PLA Blog

Is there something intrinsically different about the technology and behaviors? Frances began by reminding us to differentiate between Internet related problems vs. problems caused BY the Internet; Moral issues are the same regardless of medium, (i.e. stealing) vs. actions that rely on technology (i.e. spamming).

How are teens “led” into unethcial behavior, she asked.

• disconnect because of technology
• anonymity
• invincibility
• hacker ethics (rules are for everyone else because I’m doing good)

She pointed out the different between a child’s misbehavior and a teen’s; as a child you don’t do things because of the reprecussion of retribution; as your cognition developes, ethics and consequences come into play.

When a preschooler plays they are learning - if play is a preschooler’s work, “socializing is a teen’s work.” Social networking is happening. teens are flocking to the same blog services, building friends lists and interests lists is territorial - groups of friends sign up for the same service to share those lists.. They refer to their blogs by the service: my livejournal, my xanga, etc. It’s both inclusive and exclusionary.

Teens drive IM traffic 75%! (Pew Internet & American Life Project report, “Teens & Technology July 2005)
Communicating through away messages
Control over the communication

IM is not really instantaneous - there are 6-8 conversations going on. Too quick is too eager! Something librarians need to learn - stop panicing over replying immediately of having to stop to talk to a paron in front of you or answer the phone.

IM problems: Blocking by one of one, by many of one - cyber bullying!
Exclusive spaces
Members only or private chat rooms

Because the technology has these perks, Frances explained, it can be confusing to distinguish what’s real and what’s not (ie, warning for fun). As a teaching tool, Francis used an Ethics Blog to look at the sources of the articles, and as an exercise they looked at Wikipedia. The beauty of Wikipedia is tags articles that are controversial, and it tracks changes and lists IP address and names. Encyclopedias don’t do this, but “On the other had, Britannica does not have authors with names like jetpoop” said Frances.

Untentional vs. Intentional harm
i.e. a girl who created an online column at www.xanga.com/uni_gossip_101 a la Gossip Girls really lighthearted but comments got more and more zinging and then a pardoy site of the gossip blog http:// www.xanga.com/uni_gossip_102
another example: constructive criticism weblog (remeber slam books?) in which a group of seniors commented on other students to “help them improve”

Wikipedia
“I vandalized Wikipedia to see how long it would take for someone to fix it.” sid one student. “Have I taught you nothing?” replied Frances to the student.

She gave examples of Trouble in Cyberspace, calling it “Tales Out of School:”

• Cheating & Intellectual Property which are black and white, and things librarians are familiar with and most concerned about
• Hacking - Not a bad thing in itself (creative, altruistic) but the ends justify the means attitude and nerd discipline (I’m helping) are misguided
• Freedom of Expression vs Freedom FROM expression
• Harassment - Cyber bullying all the time - can’t get away from it. It’s hard to trace and prosecute.

In her Netiquette lectures, she tells students that 30 years from now, people are going to be looking at what you’ve posted online. Old usenet postings from 15 years ago, longer! are still around. Googling prospective employees & blind dates is a common practice. If it’s online, it’s public!

What do we do about all this? Frances asked.

• Regulatory approach:
• Rules (block at library and they develop workarounds, push it underground)
• Punitive measures (real life & digital environments have same consequences)

• Pedagological Approach
• Character Building & Cognition - Just Say No! doesn’t work - it just redefines the problem (kids who abstain from sex still get STDs)

“Saying just don’t do this is disrespectful unless there is another piece that goes along with it,” said Frances.

What is working at Uni? Ethical storytelling and scenarios! There is a narrative and a simple structure that can deliver complex concepts in a compelling personal way.
It makes abstracts concrete and is a motivator

Implemented through online discussion, because that’s the teens environment of choice. It’s intrinsically motivating. UNI uses a web board as the medium. A wiki or blog could work just as well. Scenarios are posted online, discussed in class, and then applied by looking critically at another web board (their choice). In the real time discussion, the instructor can clear up misconceptions about legal, ethical, and policy issues. Creates analogies too - what would go wrong if the scenario was a more traditional method?

Frances said that they do talk about things like sexual harassment. Teens need to be educated on these topics and nobody is doing it. Scenarios include MP3 downloading, bulk emails, personal websites with illegal and/or harassing content, public performance etc. Bringing in a school counselor with rapport can help with these discussions. Teens learn that just citing sources, not making a profit, and having a common sense argument are not valid reasons for breaking laws or behaving unethically.

For sample scenarios to use when discussing ethics on the Internet with Teens, visit www.uni.uiuc.edu/library/computerlit/scenarios.html

Tags: ALAMidwinter2006, conferences

This entry was posted on Saturday, January 21st, 2006 at 9:32 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.