The line betwen learning and entertainment

What defines the line between listening to Internet audio or watching Internet video for “learning” or for “entertainment?” This question came to mind this morning as I logged onto the guest wireless network at MetroTech here in Oklahoma City:

As you can see from the above screenshot, the AUP for MetroTech states:

Users may not use the network to… access video or audio content for entertainment purposes.

It is perhaps reasonable and understandable that an educational organization wants its resources (including its Internet bandwidth) to be used for purposes which support learning and education. However, it occurs to me that the line between entertainment and learning is sometimes vague at best. Of course there are websites which are purely for entertainment- Yahoo Games comes to mind. But what about sites like Club Penguin or Webkinz? What about MySpace, Facebook, or YouTube?

CIPA is the “Children’s Internet Protection Act” in the United States which requires that schools and libraries receiving E-Rate funding have and enforce a content filtering policy on their networks. I have been thinking quite a bit about CIPA and content filtering lately, particularly after reading John Rice’s Summer 2007 TechEdge article “How Students Bypass Content Control Software.” (Warning, this is a large PDF file, almost 17 MB.)

CIPA and Internet content filtering policies/programs in U.S. public schools (and likely in other locations) have given IT administrators BROAD latitude in censoring student, teacher, and other district employee’s access to information and ideas on the Internet. It is worth referring to the actual text of CIPA when considering the ways it is being used justify censorship and Internet content blocking in many schools today. In the “definitions” portion of the document, “TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURE” is defined as:

a specific technology that blocks or filters Internet access to visual depictions that are– (A) obscene, as that term is defined in section 1460 of title 18, United States Code; (B) child pornography, as that term is defined in section 2256 of title 18, United States Code; or (C) harmful to minors.

The text of CIPA goes on to define “HARMFUL TO MINORS” as

any picture, image, graphic image file, or other visual depiction that– (A) taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion; (B) depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and (C) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors.

I am a supporter of CIPA and the idea of providing a basic level of content filtering in schools, libraries, and also homes. (The latter context is one focus of the “Digital Dialog” Ning I set up last year.) I recognize that the power to censor and block content can become a “slippery slope” in some contexts, however, and I perceive that well-intentioned content filtering in many schools has morphed into an all-out effort to block all websites permitting user-created content as well as other “distracting” websites which students could access to be “off task” during school hours.

The specific language of CIPA does not require that network administrators block all Internet content which could be entertaining to students, teachers, or other network users. I am not writing this post to specifically criticize MetroTech (they in fact do not block access to any of the websites I’ve linked to in this post, so I’m not criticizing their content filtering policies) — but am using their wireless AUP as an example because I think it is representative of common policies in many of our schools. It should not be the responsibility of the IT department to try and ensure students cannot be distracted, entertained, or otherwise engaged in “off task” behavior at school. Yet in some cases, I think that is the role which school district IT departments have shouldered.

The line between learning and entertainment can be clear at times, but it can also be very vague. A prohibition against using a network for anything which could be construed as “entertainment” begs some questions.

1. If a student laughs during class when viewing something on the computer, should that student be interrogated to ensure he/she is LEARNING in a very dull, rote manner which involves zero humor?
2. Who is the judge of whether something a person is accessing via the Internet is being used solely for ENTERTAINMENT rather than for learning? (CIPA definitions of “harmful to minors” seem clearer than this language which prohibits something accessed “for entertainment purposes.”
3. What is the local policy to appeal decisions made by those empowered to define “pure entertainment websites?”
4. Is access and use of the Scratch website from MIT considered entertainment rather than learning, if a student is playing a game created by another Scratch programmer?

This list of questions could go on.

My thoughts about CIPA and content filtering continue to evolve, and I commend the John Rice article I mentioned previously if you’re wanting more information about how students in our schools continue to creatively bypass IT department staff’s best efforts to censor and block content.

Ultimately, my thoughts along these lines come down to two main points:

1. Teachers and administrators should take seriously their responsibility to educationally engage rather than try to “entrall” students in our classrooms.

2. A basic level of content filtering in schools and libraries to comply with CIPA is not only required by law (if the entity receives E-Rate funding) but also a very good idea. As John Rice’s article illustrates, however, the “fight” (and yes, it truly is a “fight” in many contexts) to attempt to block all student access to “unapproved” websites and network resources from school is a battle that can never be entirely “won.” (Sort of like fighting the scourge of illegal drugs is more properly understood as an effort to “weed the garden” rather than “win a war.”) Rather than focus a substantial amount of people-hours locking down computer hardware and networks to stop students from accessing any “non-approved” websites, school district employee people-hours would be better expended:

A. Striving to provide opportunities for engaged learning for students.

B. Creating and supporting a learning culture which emphasizes individual accountability for all behavior, which takes place both F2F (face-to-face) and online.

These issues are not going to become any easier or simpler in the years ahead. As one to one learning projects become more common, issues revolving around what schools permit (or try to limit) people to do on their networks will only increase in importance and complexity.

The line between learning and entertainment can be vague at times. If a supervising adult wants to ask a helpful question about the behavior of students in a classroom setting, “Are students learning?” or “Are students entertaining themselves?” may not be the best questions. Human beings are generally ALWAYS learning: In schools, sometimes when adults are concerned about “off-task behavior” the students ARE learning, they are just not learning what the teacher wants them to learn.

The question “Are students engaged in worthwhile learning activities?” may be a better question. Hopefully as students learn, they WILL have opportunities (from time to time) to have fun and even be “entertained.” When learning is fun as well as engaging, often it is the “stickiest” — meaning those experiences authentically transfer into long-term memory. Determining “a worthwhile learning activity” may be just as fuzzy / messy as trying to determine if a student is accessing a website “purely for entertainment,” I’m not sure. I am sure that we need to continue grappling with these issues, because as with many situations in schools, there do not appear to be any “simple” or “easy” answers– at least any simple or easy answers which are desirable and constructive! 🙂

Technorati Tags:
censorship, filtering, youtube, myspace, cipa, content, schools, education, IT

If you enjoyed this post and found it useful, subscribe to Wes’ free newsletter. Check out Wes’ video tutorial library, “Playing with Media.” Information about more ways to learn with Dr. Wesley Fryer are available on wesfryer.com/after.

On this day..

• How Are We Preparing Students for the Artificial Intelligence New Normal? – 2017
• First Android-Edited Video: WeVideo App – 2014
• Wii Remote Interactive Whiteboard for $60 – 2014
• Create iPad eBooks with Recorded Audio and Text Highlights FREE – 2013
• Mapping Media to the Common Core with iPads (Aug 2013) – 2013
• What is it about me you can’t teach? Five Simple Things to Reach Struggling Learners – 2012
• Present to 14 iPads Simultaneously with Idea Flight – 2011
• Lessons Learned About Enhanced or Multimedia EPUB eBook Validation – 2011
• Tell A Story in 5 Photos for Educators: S’mores! – 2010
• Discouraging lecture hall technology abuse – Encouraging interactive discussions – 2009