Just participated a great conversation with Sara Dexter of the University of Virginia for one of her Technology Leader Certificate courses. One of the questions concerned Acceptable Use Policies and the ramifications of parents failing or unwilling to sign them, so I wanted to sort of rehash my answer here.
Flickr: madmanOTLAcceptable Use Policies developed as a result of legislation that attempted to govern how schools allowed students to use the Internet. While legislation usually did not directly call for their formation, it was sort of the implementation of choice for most schools around the country. The policy is basically a signed agreement documenting what's acceptable in using the Internet at school (although as Karl Fisch stated, it is really an unacceptable use policy as most of them are just a list of things that kids cannot do). Parents and students had to sign the AUP before they were granted any Internet privileges at school. In that way, it was sort of like a contract between the school and the student's family.
Well, today I argued that such a structure should become a thing of the past. The contractual nature of these AUP's is an outdated concept. We regularly use these kind of parental contracts for extracurricular activities at schools. Parents typically have to sign one before field trips or playing football, etc. Basically, it's the same idea as student drug testing only of extra-curriculars. Because it is a privilege beyond the basic provision of curriculum, the school can put additional requirements on it.
So, as long as we viewed the Internet as extra-curricular, the idea of an contract-based AUP worked just fine. But, we are now starting to move past the era when the Internet was extra-curricular into the era when the Internet is the curriculum. Much of what teachers are teaching these days has Internet based components and even Internet based activities. When we view the Internet as a standard part of the curriculum, the AUP doesn't make sense as a contractual endeavor because the school cannot contract for the delivery of curriculum. We have compulsory attendance laws and those laws demand that students be provided curriculum, whether or not their parents sign some agreements beforehand. This gets to the question of what happens when a parent doesn't sign an AUP. but an Internet based-activity is a standard part of the course? ... Answer: Implement the curriculum including the Internet, whether or not the AUP has been signed.
Let me be clear, I am not arguing against the principles contained in those AUP's (although certainly they can be substantially improved). What I am saying is the principles in those AUP's need to be moved into the school's discipline code and schools need to retroactively punish students for violations just as we do for any other disciplinary violations. The proactive contract-based idea only works if you actually have discretion to not implement the terms of the contract. Well, as the Internet increasingly becomes a standard part of the curriculum, that discretion is waning. It is not a bad idea to articulate to parents how you expect students to use the Internet at school, but to hold out the idea that a student won't get the standard curriculum if they don't sign an AUP is just wrong.