Three cheers for the Spokane high-schooler who developed a work-around to the school district's Internet filter. Conrad Sykes, 16, thought the filter, named Bess, blocked appropriate content and made student research more difficult. He was suspended for two days. Though required in schools and increasingly popular in American homes, Internet filters can be notoriously problematic, especially where site-banning is keyword-based. URL-specific bans make more sense, along with banning chat, IM and music downloads on school PCs. Additional discerning approaches have emerged, as well.
A computer teacher named Wes Marburger admired Sykes' work, and all the hits his now-shuttered proxy site (called Bad Dog) was getting. He had Sykes give presentations to two classes on site traffic statistics (odd lesson!) and didn't inform district officials of the work-around. A mistake that earned him a reprimand; with revocation of his teaching permit now a possibility, the P-I reports. But get this ludicrous written scolding of Marburger from an HR nanny at the district: "Your conduct allowed students...to bypass the filtering system over 3,000 times, potentially exposing them to inappropriate content and putting their safety at risk."
No, actually, Bad Dog allowed filter evasion, not the teacher - and some users came to the site from outside Washington to see how it worked. In the end, as with video games, kids must be taught primarily by their parents (not schools) to develop judgement on their own.
As Senior Editor Lars Kongshem notes in a Scholastic Administrator article on Internet filters in schools:
Equally important, many educators say, is..(teaching) students...to use the filter that lies between their ears...this analogy offered in the National Research Council report is...apt: "Swimming pools can be dangerous for children....one can install locks,..fences, and...pool alarms....but by far the most important thing....is to teach them to swim."
Young Mr. Sykes actually did parents and knuckle-headed Spokane Public School uh-fish-als a favor by showing there is no turnkey solution to content filtering. Online, or in life.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at April 04, 2005 05:30 PM | Email ThisThe "teacher" should be fired. Immediately if not sooner.
Posted by: JG on April 4, 2005 07:24 PMI think this is likely an over-reaction. What this kid does with his web server is his own business. The fact that he tells his classmates that he has a website, how many people visit it and what they use it for is not inappropriate. If the school district doesn't like students visiting this site, they should block access to the website.
Schools should not punish people for being resourcefull and knowlegable. That is actually the absolute oppisite of what their mission should be.
"Mutley, you snickering, floppy eared hound. When courage is needed, you're never around. Those medals you wear on your moth-eaten chest should be there for bungling at which you are best. So, stop that pigeon, stop that pigeon, stop that pigeon, stop that pigeon, stop that pigeon, stop that pigeon, stop that pigeon. Howwww! Nab him, jab him, tab him, grab him, stop that pigeon now."
How's that for an over-reaction?
Posted by: headless lucy on April 4, 2005 08:16 PMTurns out there is a company that provides the filtering service for a nice fee to schools and libraries. The schools use it not because they want to "protect" the kids, but because the feds tie funding to the use of the filter. The whole thing is a dog and pony show.
Posted by: Vince Callaway on April 4, 2005 08:34 PMI am not surprised at the Spokane School Board's response either. These folks know even less than the librarians.
Perhaps the teachers in this case was making a point. He was certainly providing his students with some knowledge about how the real world operates. You know, the one where government and schools operate using equipment supplied by the lowest bidder.
Posted by: DeadWood on April 4, 2005 08:56 PMIf a student is surfing porn or other objectionable sites, they should be punished.
If they are sending me an e-mail during lunch telling me that Basketball practice is cancelled, then they shouldn't be.
However, the lawsuit happy parents who defend their children no matter how abhorent their behavior have made it very difficult for schools to use "judgement". Sadly, they need hard lines.
Posted by: mikeki on April 4, 2005 09:12 PMI would no more let my underage child loose on the internet unsupervised (and I mean HUMAN supervision) than I would let them play tiddlywinks in the middle of the New Jersey Turnpike.
Posted by: Jeff Brazill on April 4, 2005 11:05 PMOne of my boys has had his priviliges removed at home for the remainder of his time living under my roof, and I don't need no stinking filter to prevent that. My other boy seeing his brothers mistake will not make the same one.
Posted by: Jim in Clark County on April 5, 2005 07:38 AM