1 / 29

Privacy in the 21st Century: Issues for Schools Libraries

Privacy ? 2003 WEMA Conf.(Adams, Bocher). 2. Topics to Cover. An overview of privacy issuesFederal and state protections and actions Tips on online privacy Privacy issues in schools Privacy resources . . Privacy ? 2003 WEMA Conf.(Adams, Bocher). 3. Privacy Concerns and PII (Personally Ide

frisco
Download Presentation

Privacy in the 21st Century: Issues for Schools Libraries

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Privacy in the 21st Century: Issues for Schools & Libraries Helen Adams hadams@coredcs.com Rosholt School District WEMA Program Summary: Historically, patron privacy and confidentiality of library records have been core values of librarianship. However, contemporary phenomena such as the Internet, emerging technologies, and the events of Sept. 11, 2001 have changed personal and institutional privacy forever. How will the converging forces affect privacy in schools and libraries? With hot button privacy issues mounting daily, learn the facts behind the headlines to protect your privacy and that of your students. WEMA Program Summary: Historically, patron privacy and confidentiality of library records have been core values of librarianship. However, contemporary phenomena such as the Internet, emerging technologies, and the events of Sept. 11, 2001 have changed personal and institutional privacy forever. How will the converging forces affect privacy in schools and libraries? With hot button privacy issues mounting daily, learn the facts behind the headlines to protect your privacy and that of your students.

    2. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 2 Topics to Cover An overview of privacy issues Federal and state protections and actions Tips on online privacy Privacy issues in schools Privacy resources

    3. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 3 Privacy Concerns and PII (Personally Identifiable Information) Privacy concerns are high on consumer polls. Key concerns include Identity theft and fraud .Coms selling your PII Government misuse of your PII Security of your medical and financial data Privacy concerns increase as More people are online Residential broadband access increases (now 20%+) Use of wireless communication increases More people shop and conduct business online

    4. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 4 Personally Identifiable Information (PII) Typical PII includes Name Address (work, residence) Email address Telephone number Other ID (SSN, etc.) Non-PII includes Demographic Age, gender, race/ethnicity Education level, job, income Preferences, interests, hobbies

    5. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 5 Federal Protections and Action 4th and 5th amendments Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is lead privacy agency Many federal laws have privacy provisions, including: Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB, 1999) Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA, 1996) Rules (93 pages) effective, April 14 USA Patriot Act (2001) Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA, 1998) Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA, 1974) 34 privacy-related bills are pending in Congress

    6. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 6 FTC’s Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs)

    7. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 7 USA Patriot Act (PL107–56, Sections 214–216) Quickly passed following Sept 11, 2001 342 pages that revises more than 15 other laws Expands Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Provisions extend beyond terrorism Increases counterfeiting penalties Russ Feingold was only senator to vote “no” Patriot II act has been drafted Total Information Awareness (TIA) system, research continues USA Patriot Act, signed into law on Oct. 26, 2001—weakens privacy online Law had 4 different names & 5 different versions before signed by Pres. Completed in 5 weeks, normal committee & hearing processes suspended Amended 15 federal laws Privacy advocates have concerns Major concerns re: surveillance w/less checks and balances *FBI/CIA may place a wiretap on any person nationwide (not just local jurisdiction whether person is named in the court order. *Law increases info gov’t may obtain about users from ISPs expands records gov’t may seek with subpoena,(no court review required) for online times, durations, IP addresses, payments of accounts, email to/from Provisions extend beyond terrorism through whole judicial system appear less related to terrorism & more to nonviolent computer crim Including: *spying on computer trespassers without court order *increased penalties for suspects violating Computer Fraud & Abuse Act (penalties for 1st offense 10 years prison, 20 yrs. 2nd offense) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A May 17 opinion by the court that oversees the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) alleges that Justice Department and FBI officials supplied erroneous information to the court in more than 75 applications for search warrants and wiretaps, including one signed by then-FBI Director Louis J. Freeh. The FISA court agreed with other proposed rule changes. But Ashcroft filed an appeal yesterday over the rejected procedures that would constitute the first formal challenge to the FISA court in its 23-year history, officials said. “We believe the court’s action unnecessarily narrowed the Patriot Act and limited our ability to fully utilize the authority Congress gave us,” the Justice Department said in a statement. The documents released yesterday also provide a rare glimpse into the workings of the almost entirely secret FISA court, composed of a rotating panel of federal judges from around the United States and, until yesterday, had never jointly approved the release of one of its opinions. Ironically, the Justice Department itself had opposed the release. Stewart Baker, former general counsel of the National Security Agency, called the opinion a “a public rebuke.” “The message is you need better quality control,” Baker said. “The judges want to ensure they have information they can rely on implicitly.” A senior Justice Department official said that the FISA court has not curtailed any investigations that involved misrepresented or erroneous information, nor has any court suppressed evidence in any related criminal case. He said that many of the misrepresentations were simply repetitions of earlier errors, because wiretap warrants must be renewed every 90 days. The FISA court approves about 1,000 warrants a year. WI’s Sen. Feingold only senator to vote against the bill. USA Patriot Act, signed into law on Oct. 26, 2001—weakens privacy online Law had 4 different names & 5 different versions before signed by Pres. Completed in 5 weeks, normal committee & hearing processes suspended Amended 15 federal laws Privacy advocates have concerns Major concerns re: surveillance w/less checks and balances *FBI/CIA may place a wiretap on any person nationwide (not just local jurisdiction whether person is named in the court order. *Law increases info gov’t may obtain about users from ISPs expands records gov’t may seek with subpoena,(no court review required) for online times, durations, IP addresses, payments of accounts, email to/from Provisions extend beyond terrorism through whole judicial system appear less related to terrorism & more to nonviolent computer crim Including: *spying on computer trespassers without court order *increased penalties for suspects violating Computer Fraud & Abuse Act (penalties for 1st offense 10 years prison, 20 yrs. 2nd offense) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A May 17 opinion by the court that oversees the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) alleges that Justice Department and FBI officials supplied erroneous information to the court in more than 75 applications for search warrants and wiretaps, including one signed by then-FBI Director Louis J. Freeh. The FISA court agreed with other proposed rule changes. But Ashcroft filed an appeal yesterday over the rejected procedures that would constitute the first formal challenge to the FISA court in its 23-year history, officials said. “We believe the court’s action unnecessarily narrowed the Patriot Act and limited our ability to fully utilize the authority Congress gave us,” the Justice Department said in a statement. The documents released yesterday also provide a rare glimpse into the workings of the almost entirely secret FISA court, composed of a rotating panel of federal judges from around the United States and, until yesterday, had never jointly approved the release of one of its opinions. Ironically, the Justice Department itself had opposed the release. Stewart Baker, former general counsel of the National Security Agency, called the opinion a “a public rebuke.” “The message is you need better quality control,” Baker said. “The judges want to ensure they have information they can rely on implicitly.” A senior Justice Department official said that the FISA court has not curtailed any investigations that involved misrepresented or erroneous information, nor has any court suppressed evidence in any related criminal case. He said that many of the misrepresentations were simply repetitions of earlier errors, because wiretap warrants must be renewed every 90 days. The FISA court approves about 1,000 warrants a year. WI’s Sen. Feingold only senator to vote against the bill.

    8. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 8 USA Patriot Act: Some Privacy Issues Expands monitoring laws (beyond phone taps) to include Internet traffic Email addresses, IP addresses/routing, Web search terms Monitoring at various levels, from PC to the ISP Allows nationwide monitoring Expands surveillance with less judicial review Former “probable cause” was higher legal bar than new “relevant to an ongoing investigation” ALA advises librarians to “avoid creating unnecessary records” Is this a new “Library Awareness Program”?

    9. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 9 State Protections and Action Student privacy protections are in state statutes WI library privacy law DPI approves school district technology plans Plans often include privacy provisions in relation to NCIPA

    10. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 10 WI Library Privacy Law

    11. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 11 Tips on Personal Privacy Read closely any Website’s privacy policy Keep a “clean” email address Home cable and DSL users are especially vulnerable Never enter sensitive PII without a secure connection Enter only minimal data, look for opt-out check boxes Look for compliance with groups like BBBOnline, TRUSTe and HON Be aware of your surroundings Security cameras in Times Square

    12. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 12 Schools and Privacy: 12 Issues & Answers

    13. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 13 Privacy in Schools: Issue #1 Confidentiality of Student Records (federal law) Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA, 1974) Applies to schools accepting DOE funds Requires districts to establish written policies and procedures protecting student PII Defines educational records and who has access Parental permission required to disclose student PII

    14. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 14 Privacy in Schools: Issue #1 Confidentiality of Student Records (state law) Chapter 118.125 WI State Statutes All student records in public schools are confidential, including: Behavioral, directory data, progress records, physical health Access to records granted To parents To staff with “legitimate educational interest” For legal reasons For an audit of state or federal program

    15. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 15 Privacy in Schools: Issue #2 Privacy Language in the AUP Addressing privacy in the AUP N-CIPA requires schools receiving E-rate discounts to adopt an Internet Safety Policy Must address “unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of PII regarding minors.” Minor defined as someone less than 17 years old Requires public hearing and formal Board adoption Many privacy issues related to schools and school libraries Will describe 6 issues 1) Addressing privacy in the AUP Dec. 2000, Congress passed CIPA (Children’s Internet protection Act) + NCIPA (Neighborhood Children’s Internet Protection Act) *requires schools & libraries receiving Universal Service discounts to: adopt and implement an Internet Safety Policy that addresses 15 areas: Iv) unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personally indentifiable information regarding minors. *Under CIPA and N-CIPA, a minor is anyone less than 17 years of age. Many privacy issues related to schools and school libraries Will describe 6 issues 1) Addressing privacy in the AUP Dec. 2000, Congress passed CIPA (Children’s Internet protection Act) + NCIPA (Neighborhood Children’s Internet Protection Act) *requires schools & libraries receiving Universal Service discounts to: adopt and implement an Internet Safety Policy that addresses 15 areas: Iv) unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personally indentifiable information regarding minors. *Under CIPA and N-CIPA, a minor is anyone less than 17 years of age.

    16. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 16 Privacy in Schools: Issue #3 Privacy Policy on a District’s Website All school sites should post a privacy policy Present on every major page of site Examples Anchorage (Alaska) School District www.asd.k12.org/privacy.asp School District of Greenville County (SC) www.greenville.k12.sc.us/district/web/policy/privacy.htm Valley Elementary School (Utah) www.weber.k12.ut.us/LegalNotice/privacy.html Issue 2: Privacy Policies or Statements on District Web Sites *along w/commercial & other web sites, district web sites should post a privacy policy or statement Policy explains a district’s collection & use of personal information from web site visitors & and security of the data collected. May also relate how a district treats student PII on its web site. Should be Statements as a link on EVERY major page of the site AND Contact info should be given for those having questions. 3 Examples: Anchorage (Alaska) S.D.: addresses itself to site visitors & includes this info: How info is collected & used, what PII is collected, how email is treated, security, cookies, contact info for district School District of Greenville County (SC):Similar to anchorage policy Also BUT includes a paragraph on collection of data from children “No one under age 13 is allowed to provide any PII or use the public discussion area. Minors under the age of 18 are prohibited from reg. On our sites.” Valley Elem. School (Utah): emphasis on the privacy of their students Addresses use of st. phots, st. names, & take steps to protect info about sts. Issue 2: Privacy Policies or Statements on District Web Sites *along w/commercial & other web sites, district web sites should post a privacy policy or statement Policy explains a district’s collection & use of personal information from web site visitors & and security of the data collected. May also relate how a district treats student PII on its web site. Should be Statements as a link on EVERY major page of the site AND Contact info should be given for those having questions. 3 Examples: Anchorage (Alaska) S.D.: addresses itself to site visitors & includes this info: How info is collected & used, what PII is collected, how email is treated, security, cookies, contact info for district School District of Greenville County (SC):Similar to anchorage policy Also BUT includes a paragraph on collection of data from children “No one under age 13 is allowed to provide any PII or use the public discussion area. Minors under the age of 18 are prohibited from reg. On our sites.” Valley Elem. School (Utah): emphasis on the privacy of their students Addresses use of st. phots, st. names, & take steps to protect info about sts.

    17. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 17 Privacy in Schools: Issue #4 Identifying Students on the District’s Website FBI recommends districts not publish student photos Increased arrests of pedophiles Study: 12% of kids meet unknown person Districts approach the issue in different ways Pictures and names Pictures with no names Pictures and names separated No photos or names Mankato (MN) S.D. #77 www.isd77.k12.mn.us/webguide.php Issue 3: Should st. photos/names appear on district web sites? FBI rec. not because found cases involving pedophiles seeking young children in chat rms increasing: 700= 1998, 1500=1999, 2001=4,000 Study found 12% of kids go through with an offline rendezvous. Undercover FBI agents spoke to nearby parents group , went online, within 5 min-posing as young person in chat room, propositioned for sex 3x’s. WI Districts approach use of student photos/names in different ways 1) photos and first names 2) pictures w/ no names, 3) pictures & names separate, 4) no photos or names Districts which do publish student photos generally have policies Mankato MN SD #77 has “Student Safeguards” Guidelines posted at address Guidelines include: Wed pages may contain only first name of student May NOT include student’s home phone #, address, names of family members or friends, or email addresses Decisions on publishing st. pictures & audio clips based on judgement of supervising teachers & signed permission of student & parent/guardianIssue 3: Should st. photos/names appear on district web sites? FBI rec. not because found cases involving pedophiles seeking young children in chat rms increasing: 700= 1998, 1500=1999, 2001=4,000 Study found 12% of kids go through with an offline rendezvous. Undercover FBI agents spoke to nearby parents group , went online, within 5 min-posing as young person in chat room, propositioned for sex 3x’s. WI Districts approach use of student photos/names in different ways 1) photos and first names 2) pictures w/ no names, 3) pictures & names separate, 4) no photos or names Districts which do publish student photos generally have policies Mankato MN SD #77 has “Student Safeguards” Guidelines posted at address Guidelines include: Wed pages may contain only first name of student May NOT include student’s home phone #, address, names of family members or friends, or email addresses Decisions on publishing st. pictures & audio clips based on judgement of supervising teachers & signed permission of student & parent/guardian

    18. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 18 Privacy in Schools: Issue #5 Protecting the Confidentiality of Library Records Records kept for library management No federal law protects confidentiality Legislation in 48 states and DC varies Wisconsin Library Privacy Law covers Patron information, circulation records Records associated with use of the Internet Use of in-house databases Can release only by court order NO federal law protecting privacy of library records YET- Libraries have a long history of protecting privacy of patrons. For example: purpose of circ records is to manage library’s collection not track what patrons are reading, viewing, listening to 48 states & District of Col. Have laws governing release of patron use records laws are not uniform & vary from state to state [KY & Hawaii have no law] 14 specify school libs, 8 + DC public library only, 8 those libs wholly or in part supported by public funds, 18 refer only to a lib. or any library WI Library Privacy Law covers: 1)Patron information, 2)circulation records, 3)Use of Internet including: email, searching sites, Internet logs, history files, sign-up sheets Can only be released by COURT ORDER Ex. Law officer asks what student reading/viewing, cannot tell w/out court order WI law: may not even inform parentNO federal law protecting privacy of library records YET- Libraries have a long history of protecting privacy of patrons. For example: purpose of circ records is to manage library’s collection not track what patrons are reading, viewing, listening to 48 states & District of Col. Have laws governing release of patron use records laws are not uniform & vary from state to state [KY & Hawaii have no law] 14 specify school libs, 8 + DC public library only, 8 those libs wholly or in part supported by public funds, 18 refer only to a lib. or any library WI Library Privacy Law covers: 1)Patron information, 2)circulation records, 3)Use of Internet including: email, searching sites, Internet logs, history files, sign-up sheets Can only be released by COURT ORDER Ex. Law officer asks what student reading/viewing, cannot tell w/out court order WI law: may not even inform parent

    19. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 19 Privacy in Schools: Issue #6 Privacy and Security of Electronic Student Records Student management systems allow access to records via LAN and WAN Include directory, attendance, grade, disciplinary, and other records Levels of security for data Confidentiality and privacy policies LAN/WAN network security procedures Teacher access Parents access child’s records via Web Grades, attendance, discipline, and health records Many districts implementing Student management systems with records accessible via LAN, WAN Milwaukee SD implementing new system management system which includes directory, attendance, grade, disciplinary, & other records State & federal laws for privacy & confidentiality must be observed need Therefore, need levels of security for data Requires Confidentiality policies similar to students records in paper format Usual LAN/WAN network security Teachers access system by login/password IF have student in class In Mankato MN Parents can access child’s records via Web Grades, attendance, discipline, & health records Security includes: parents required to come to school to pick up username & password Have firewall in place to protect server. Milwaukee also gives parents Web access to grades, attendance, discipline & health records Many districts implementing Student management systems with records accessible via LAN, WAN Milwaukee SD implementing new system management system which includes directory, attendance, grade, disciplinary, & other records State & federal laws for privacy & confidentiality must be observed need Therefore, need levels of security for data Requires Confidentiality policies similar to students records in paper format Usual LAN/WAN network security Teachers access system by login/password IF have student in class In Mankato MN Parents can access child’s records via Web Grades, attendance, discipline, & health records Security includes: parents required to come to school to pick up username & password Have firewall in place to protect server. Milwaukee also gives parents Web access to grades, attendance, discipline & health records

    20. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 20 Privacy in Schools: Issue #7 Conducting Market Research on Students Companies have offered districts incentives for info on student use of the Internet Equipment, email accounts, host Website Student Privacy Protection Act (Dec. 2001) Requires schools to develop and adopt policies Collection, disclosure, or use of personal information collected from students for the purpose of marketing or selling #Issue 6: co’s doing market research on st use of Internet for commercial reasons w/out parental permission Prior to Dec. 2001, No law forbid the gathering of info from sts in schools without parental approval As an inducement to school districts, companies offered free email accounts, would host web sites, offer content to teachers Co’s very loose privacy policies - & shared info w/ third parties IN 2001, Student Privacy Protection Act , signed into law . Requires schools to develop & adopt policies covering: * collection, disclosure, or use of personal information collected from students for the purpose of marketing or selling. *give parents an opportunity to opt out of having children surveyed *must provide notice annually *must provide dates when such activities are scheduled. #Issue 6: co’s doing market research on st use of Internet for commercial reasons w/out parental permission Prior to Dec. 2001, No law forbid the gathering of info from sts in schools without parental approval As an inducement to school districts, companies offered free email accounts, would host web sites, offer content to teachers Co’s very loose privacy policies - & shared info w/ third parties IN 2001, Student Privacy Protection Act , signed into law . Requires schools to develop & adopt policies covering: * collection, disclosure, or use of personal information collected from students for the purpose of marketing or selling. *give parents an opportunity to opt out of having children surveyed *must provide notice annually *must provide dates when such activities are scheduled.

    21. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 21 Privacy in Schools: Issue #8 Students Providing PII About Themselves Students have little concept of privacy Annenberg “The Internet and the Family 2000” study Teenagers more likely to give information Teach “Stranger danger” online and off Wisconsin Rapids (WI) School District AUP No PII transmitted from district computers Issue 8: students providing personal info about themselves. Anyone who watches teenagers on the Internet, knows they are not conscious of giving personal info COPPA protects children under 13, but there is no protection for teenagers. Annenberg “Internet & the Family 2000” study found Teenagers more likely to give info about themselves, families, & schools than younger children. Example: Megan Schultz & health site We need teach kids about “stranger danger” AND privacy Easier to teach younger children Tough w/teenagers- feel invulnerable Ex. Sara, senior corresponding w/student from Waupaca HS *WI Rapids S.D.:. related to privacy: Sts may not provide PII while on district computer. Issue 8: students providing personal info about themselves. Anyone who watches teenagers on the Internet, knows they are not conscious of giving personal info COPPA protects children under 13, but there is no protection for teenagers. Annenberg “Internet & the Family 2000” study found Teenagers more likely to give info about themselves, families, & schools than younger children. Example: Megan Schultz & health site We need teach kids about “stranger danger” AND privacy Easier to teach younger children Tough w/teenagers- feel invulnerable Ex. Sara, senior corresponding w/student from Waupaca HS *WI Rapids S.D.:. related to privacy: Sts may not provide PII while on district computer.

    22. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 22 Privacy in Schools: Issue #9 Access to Student Information by Military Recruiters NCLB Act 2001 requirement H.S.’s must supply military recruiters with students’ names, addresses, and phone numbers (including unlisted #’s) District policies keep student information confidential under Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (1974) Oct. 2002 letter sent to districts by federal officials Parents can “opt out” Issue 9: NCLB legislation passed in 2001 includes requirement for HS’s to provide names, addresses, and phone numbers [including unlisted numbers] of students to military recruiters. District policies generally held this information confidential since Family Education Rights and Privacy Act {FERPA] passed 1974. NCLB legislation modified the Family Education Rights & Privacy Act. Oct.9, 2002, letter sent to districts by Education Secretary Rod Paige & Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld reminding them of this law. Failure to comply could mean loss of all federal funding to district. Schools must “notify parents annually of the option to make a request [to opt out], and honor such requests if they are made.”Issue 9: NCLB legislation passed in 2001 includes requirement for HS’s to provide names, addresses, and phone numbers [including unlisted numbers] of students to military recruiters. District policies generally held this information confidential since Family Education Rights and Privacy Act {FERPA] passed 1974. NCLB legislation modified the Family Education Rights & Privacy Act. Oct.9, 2002, letter sent to districts by Education Secretary Rod Paige & Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld reminding them of this law. Failure to comply could mean loss of all federal funding to district. Schools must “notify parents annually of the option to make a request [to opt out], and honor such requests if they are made.”

    23. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 23 Privacy in Schools: Issue #10 Internet Use Logs as Public Record 2 legal battles over whether Internet logs are public records and available 1998: Utah Supreme Court granted right to review logs of Utah Educational Network 2000: New Hampshire judge ruled Internet history logs of 2 school districts are public records and may be reviewed Student PII must be removed first Person requesting logs bears the cost for removal WiscNet’s policy 2 legal battles since 1998 over whether Internet logs are public records & therefore, available for review. 1) 1998, Utah Supreme Court granted Michael Sims, co-founder of Censorship Project, right to review the cache of the Utah Educational Network, statewide school computer network of 40 school districts & several public lib. systems. Sims wanted to view the log to determine the types of Web sites blocked by the network’s blocking software. UEN could not produce logs from 87-98 school year because UEN overwrites its caches after 31 days. 2) Parent in Exeter, NH requested schools’ Internet logs to learn whether students were accessing objectionable sites or porn despite faculty supervision. Instead of filtering, districts had opted for supervision by staff. Judge ruled that Internet history logs are public records & can be requested for viewing. Districts arguied the privacy of students must be protected against disclosure or pii. Judge ruled all pii must be removed & person requesting logs bears the cost. Wiscnet’s policy-Logs Can be requested by district, others need court order. 2 legal battles since 1998 over whether Internet logs are public records & therefore, available for review. 1) 1998, Utah Supreme Court granted Michael Sims, co-founder of Censorship Project, right to review the cache of the Utah Educational Network, statewide school computer network of 40 school districts & several public lib. systems. Sims wanted to view the log to determine the types of Web sites blocked by the network’s blocking software. UEN could not produce logs from 87-98 school year because UEN overwrites its caches after 31 days. 2) Parent in Exeter, NH requested schools’ Internet logs to learn whether students were accessing objectionable sites or porn despite faculty supervision. Instead of filtering, districts had opted for supervision by staff. Judge ruled that Internet history logs are public records & can be requested for viewing. Districts arguied the privacy of students must be protected against disclosure or pii. Judge ruled all pii must be removed & person requesting logs bears the cost. Wiscnet’s policy-Logs Can be requested by district, others need court order.

    24. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 24 Privacy in Schools: Issue #11 Use of Email to Conduct School Business Monitoring of employees 63% monitor email and Internet use Personal email and recreational surfing cost money Employers have the right to monitor without informing employees Court cases “No legal or factual basis for extending right of privacy to cover business-related communications.” Employers should establish use policy Reasonable use vs. abuse Employees are concerned about employers monitoring their email & I. use According to study by Am. Management Assoc 63% employers review employee email& monitor Internet use. Labor Dept. estimates personal email & recreational web surfing cost co’s est. $3 million per year in lost productivity per 1,000 employees. Employees have the right to monitor email & Internet use without informing employees In Court decisions re: privacy of email in the workplace Courts have ruled in favor of employers [READ OFF SCREEN] Inappropriate use may result in Job loss 10% know someone fired, NY Times fired 23 employees for emailing distasteful jokes. Employers need written policies on purpose of email & guidelines for use RSD: Staff use: to conduct district bus. & communication w/colleagues. Guidelines are provided in policy materials for use. Comes down to: Reasonable use vs. abuse (staff writing to child in college)Employees are concerned about employers monitoring their email & I. use According to study by Am. Management Assoc 63% employers review employee email& monitor Internet use. Labor Dept. estimates personal email & recreational web surfing cost co’s est. $3 million per year in lost productivity per 1,000 employees. Employees have the right to monitor email & Internet use without informing employees In Court decisions re: privacy of email in the workplace Courts have ruled in favor of employers [READ OFF SCREEN] Inappropriate use may result in Job loss 10% know someone fired, NY Times fired 23 employees for emailing distasteful jokes. Employers need written policies on purpose of email & guidelines for use RSD: Staff use: to conduct district bus. & communication w/colleagues. Guidelines are provided in policy materials for use. Comes down to: Reasonable use vs. abuse (staff writing to child in college)

    25. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 25 Privacy in Schools: Issue #11 Use of Email to Conduct School Business Email communication by administration and school boards email issues discussion may violate open records and open meetings laws Archiving district email Content, not format, determines if documents require archiving and length of time Madison (WI) School District case 2001 Oshkosh (WI) School District case 2002 ISSUE 11: Email communication Bd. & district admin. Warning by Nat. School Bds Assoc warning: email communication among public officials can become public under open records laws There is a danger of violating open records & open meetings laws by debating issues via email instead of open public meeting Several incidents led to discussion of archiving email CONTENT NOT FORMAT determines what docs must be kept & for how long Madison WI case district eliminated thousands emails relating public opposition to Bd. Voting to not say pledge of allegiance in schools- part of new state law district cited by Attorney Gen.- determined no malice involved 11-02 Oshkosh S.D. Board bd. Deleted personal email messages from constituents on district consolidation plans, Attorney Gen. ruled deletions violated open-records laws, system now in place to store messages re: district affairs Remember, it is the content, not the format which determines archiving. ISSUE 11: Email communication Bd. & district admin. Warning by Nat. School Bds Assoc warning: email communication among public officials can become public under open records laws There is a danger of violating open records & open meetings laws by debating issues via email instead of open public meeting Several incidents led to discussion of archiving email CONTENT NOT FORMAT determines what docs must be kept & for how long Madison WI case district eliminated thousands emails relating public opposition to Bd. Voting to not say pledge of allegiance in schools- part of new state law district cited by Attorney Gen.- determined no malice involved 11-02 Oshkosh S.D. Board bd. Deleted personal email messages from constituents on district consolidation plans, Attorney Gen. ruled deletions violated open-records laws, system now in place to store messages re: district affairs Remember, it is the content, not the format which determines archiving.

    26. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 26 Privacy in Schools: Issue #12 Use of Surveillance Cameras Dept. of Justice “Safe Schools Manual” Allows use of “surveillance technology to protect health, welfare, and safety of students and staff” Generally in places students and staff lack reasonable expectation of privacy Hallways, cafeteria, stairways, parking lot, entrances School libraries and computer labs Installed to prevent vandalism, enforce school rules, provide security Notification of public Signs on doors, notice in district newsletter, letters to parents, highlighted in orientation meetings

    27. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 27 Actions Schools Can Take Add privacy language to Internet AUP Add privacy statement to district Website Review how Internet logs are archived Maintain minimal library records Provide staff training on privacy issues Teach students about privacy issues Students should know their rights They should learn to protect their own privacy Inform parents of district policies related to privacy There are 5 steps schools can take to protect student & staff privacy online: 1) Add privacy language to Internet use policy regardless of N-CIPA: *Montello S.D. Internet Guidelines: When communicating with others, keep in mind: *cannot see them, cannot tell how old they are, or even what sex They can tell you anything & you cannot be sure it is the truth Privacy is not guaranteed in a network environment Think carefully about what you say and how you say it. Exercise caution: do not give out home phone number of personal info. Do not make arrangements to meet others only know through the Internet. 2) Address privacy on district’s website by adding privacy statement 3) Inservice All staff on protecting PERSONAL & STUDENT privacy Everyone needs to have a basic understanding of privacy concerns Address need for some email archiving with staff 4) Teach students about privacy issues Sts. Should know their rights & Begin young to make privacy a habit. 5) Inform parents of policies related to privacy There are 5 steps schools can take to protect student & staff privacy online: 1) Add privacy language to Internet use policy regardless of N-CIPA: *Montello S.D. Internet Guidelines: When communicating with others, keep in mind: *cannot see them, cannot tell how old they are, or even what sex They can tell you anything & you cannot be sure it is the truth Privacy is not guaranteed in a network environment Think carefully about what you say and how you say it. Exercise caution: do not give out home phone number of personal info. Do not make arrangements to meet others only know through the Internet. 2) Address privacy on district’s website by adding privacy statement 3) Inservice All staff on protecting PERSONAL & STUDENT privacy Everyone needs to have a basic understanding of privacy concerns Address need for some email archiving with staff 4) Teach students about privacy issues Sts. Should know their rights & Begin young to make privacy a habit. 5) Inform parents of policies related to privacy

    28. Privacy in the 21st Century: Issues for Schools & Libraries Helen Adams hadams@coredcs.com Rosholt School District WEMA Program Summary: Historically, patron privacy and confidentiality of library records have been core values of librarianship. However, contemporary phenomena such as the Internet, emerging technologies, and the events of Sept. 11, 2001 have changed personal and institutional privacy forever. How will the converging forces affect privacy in schools and libraries? With hot button privacy issues mounting daily, learn the facts behind the headlines to protect your privacy and that of your students. Mardi GrasWEMA Program Summary: Historically, patron privacy and confidentiality of library records have been core values of librarianship. However, contemporary phenomena such as the Internet, emerging technologies, and the events of Sept. 11, 2001 have changed personal and institutional privacy forever. How will the converging forces affect privacy in schools and libraries? With hot button privacy issues mounting daily, learn the facts behind the headlines to protect your privacy and that of your students. Mardi Gras

    29. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 29

    30. Privacy — 2003 WEMA Conf. (Adams, Bocher) 30

More Related