I don’t care that they have blocked change.org, but let’s be clear that the District’s technology policy is clearly not focused on safety for kids.
I’ve yet to hear a pedagogical reason for issuing iPads to elementary school kids.
The security reports I get on their use show that the bulk of the time they seem to be using it to watch inappropriate videos on YouTube.
None of the ’learning’ apps do anything more than a book or worksheet might do and the devices cause nothing but friction since the kids want to play games on them when they are home.
There is lots of evidence to suggest limitations on screen time is wise for kids yet the district embraces them without any critical assessment as far as I can ascertain.
100% agree with you. Maybe we need a change.org petition to get D65 to ban YouTube on district devices or stop using them altogether in elementary school.
There is way too much reliance on technology and ipads in the schools. I was shocked when my oldest kid started kindergarten how much of the curriculum was directly tied to the Ipad. I know a lot of parents are unhappy with how phones, ipads, and technology are prevalent in the schools in general. A lot of those same parents are spearheading the Wait Until 8th Pledge at several of the D65 schools in the area to encourage families to delay giving their kids a smart phone until high school. If anyone is interested in learning more about that, you can check it out here: https://www.waituntil8th.org/
Amen. And a pet peeve of mine is that they don't even use the computers to teach a useful skill like touch typing. My middle schooler is still hunting and pecking to type papers. Ugh
Might not be this straightforward, but why don't we simply require a parent-authorized "opt-in" for everything. Shortlist of apps provided with a clear educational purpose, maybe even explanation of why it's superior to whatever the analog equivalent might be (i.e. the bar should be justifying why tech is best suited to build the proficiency). Additionally, it would be great to hear from teachers why YouTube is critical to their ability to teach the students. If there's a handful of videos that are posted on YT, could those be downloaded into some "Class Folder" so that they're only accessing the specific videos themselves, vs. launching kids into the infinite world of YouTube? Parents can make their own tech decisions that extend beyond what's academically necessary on school-issued devices.
Doing parental controls and attempting to block sites ad hoc is a fools errand, and the burden shouldn't be on parents.
OK, I’m pretty well known for not trusting a damn thing D65 does, but given the age of the students that have district devices, blocking sites that require PII from students on the district network and devices seems like it’s well on the right side of the allowable line. IOW, this doesn’t offend me.
ETA: as a for instance, my kid is a sophomore at ETHS (thank god they’re out of D65 now), and their ETHS email address is only reachable by other ETHS email addresses…and that seems perfectly fair to me.
Yeah, I agree - I think it's fine. Ultimately, I decided to publish this because there were rumors that this was done intentionally to BR but I think that's likely not the case here and I hope that was reflected in my reporting. I love a good first amendment fight but this is not it.
Stand alone, I can understand the district's desire to protect children's identity. I can't help noticing, however, how conveniently it serves them. We've notice several other attempts to limit our efforts at organizing, etc. Thank you for sharing Tom.
Dear Tom, as an anonymous district 65 student, I am proud to say that we moved to a localized school website, that is PRIVATE. We are moving it throughout the community by email. There is roughly 125 signatures on this website and multiple people bringing out practically short essays listing reasons. The majority of signatures are from middle schoolers in the area. We’re currently shooting for 150 signatures. For anonymity, I will not disclose this article or my name if anybody asks.
The timing of District 65’s decision to ban this website was TERRIBLY self-serving and does stifle free speech. Even if it had merit. The admin and board couldn’t be more distant from the majority of stakeholders while petitions are one of the few ways to express, en mass, the will of the people. And their discontent.
We all know the board/Horton circumvented the public by not holding a referendum for the 5th ward school. We all know that closing Bessie Rhodes is bananas from an equity point of view given the population it serves. BANANAS. We all know that this new standards based grading system is meant to COVER UP the educational gaps between races that district 65 cannot resolve.
These are conclusions one comes to on their own but unable to express because the fb mafia will bully you down. Right now on the D65 page it is literally happening with the usual gang. Slim pickings for having a voice in this town, albeit, in a barely looked at petition.
As someone who knows kids in the district, I am practically certain this was in response to a petition by middle schoolers to return to normal letter grades as opposed to the current standards based grading. The stated reasons may make sense, but I doubt they are the true reasons. I coach the debate team at Nichols specifically, and 5 different kids independently brought it up during practice Monday and Wednesday. I find it hard to believe that these two things so close in time are unrelated.
Ah, yes, the standards based grading plow to level the playing field. I have a high-achieving middle schooler who, after seeing first term grades, realized there's no need for him to work as hard as he has been because a minimum of effort will result in the same grade. Lop off the top and the valleys don't look so deep.
This really is a nothing story. There are plenty of sites that are technically "banned" or not allowed for student use. The law makes it very clear that students are NOT allowed to use any website that collects personal information from students UNLESS the District has a signed legal form that protects this information. It is disingenuous to claim that DIstrict 65 is banning Change.org Petitions. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of issues I have with the District, but this feels click-baity.
I want to know why you won’t sign a petition? I have a friend who refuses to display yard signs. Once she explained it to me I’ve never looked at yard signs in the same way. 😂😂😂😂
Yeah, I want to know the reason she refuses to display yard signs. My reason is the same reason I won’t drive a Prius or an Outback: it’s too Evanston-y. Yuck.
I don’t care that they have blocked change.org, but let’s be clear that the District’s technology policy is clearly not focused on safety for kids.
I’ve yet to hear a pedagogical reason for issuing iPads to elementary school kids.
The security reports I get on their use show that the bulk of the time they seem to be using it to watch inappropriate videos on YouTube.
None of the ’learning’ apps do anything more than a book or worksheet might do and the devices cause nothing but friction since the kids want to play games on them when they are home.
There is lots of evidence to suggest limitations on screen time is wise for kids yet the district embraces them without any critical assessment as far as I can ascertain.
100% agree with you. Maybe we need a change.org petition to get D65 to ban YouTube on district devices or stop using them altogether in elementary school.
There is way too much reliance on technology and ipads in the schools. I was shocked when my oldest kid started kindergarten how much of the curriculum was directly tied to the Ipad. I know a lot of parents are unhappy with how phones, ipads, and technology are prevalent in the schools in general. A lot of those same parents are spearheading the Wait Until 8th Pledge at several of the D65 schools in the area to encourage families to delay giving their kids a smart phone until high school. If anyone is interested in learning more about that, you can check it out here: https://www.waituntil8th.org/
Amen. And a pet peeve of mine is that they don't even use the computers to teach a useful skill like touch typing. My middle schooler is still hunting and pecking to type papers. Ugh
Might not be this straightforward, but why don't we simply require a parent-authorized "opt-in" for everything. Shortlist of apps provided with a clear educational purpose, maybe even explanation of why it's superior to whatever the analog equivalent might be (i.e. the bar should be justifying why tech is best suited to build the proficiency). Additionally, it would be great to hear from teachers why YouTube is critical to their ability to teach the students. If there's a handful of videos that are posted on YT, could those be downloaded into some "Class Folder" so that they're only accessing the specific videos themselves, vs. launching kids into the infinite world of YouTube? Parents can make their own tech decisions that extend beyond what's academically necessary on school-issued devices.
Doing parental controls and attempting to block sites ad hoc is a fools errand, and the burden shouldn't be on parents.
OK, I’m pretty well known for not trusting a damn thing D65 does, but given the age of the students that have district devices, blocking sites that require PII from students on the district network and devices seems like it’s well on the right side of the allowable line. IOW, this doesn’t offend me.
ETA: as a for instance, my kid is a sophomore at ETHS (thank god they’re out of D65 now), and their ETHS email address is only reachable by other ETHS email addresses…and that seems perfectly fair to me.
Yeah, I agree - I think it's fine. Ultimately, I decided to publish this because there were rumors that this was done intentionally to BR but I think that's likely not the case here and I hope that was reflected in my reporting. I love a good first amendment fight but this is not it.
No, I think you made it clear that you’re also on the “the stated reasons are fair and make sense” train…which is where I think most people will be.
Stand alone, I can understand the district's desire to protect children's identity. I can't help noticing, however, how conveniently it serves them. We've notice several other attempts to limit our efforts at organizing, etc. Thank you for sharing Tom.
Dear Tom, as an anonymous district 65 student, I am proud to say that we moved to a localized school website, that is PRIVATE. We are moving it throughout the community by email. There is roughly 125 signatures on this website and multiple people bringing out practically short essays listing reasons. The majority of signatures are from middle schoolers in the area. We’re currently shooting for 150 signatures. For anonymity, I will not disclose this article or my name if anybody asks.
Keep the Tom bait coming!
The timing of District 65’s decision to ban this website was TERRIBLY self-serving and does stifle free speech. Even if it had merit. The admin and board couldn’t be more distant from the majority of stakeholders while petitions are one of the few ways to express, en mass, the will of the people. And their discontent.
We all know the board/Horton circumvented the public by not holding a referendum for the 5th ward school. We all know that closing Bessie Rhodes is bananas from an equity point of view given the population it serves. BANANAS. We all know that this new standards based grading system is meant to COVER UP the educational gaps between races that district 65 cannot resolve.
These are conclusions one comes to on their own but unable to express because the fb mafia will bully you down. Right now on the D65 page it is literally happening with the usual gang. Slim pickings for having a voice in this town, albeit, in a barely looked at petition.
Harumph!
As someone who knows kids in the district, I am practically certain this was in response to a petition by middle schoolers to return to normal letter grades as opposed to the current standards based grading. The stated reasons may make sense, but I doubt they are the true reasons. I coach the debate team at Nichols specifically, and 5 different kids independently brought it up during practice Monday and Wednesday. I find it hard to believe that these two things so close in time are unrelated.
Tell your kids to debate the standards based grading because I have been trying to write on it and its a messy topic
Ah, yes, the standards based grading plow to level the playing field. I have a high-achieving middle schooler who, after seeing first term grades, realized there's no need for him to work as hard as he has been because a minimum of effort will result in the same grade. Lop off the top and the valleys don't look so deep.
This really is a nothing story. There are plenty of sites that are technically "banned" or not allowed for student use. The law makes it very clear that students are NOT allowed to use any website that collects personal information from students UNLESS the District has a signed legal form that protects this information. It is disingenuous to claim that DIstrict 65 is banning Change.org Petitions. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of issues I have with the District, but this feels click-baity.
If you want to quell some rumors, maybe have an article title that isn't as misleading.
Hm. OK. What would you suggest for a title?
Maybe "District 65 Limits Student Access to Change.org"?
There ya go - enjoy.
I want to know why you won’t sign a petition? I have a friend who refuses to display yard signs. Once she explained it to me I’ve never looked at yard signs in the same way. 😂😂😂😂
I just hate putting my name on anything unless I also get to write a blog about it
Yeah, I want to know the reason she refuses to display yard signs. My reason is the same reason I won’t drive a Prius or an Outback: it’s too Evanston-y. Yuck.
Yes, and now I'm interested in hearing about the refusal to ban yard signs, please tell!