Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pia L. Bowes
11/8/17
RESPONSIBLE USE POLICY LETTER: PARTS I & II 2
School districts allow students to access technology, so that it may be integrated into
instruction and help them be more prepared for the 21st century job market and society. In order
to align themselves with federal law, The Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA), school districts
must have certain elements in their internet safety policy or acceptable use policy (Bosco, 2013).
The following paper contains a comparison of two such acceptable use policies (AUPs) and
recommendations for updates and improvements to my current district’s acceptable use policy.
I chose to compare the AUPs of my current district, Prince George’s County Public
Schools, and my previous district, Newport News Public Schools. These district’s policies were
formatted completely differently, found in different locations within each organization, and of
different length.
Comparison Table
procedure. The positive here is that list of specific actions, so I have nothing
everything is laid out, so there are to compare or contrast. There is a
very few questions as to what could positive to this because this allows you
happen. leeway for exemptions and extenuating
circumstances.
This letter is to be written to the Chief Executive Officer of the Technology Training and
Instructional Technology Office, Melinda Gooch. It should be noted that PGCPS has a 12 year-
old Technology Plan, but it does incorporate components of the National Education Technology
Letter
I am writing to express several concerns about Prince George’s County Public Schools’
Guidelines. Its content should be updated to reflect district changes, should address all of the
elements required by The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), and should align with both
RESPONSIBLE USE POLICY LETTER: PARTS I & II 5
the National Education Technology Plan (NETP) and Maryland’s Education Technology Plan
(METP).
First and foremost, it was written in 2013, and when I entered the district, in 2015, new
equipment, which required new training and procedures was introduced. Also, new software
allowing students more access to the internet and communication with others is now included in
instruction. There is no specific statement that pertains to student safety and security, though
pieces of what one person might consider as components of safety and security are listed in the
prohibitions section amongst 22 prohibited actions. Also, there should be measures restricting
minor access to harmful material, but none are listed. Perhaps this could be addressed, as a
disgruntled parent may notice that the of the six technology acceptable uses, using appropriate
language is mentioned and so is respecting the limit transmitting information, but the safety and
Secondly, though PGCPS does have a Technology Plan, which is dated 2005, PGCPS’s
acceptable use policy should still align with the National Education Technology Plan or at least
indicate that there is a document that does. One noticeable difference the lack of emphasis on
equal access to technology by all learners (USDE, 2016). As a special education teacher, I am
acutely aware of some children’s need for assistive technology gain equal access to the
curriculum. If the curriculum is changing to include more technology, then the technology would
be adapted or new technology would be provided for those students. Just like those students use
assistive technology to access the curriculum, learners from disadvantaged home life situations
can use technology, at school, to close the digital divide, or the gap between themselves and
students who have access to technology in multiple places (USDE, 2016). The digital divide is
more noticeable now because students are being required to complete activities through online
RESPONSIBLE USE POLICY LETTER: PARTS I & II 6
software. That can be difficult for families without computers at home, as library computers are
not always available. An instructional piece dictating the integration of technology with
instruction, not completely replacing it would help level the playing field, if issues preventing the
funds for new technology arose. Another component that could be included in the AUP, and one
is to have teachers that are knowledgeable enough to create technology integrated into
instruction (MSDE, 2007). It is an excellent idea to provide these students with new hardware
and software, but if teachers are not able to use the new technology, it is being wasted. The
technology trainings that are currently offered are attended by mostly the same teachers,
technology coordinators, and tech liaisons every year. Even including a requirement of one
training per year would help improve the skills of the “digital immigrants” that are in many
Lastly, if our mission is to truly bring students into the 21st century and prepare them to
be successful members of society, we should adapt our acceptable use policies into responsible
use polices. When should be empowering them with the tools they need to become “digitally
literate,” not restricting them to remain teacher dependent in their learning (Maloy et. al, 2017, p.
104).
Sincerely,
Pia L. Bowes
Conclusion
It seemed to me that NNPS’s AUP was written with more responsibility on the student,
like a responsible use policy, while PGCPS’s was clearly an AUP. If Prince George’s County
RESPONSIBLE USE POLICY LETTER: PARTS I & II 7
Public Schools can change the climate from acceptable to responsible, our students will be even
more successful.
RESPONSIBLE USE POLICY LETTER: PARTS I & II 8
References
Bosco, J. (2013). Rethinking Acceptable Use Policies to Enable Digital Learning: A Guide for
http://www.cosn.org/sites/default/files/pdf/Revised%20AUP%20March%202013_final.p
df
Newport News Public Schools. (2016). Internet Acceptable Use Procedures Form: Acceptable
http://sbo.nn.k12.va.us/resources/handbook/internet.pdf
resources/pearson/2017/transforming-learning-with-new-technologies_ebook_3e.php
Maryland State Department of Education. (2007). The Maryland State Technology Plan for the
http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/NR/rdonlyres/C3BAD835-6100-484C-8397-
85279EB95A34/13485/TechPlanFinalfromPrinter73007.pdf
Prince George’s County Public Schools. (2005). Tech Final Plan. Retrieved from
http://www1.pgcps.org/uploadedFiles/Offices/Information_Technology/Training/Instructi
onal_Tech/Tech%20Plan%20Final.pdf
Prince George’s County Public Schools. (2013). Administrative Procedure 0700 Information
file:///C:/Users/pbowes/Downloads/0700%20(1).pdf
RESPONSIBLE USE POLICY LETTER: PARTS I & II 9
https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf