• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!



Page history last edited by PBworks 17 years, 7 months ago

Let's list Dave Letterman Style...The Top 20 Reasons why we should dissent to a bill pending introduction by Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-PA) titled the “Deleting Online Predators Act” or DOPA.


20. This bill will increase the technology gap.

Blogging and the effective use Internet information is a vital skill for children to master. Only having access at home to these technologies will target our most at-risk populations by disallowing them to have access at all, since most disadvantaged kids use public libraries and schools for access to the very tools that will allow them to be competitive in the 21st century market place. Through this piece of legislation we will only further the chasm between the haves and have nots.


19. This bill will prevent the effective teaching of the Internet.

A new report Results that Matter:  21st Century Skills and High School reform points out that:


"Today's graduates need to be critical thinkers, problem solvers, and effective communicators who are proficient in both core subjects and new, 21st-century content and skills--including learning and thinking skills, information and communications technology literacy skills, and life skills. "


It is vital that teachers educate their students that what they post on the Internet is in a sense permanent--the follies of youth will haunt you in your thirties. Young people sometimes do foolish things; like sharing revealing pictures of themselves on the Internet. They think only the one person they send it to will ever see it. They often do these things without thinking about the consequences. (They are, after all, children.) They need to be educated how to use and access the Internet responsibly. Where better to educate them on effective Internet literacy and use than at school? DOPA would deprive them of the education that is increasingly important in the digital age.


18. This bill will stymie the use of emerging technologies that have the potential to increase student engagement.

While many students understand the importance of education, national statistics on drop out rates are too high. It is vital that we engage students in a meaningful, salient educational process. The use of social software to teach math, science, and English is being reported as revolutionary and engaging by many educators in the classroom. Because this technology is so new, the research has just begun. This bill would in effect, remove the United States from the forefront of the most promising technologies to emerge in education since the inception of the computer and the Internet.


17. This bill will limit the sharing of best practices among educators around the world.

In a study commissioned by the National Governor's Association (NGA) in 2003, Harvard Scholar, Richard Elmore concluded that:


"Knowing the right thing to do is the central problem of school improvement. Holding schools accountable for their performance depends on having people in the schools with the knowledge, skill, and judgment to make the improvements that will increase student performance. (p 9)"


Educators, teachers, administrators, and others are journaling in online journals called blogs about their best practices in all facets of education. Because there is no standard platform for blogging but most educators use the free blogging tools available to them because they are fast, easy, and inexpensive. This bill would effectively remove the American public school teacher and administrator from reading about and sharing their best practices with the world. This would be to the detriment of American public school students who will be completely left out of innovations that emerge much more rapidly than they did even five years a go. Research papers are presented and conferences, published, and discussed via blogs all within days. This research would have to be disseminated via other means to public schools who wanted to improve based on the latest research. American education is in a crisis situation and our students need their teachers and administrators to be able to participate in the discussion. As leading educator, Robert J. Marzano said in his 2003 research paper "A Tool for selecting the 'Right Work' in Your school' , "The problem in low performing schools is not getting people to work hard, it is getting people to do the 'right work.'" (p 1)


By restricting access to blogs, wikis, and RSS feeds, efforts to keep children from being "left behind" will be stopped in their tracks as leading educators lose the valuable resources available to them through wikis, blogs, and other social networking tools.


16. This bill will prevent research into emerging technologies.

The system that teaches America's teachers focuses on research based methodologies. The technologies of wikis and blogs are very exciting and have produced a lot of anecdotal evidence to show that they work effectively. Basic research into these technologies is just beginning and would be halted before it reached critical mass. In America, we simply must re-engage our students into the education system. By limiting one of the most promising technologies, we could also be setting aside a technology that has the potential to move us forward and become competitive again with the world.


    • 15. Banning the medium is not the same as making the medium difficult to use for those who are up to no good.

If we think back to the days when some of us were kids, we had stranger danger. We were told not to speak with strangers, don't take candy from them, and most assuredly, don't get into their cars. Well, more likely they had vans, as that was the vehicle of choice for would be kidnappers. Did we ban kids from vans? No. We came up with a solution that made vans (all cars really) difficult to use as a way to do bad. The Amber Alert is beautiful in its simplicity and effectiveness, and should be a primary example of government guiding the private sector to come up with solutions which are not over-reaching.




1. This bill will cause more predatory behavior because of the lack of education.**

When threats to the safety of our citizens arise such as the dangers of tobacco and the dangers of the not wearing seatbelts, our country wisely seeks to educate our citizens. In our free country, our citizens can choose to participate in harmful behavior, but we hope they will do it with open eyes and and understanding of their choices. We have a mechanism to reach the majority of our children about the dangers of Internet predators and privacy: the public school system. To neglect teaching safety to these children is to be contrary to the beliefs that most educators hold dear. Rather than restrict access, we should focus on educating students. Rather than forcing students to log on alone, we should guide them onto the Internet at school. This does not mean they will be doing personal activities on school time, rather it means they will learn effective, productive, and safe methodologies of harnessing the newest tools to learn.



***Other Potential Additions to the Top 20 list ***

1. The bill's language can't be edited/massaged into acceptability. The fundamental premise of restricting technology is wrong.


2. Look at the fear-mongering and bad use of data in the argument for the bill.


3. Consitutes an attack on the internet


4. Constitutes an attack on local control of schools


points from





1. The law is simply unenforceable. Students will find open proxies for bypassing content filters faster than they can be blocked.

2. The bill is way too broad.

3. The very technologies that this bill would prohibit are the future of the online world.

4. The bill would allow a school or library to disable the filtering during adult supervision or for educational use. That’s an exemption that isn’t really an exemption. How would that process be managed in a busy school? It wouldn’t happen. The filters would never get disabled.

5. If students are at risk from online predators, it’s not typically during school hours. I understand that Congress can’t legislate how parents supervise their childrens’ computer use, but this seems like a solution pointed in the wrong direction.

6. The social networking phenomenon is too new to know how it’s going to play out in the culture. This law seems like half-cocked response targeted for short-term political gain. That’s a bad way to legislate regardless of the issue.

7. Blocking sites like these only serves to convince students that what they do in school isn’t “real life.” Isn’t it hard enough already to keep students engaged?

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.