The education world is scrambling to catch up with the implications of today’s ubiquitous, social media environment. We’re familiar with stories about teacher firings and cyber-bullying. The latest dustup has been the recent legislation in Missouri that forbids teachers from having any private interaction with students online. This means no friend-connections on Facebook or private messages between students and teachers. All interaction must occur publicly. Of course, there’s been huge push-back and uproar to this shortsighted policy and many such controversies are sure to come in the education world as we deal with new media. But how can we as education leaders think about these policy issues?
The critical issue at play is what scholars call a policy frame. A policy frame is the story we tell ourselves that becomes the fundamental influence on the legislation or school regulations we create. For example, the “frame” in this Missouri case is that because a small minority of teachers (87 as reported by the Huffington Post article) have been fired due to sexual misconduct with students, education leaders “hope” to curb the behavior and limit their liability by banning a communication channel (online interaction). With just a little bit of thought about this narrative, we can easily poke holes in this policy frame. Will banning online interaction on Facebook curb sexual misconduct on the part of adults? Couldn’t these teachers also enact these behaviors on school grounds as well? Perhaps we should ban teachers and students from talking to each other in classrooms altogether.
Our own policy frames – or how we view the world at a given moment – are the fundamental building blocks to the education policies we create. What are other policy frames that relate to social media and education? Scholars like Henry Jenkins would argue that social media tools are now an important element of our lives and learning how to responsibly use them is an important literacy. Students today tell us that using online technologies to interact with peers and teachers is what they WANT in their education. (For example, see here and here).
I think it is vital that we – as education leaders – take a step back and assess what our own biases, inclinations, and personal narratives are when thinking about technology. What are the policy frames that govern our own thinking? When our knee jerk reaction is to ban access to technology in schools, let’s take a step back and ask ourselves: What is the story that is going on in my mind? How do we address the REAL problem instead of losing focus by fixating on the shiny new technology? I think this self-reflection is key to avoid ill-informed legislation (such as in Missouri) that tackles the wrong issue (technology) while avoiding the true issue (teacher-student misconduct). These same principals apply to thinking about cyber-bullying. Would banning Facebook curb cyber-bullying? Most likely not. Bullies will just find another open medium. We need to think about proactive and educational interventions that combat behaviors — not ban access to tools because we do not know of better ways to deal. There is no reason that schools cannot adopt a progressive attitude towards technology access for students, but also clearly outline the repercussions of irresponsible behavior. Couple this policy stance with much needed media literacy education and we may actually be teaching our kids something useful in school.
What are some policy frames that currently govern K-12 schools in America? I invite you to take a read of a recent paper I will present at the American Society for Information Science & Technology (ASIS&T) this Fall. In it, my students and I offer some ways that curent school policies limit the ways in which we frame students and technology. We also offer some suggestions for changing our thoughts around school technology policies in an era of widespread social media access. The paper is just the beginning of my thought process around education policy and social media, so please feel free to send thoughts, comments, and suggestions.