4 ms·

It's not just the British. For decades in the US, school administrators have been obsessed with monitoring student's online activity and email. There is a lucr

It's not just the British. For decades in the US, school administrators have been obsessed with monitoring student's online activity and email. There is a lucrative industry providing what amounts to glue and regexs for detecting and reporting suicidal language, threats of violence, and so on (you can be sure there's detection of LGBTQ language for all the various religious schools.) There is a subreddit for K-12 IT administrators and the stuff people would post there about monitoring students was pretty shocking (also, the levels of incompetence are also pretty shocking. Most of the crowd are barely competent at IT basics. People who are in charge of IT at multiple campuses.) Tell your kids that any email account associated with the school, and anything they even type into a school device (phone, tablet, laptop, computer) is monitored, and even the most innocent keyword could flag their email and put it front of admins. If they want to talk to a trusted friend about anything regarding the administrator or teachers, or something regarding mental health, sexuality, bullying, violence, etc - they need to do it on devices not associated with the school, with no school management software installed, on non-school accounts. In fact, they should probably never use their school accounts or devices for anything except strictly school related communication and work. It's amazing how completely ignorant these admins are that, say, hauling a suicidal student into a meeting with administrators is just about the last fucking thing that kid needs, and yet that's exactly what was described in some posts and discussions. The only thing they care about is snooping in student's activity and covering the school's ass.

fnordpiglet 3y ago
Sadly a lot of kids only have one portal to the internet and that’s through a school device. Otherwise the advice should be, as you said, to never use a school device for anything not explicitly required by the school. But when there’s no other route, surveilled access is better than none, I guess? It’s a tough quandary though - schools can be held liable, at least socially so if not legally, if kids use school provided devices for all the things kids use devices for that they shouldn’t. Meeting sexual predators, bullying, etc. Many parents are technically incapable of monitoring their online activity, others too busy. Schools are being put in a weird spot of being access providers to an adult world online, not just educators. I’ll wager a lot of school surveillance started with parents demanding it. It’s a tough subject, I don’t have the answer. My intuition tells me schools shouldn’t be involved in access OR monitoring, but I also understand the “digital divide” isn’t just a media term. A lot of pretty smart kids live in a pretty neglected context, and without access to sources of fact like Wikipedia or sources of dubious plagiarism like ChatGPT (tongue in cheek), they’re at a structural disadvantage that can’t be overcome through hard work alone.
- SoftTalker 3y ago
  Or they could just use paper and books and avoid the whole morass. There is zero need to be using "devices" in schools at least until High School, and I'd question even then.
  - ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
    It can work out cheaper to provide digital devices than providing plenty of books and of course they're a lot more flexible. Modern society is of course dominated by technology, so there's a strong argument for getting all kids to have experience in using it.
  - fnordpiglet 3y ago
    Except they can’t control the fact that wealthier kids will have access to devices that give them Wikipedia and ChatGPT and other online knowledge sources. Being able to tell ChatGPT “explain to me the Byzantine empires history” then interrogate it on fine points to prep to write an essay in immeasurably more powerful than “here’s a middle school textbook good luck understanding the nuances.” This puts the kids without a device at a structural disadvantage, a more steep disadvantage than they’re already at in society. Finally, there’s an idea of digital literacy - the ability to use these tools to your advantage, and to navigate with sophistication the mental crack of algorithmic personalization. They will have a device at some point, and being taught at a younger age to be skeptical of mental crack might help weaken its hold (still to be seen!)
    - SoftTalker 3y ago
      Wealthier kids have always had and always will have advantages like that. Wealthier kids probably also have their own room and a quiet organized place to do homework. They've probably been encouraged to read and been provided with books and other enrichment opportunities. I think most teachers know who these kids are and and know if they are turning in their own work or not.
      - fnordpiglet 3y ago

fnordpiglet 3y ago

Sadly a lot of kids only have one portal to the internet and that’s through a school device. Otherwise the advice should be, as you said, to never use a school device for anything not explicitly required by the school. But when there’s no other route, surveilled access is better than none, I guess? It’s a tough quandary though - schools can be held liable, at least socially so if not legally, if kids use school provided devices for all the things kids use devices for that they shouldn’t. Meeting sexual predators, bullying, etc. Many parents are technically incapable of monitoring their online activity, others too busy. Schools are being put in a weird spot of being access providers to an adult world online, not just educators. I’ll wager a lot of school surveillance started with parents demanding it. It’s a tough subject, I don’t have the answer. My intuition tells me schools shouldn’t be involved in access OR monitoring, but I also understand the “digital divide” isn’t just a media term. A lot of pretty smart kids live in a pretty neglected context, and without access to sources of fact like Wikipedia or sources of dubious plagiarism like ChatGPT (tongue in cheek), they’re at a structural disadvantage that can’t be overcome through hard work alone.

SoftTalker 3y ago
Or they could just use paper and books and avoid the whole morass. There is zero need to be using "devices" in schools at least until High School, and I'd question even then.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
  It can work out cheaper to provide digital devices than providing plenty of books and of course they're a lot more flexible. Modern society is of course dominated by technology, so there's a strong argument for getting all kids to have experience in using it.
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  Except they can’t control the fact that wealthier kids will have access to devices that give them Wikipedia and ChatGPT and other online knowledge sources. Being able to tell ChatGPT “explain to me the Byzantine empires history” then interrogate it on fine points to prep to write an essay in immeasurably more powerful than “here’s a middle school textbook good luck understanding the nuances.” This puts the kids without a device at a structural disadvantage, a more steep disadvantage than they’re already at in society. Finally, there’s an idea of digital literacy - the ability to use these tools to your advantage, and to navigate with sophistication the mental crack of algorithmic personalization. They will have a device at some point, and being taught at a younger age to be skeptical of mental crack might help weaken its hold (still to be seen!)
  - SoftTalker 3y ago
    Wealthier kids have always had and always will have advantages like that. Wealthier kids probably also have their own room and a quiet organized place to do homework. They've probably been encouraged to read and been provided with books and other enrichment opportunities. I think most teachers know who these kids are and and know if they are turning in their own work or not.
    - fnordpiglet 3y ago