The FYI on AUPs-What Does (and Should) Acceptable Use Look Like?

A major question that schools are faced with, as the trend of tech integration into the classroom continues, is how to keep students and staff responsible and safe in their use of technology. Many teachers (myself included) would obviously love to see fewer moments of games or YouTube being accessed during work time, as the potential for off-task behaviors is something that we will constantly grapple with whenever we incorporate tech-driven learning. But, this is just one of the (smaller, relatively) concerns faced as tech’s role in schools grows. Especially as schools transition to a 1-1 setup, where they are now providing each student with a device that can potentially access every recess of the internet, communicating the expectations for how those devices can/should be used is paramount. Many schools have done this by drafting acceptable use policies, or AUPs, which are shared with teachers, students, and parents.

For reference, here is my own district’s policy on use for computers and electronic networks: https://www.naperville203.org/cms/lib/IL01904881/Centricity/Domain/1216/Policy%206.235%20Exhibit%20Authorization%20for%20Use%20of%20Computers%20and%20Electronic%20Networks.pdf

And here is a link to the form which is required to be signed by all students, as well as parents/guardians of K-8 students: https://www.naperville203.org/cms/lib/IL01904881/Centricity/domain/90/documents/Acceptable%20Use%20Guidelines%20EC-12.pdf

There is some reference in the first link to “any employee, student, or other individual engaged in activity that involves the use of the District’s electronic resources” must comply with the expectations laid out by the board, but otherwise these two links focus primarily on student acceptable use of technology. In reviewing these two documents, I feel that the overall expressed purpose of them is on par with what one would expect from an acceptable use policy-I like that the first document also lays out the six primary expectations for student digital citizenship as well (respect yourself, protect yourself, respect others, protect others, respect intellectual property, protect intellectual property). However, in prior learning I was introduced to this concept of nine aspects of digital citizenship, shown in the graphic below:

Source Link

I feel that this is a more holistic approach to digital citizenship overall (something that perhaps a school could build a digital citizenship curriculum around), whereas the aspects included in my district’s acceptable use policy are more aligned to being applicable to district devices and networks. This section, as well as the majority of the policies, are focused on how students should not use networks and devices from the district-there is very little about how students should (which was slightly surprising, since I felt at least the digital citizenship section would be more centered on how to conduct oneself online). This doc from Manawa school district in Wisconsin is one that I feel has a better approach from a language perspective, since the agreement is framed by what students will do with their devices.

One new aspect of the responsible use policy that might be beneficial, especially in the area of digital citizenship, would be to create a plan for giving students better awareness of digital safety, and specifically phishing attacks. This article talks about finding ways to keep teacher accounts safe from phishing attacks, which is something that I know has happened to a handful of teachers in my building, including one that was sent by an email account imitating our building’s principal. The article talks about the principles of creating an environment that is understanding of mistakes, and making it so people are comfortable reporting if a link is clicked or some other aspect of a phishing email is interacted with. I feel this same mindset and approach needs to be incorporated with students. Students should be made aware of what these emails can look like/do, as their school accounts are potential targets. For example, teaching students about phishing scams, and perhaps having them test their knowledge with a quiz like this one. But I think even more so when it comes to digital citizenship and conduct overall, I think the sentiment the article communicates is important too, that mistakes might happen, but the important thing is being open and proactive. This is what can avoid a bigger problem.

In addition to potentially re-framing the approach to digital citizenship, in thinking about what the policies of my school might be missing, one question that comes to mind is how the district will approach acceptable use of AI within the classroom. Thus far, there has been a directive that teachers up through 7th grade may use AI in front of students (in addition to outside of the classroom for things like planning), and then 8th and up may have students use AI within the classroom. However, there is not any spelled-out policy for how to handle things like plagiarism from AI, if there will be a protocol for how questionable work is verified, and then how the district will handle work that is submitted that has had any percentage done by AI. I realize this is a question that schools at every level are grappling with, so I would imagine there will be updates coming shortly (in fact, I believe the goal is even by next school year). Otherwise, the biggest question I had came from a line from the second link that reads “I understand that my student may lose privileges if the device is continuously damaged, brought to school sporadically, or if the device is not properly charged for the school day”. This primarily comes from the perspective of a teacher, because this is something that does happen, but I have not seen the actual loss of privilege ever occur, and I’m not sure what this loss would be beyond losing the device. I like the idea that part of acceptable/responsible use of a device is bringing the device into the learning environment in a state that it can be used, but I feel there needs to be more clarity for how this situation will be handled. This doc (again from Manawa-same from above) also includes a note about students agreeing not to try to work around filters and firewalls, and specifically names them. My district’s agreement does not name Hapara, a management system commonly used by teachers that students have found many ‘work arounds’ for-I feel like including this app specifically could create more clarity within the classroom, and be a reminder to students that trying to make it so their activity cannot be monitored during class is a violation of the district policy.