Description
write a 10-12 page paper that designs a comprehensive, customized, and achievable policy for safe and ethical online behavior in a specific educational setting.
Submit a 10–12-page scholarly, APA-formatted paper in which you:
- Write a policy statement that provides a rationale for the policy, including the underlying philosophy of the policy and what the policy hopes to accomplish (1 page).
- Provide a policy title that captures the content of the policy, but does not include the word policyand include the date from which the policy will become effective.
- Describe the features of safe and ethical online behavior that you feel are most relevant to the specific educational setting based on your collaborations with stakeholders at that educational site. If you do not have access to stakeholders, use publicly accessible information about the school from the school or district Web site, community publications, et cetera (1 page).
- Explain how the policy is related to the institution's core mission and values.
- Develop a comprehensive policy for safe and ethical online behavior that reflects the unique needs of the specific educational setting as determined through your collaborations or research of publicly accessible data (4 pages).
- Evaluate how your policy aligns with your findings from the professional literature (2–3 pages).
- The scholarly literature you cite should focus on the roles and responsibilities of students, teachers, and members of the wider school community.
- Develop a plan for the sustainability of the policy (2–3 pages).
- Consider the nature of technological change and how future developments in technology might impact your policy over time.
- List any statutes, regulations, state board policies, or other relevant authority governing the policy.
- Consider which individuals or groups will be responsible for administering the policy and revising it if necessary.
- RESOURCES
- Dotterer, G., Hedges, A., & Parker, H. (2016). Fostering digital citizenship in the classroom. Education Digest, 82(3), 58–63.
- This article outlines steps that can be taken in a learning environment to outline guidelines for digital citizenship.
- Jones, L. M., & Mitchell, K. J. (2016). Defining and measuring youth digital citizenship. New Media & Society, 18(9), 2063–2079.
- This article outlines a study that assessed a "digital citizenship scale." Also discussed are "implications of study findings for developing and evaluating digital citizenship educational programs."
- Orth, D., & Chen, E. (2013). The strategy for digital citizenship. Independent School, 72(4), 56–63.
- This article provides background on why teaching digital citizenship is important and provides strategies for teaching and supporting digital citizenship in the classroom.
- Ribble, M. (2015). Digital citizenship in schools: Nine elements all students should know (3rd ed.). Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
- Read Chapter 2, which describes elements of digital citizenship which includes digital access, digital commerce, digital communication, digital literacy, digital etiquette, digital law, digital rights and responsibilities, digital health and wellness, and digital security.
- Trach, S. (2013). Safe digital citizenship. National Association of Elementary School Principals. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/principal-novemberdecember-20...
- This article provides a list of "do's and don'ts" for students, teachers, and parents are provided. The authors discuss district policies related to online access, as well as school-based strategies to ensure student safety.
- Ishimaru, A. M. (2014). Rewriting the rules of engagement: Elaborating a model of district-community collaboration. Harvard Educational Review, 84(2), 188–216.
- This article explains how a low-income Latino parent group came to collaborate with their school district. The author "seeks to understand the role of parents, goals, strategies, and change processes that characterize a school district's collaboration with a community-based organization."
- Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2011). Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review. Retrieved from https://ssir.org/articles/entry/collective_impact
- Volk, D. T., Sanetti, L. M. H., & Chafouleas, S. M. (2016). The whole school, whole community, whole child model: An opportunity for school psychologists to show leadership. Communique, 44(8), 1, 18, 20.
- Sanders, M. G. (2012). Sustaining programs of school, family, and community partnerships: A qualitative longitudinal study of two districts. Educational Policy, 26(6), 845–869.
- This article is a study of an urban district and a suburban district and their process of developing a comprehensive program of school, family, and community partnerships.
- You may want to explore some of the tools for teaching digital citizenship created by Common Sense Media:
- Common Sense Media. (n.d.). Search results for "digital citizenship." Retrieved from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/search/digital%20...
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
Policy for Safe and Ethical Digital Behavior - Outline
I.
Policy Statement
A. In a university setting, students should not engage in non-educative material online from
1st July 2019 to increase maximum use of the developed technology.
II.
Features
A. The policy developed aims at ensuring that the students make use of the technology
positively by the search for online materials
III.
Comprehensive Policy
A. Need for the Policy
B. The Unique Needs of the Education Setting
C. The Policy
D. Limitation of the Policy
IV.
Alignment of the Policy with Professional Literature Findings
A. Role of Student
B. Role of Teachers
C. Role of the Wider School Community Members
D. Knowledge Gap That Would Challenge the Alignment
V.
A Policy Sustainability Plan
A. The Nature of the Technological Change
B. Net Neutrality
C. Individual responsible for the Policy
Running head: POLICY FOR SAFE AND ETHICAL DIGITAL BEHAVIOR
Policy for Safe and Ethical Digital Behavior
Name
Institution
1
POLICY FOR SAFE AND ETHICAL DIGITAL BEHAVIOR
2
Policy for Safe and Ethical Digital Behavior
Policy Statement
In a university setting, students should not engage in non-educative material online from
1st July 2019 to increase maximum use of the developed technology. According to the research
conducted by Dotterer, Hedges, & Parker, (2016), student mostly use online platforms for noneducative practices such as chatting with friends rather than getting educative materials that will
promote their knowledge regarding their career. Several institutions have installed digital
technology to their settings to ensure that students have easy access to the materials that they
would need. Some of the items that are installed in such institutions to ensure that the students
have easy access to the online materials include computer systems, computer rooms, wireless
fidelity (Wi-Fi), and technical support team. Through the help of these items, students can make
maximum use of the technology to look for educative materials such as scholarly sources of
materials and education projects. However, most of the students opt to look for other noneducative materials when given a chance to have access to online platforms.
Due to the current advancement in the level of technology, almost every student in a
university setting has joined online social media platforms such as facebook, twitter, WhatsApp,
and Skype, among others. The students use these platforms for dating, spreading rumors,
watching trending videos, and cheating in exams. Due to the increased time spent by the students
in these sites, most of the students fail in their exams regardless of the institution, providing them
with the resources to enable them to increase their level of understanding. According to the
research conducted from various institutions by (Jones & Mitchell, 2016), students claim that
they fail in their exams due to the increased time that they spend with technological devices such
as mobile phones and computers as they chat with their friends or play games online. By
POLICY FOR SAFE AND ETHICAL DIGITAL BEHAVIOR
3
spending most of the time in such practices, they lack enough time to study thus leading to their
failure in academic work. Therefore, the institutional technology should be set in a manner
students cannot access social media or gaming platforms so that they can spend most of their
time obtaining educative materials.
Features
Based on the end of year exam records viewed in a particular school in one of the
universities in the United States, more than half of the students had failed their exams. This
aspect led to the need for the school stakeholders, especially the administration staff, to develop
much concern to understand the reason behind the failure. After conducting a thorough
interview, the students gave out different reasons behind their failure. However, most of the
students claimed to have failed in the exams by using institutional technology in a negative way
other than using it to obtain educative materials. From the information collected, the reason for
failure revolved around the use of social media and gaming platforms (Orth & Chen, 2013).
As per the reasons behind the failure of the students, the policy developed aims at
ensuring that the students make use of the technology positively by the search for online
materials. However, since it is difficult for the students to adhere to the policy, the policy will
ensure that such students cannot access such sites. In this case, the techn...
