The EMU at my uni recently blocked all the internet access on the microscope computers. While this is probably sensible because you don't want them getting viruses, it's also annoying as hell because it's an instrument which takes 3-15 minutes to acquire one image.
My university doesn't block anything, so pretty much everyone's laptop has a little uTorrent icon in the tray at all times.
We block torrents, and our downloads are like $20 a gig or something because it's all over a T3 line so it's very fast. Someone is abusing that and going to get our privileges taken away.
Recently my school started blocking game sites like penny-arcade. I was really pissed off for a while, but a friend found me a proxy that can get past the block, [NO NO NO NO NO].
I was wondering what you all thought of this, and how common it is? If you go to school, what does yours block? Nothing / Porn / Time wasting sites / Email / Google / Everything? I was really pissed they blocked penny-arcade, I think I should be able to take a break every once in a while.
mod edit: It's not cool to give instructions on how to avoid your school's rules. - ElJeffe
You're browsing on their dime. They get to dictate what you can, and cannot look at on the internet. Suck it up.
And these grades are based more or less on your performance, right?
So if a student finishes his work, and understands the material well enough to get an A without studying, why should the school care that he is goofing off a little on the school computers? If the student hasn't done his work and hasn't studied the material, then that will be reflected in his grade.
Does the school have a right to do it? Sure. But it's a shitty thing to do.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
So if a student finishes his work, and understands the material well enough to get an A without studying, why should the school care that he is goofing off a little on the school computers?
Then its the teacher fault for not challenging the little darlings Elki. They should have unrestricted internet access to prepare them for the real world. I know my job allows me unrestricted browsing all day.
In all seriousness, game sites, especially PA should be blocked. When children are sent to school its under the idea they are there to learn and socialize with their peers. If they have free time on their hands they should invest that back into their school work while they are at school, perhaps finish up an assignment from another class?
Preacher on
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Then its the teacher fault for not challenging the little darlings Elki. They should have unrestricted internet access to prepare them for the real world. I know my job allows me unrestricted browsing all day.
In all seriousness, game sites, especially PA should be blocked. When children are sent to school its under the idea they are there to learn and socialize with their peers. If they have free time on their hands they should invest that back into their school work while they are at school, perhaps finish up an assignment from another class?
You say this like this is something you would ever have done with spare time.
I browsed game sites all through my high school programming classes. It was an enjoyable waste of time.
Might it have been better spent actually trying to learn how to program, and not just share code with friends to get an A? In hindsight that seems like such an obvious 'yes.'
Just because you can get A's in high school doesn't mean you should have carte blanche to do whatever you want on the school's time. They can and should block everything that isn't directly related to student use, which is basically the entire goddamn internet. If you're done with your assignments early, congratulations. You can bring a book, or take a nap. School's aren't tasked with making sure you aren't bored. If it takes some boredom to reduce a significant amount of unsupervised goofing-off that goes against school rules, tough shit.
And I love the arguments that go, "well bored.com wasn't blocked but stuff like Wikipedia was!" That only means the school IT department hasn't got the unblocked site on their list yet. The (cheap) way that most schools handle that stuff takes a lot more effort than just clicking a "filter" button, and requires a semi-competent IT department.
One site being unblocked shouldn't be viewed as evidence of a double-standard, because it's not an endorsement of that site. It's just under the radar, and accessing it frequently is more likely to get it on the blacklist.
AresProphet on
0
Options
Monkey Ball WarriorA collection of mediocre hatsSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
There's nothing exactly wrong with a school blocking sites it deems a waste of time but it's very draconian. If I was a school sys admin I would do what I could to prevent it. First of all it's the teacher's job to ensure the students are on task. Secondly, the possibility of accidently blocking sites that may very well be needed for the students to do research makes it a dangerous tactic. One wants to encourage using the internet as a learning tool, not choke it down to the point it is rendered virtually useless. And finally, the very motivated students will just use a proxy.
In short, while the certainly have the right to do things like this, they ought not to.
Just blocking porn is hard enough, they should concentrate on that.
Monkey Ball Warrior on
"I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
So if a student finishes his work, and understands the material well enough to get an A without studying, why should the school care that he is goofing off a little on the school computers?
And if they don't get an A?
Then it's reflected in their grade, just like if they goofed off at home, or daydreamed in class.
I don't think that blocking gaming sites at school is going to suddenly turn a mediocre high school student into a good one. If they're unconcerned with the consequences, then locking down the firewall isn't going to cause them to shape up. It's only going to make them hate coming to school even more.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I don't think locations ought to block specific aspects of the internet. A workplace, school, library, etc. all ought to allow access to everything. Mainly because I think that's what the internet and democracy and freedom is all about.
So if a student finishes his work, and understands the material well enough to get an A without studying, why should the school care that he is goofing off a little on the school computers?
And if they don't get an A?
Then it's reflected in their grade, just like if they goofed off at home, or daydreamed in class.
I don't think that blocking gaming sites at school is going to suddenly turn a mediocre high school student into a good one. If they're unconcerned with the consequences, then locking down the firewall isn't going to cause them to shape up. It's only going to make them hate coming to school even more.
As someone who has had to clean up computers after random teenagers have been allowed to do whatever they want on them in an institution that lacks the budget for something like Zenworks or Ghost, I hope you choke to death on your own balls.
ViolentChemistry on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I don't think locations ought to block specific aspects of the internet. A workplace, school, library, etc. all ought to allow access to everything. Mainly because I think that's what the internet and democracy and freedom is all about.
I don't think locations ought to block specific aspects of the internet. A workplace, school, library, etc. all ought to allow access to everything. Mainly because I think that's what the internet and democracy and freedom is all about.
You've never tried teaching, have you? Schools have this little thing called a "duty of care". If a kid accesses something at school that the child's parents don't want them to access then the school is responsible. It's obvious that some parents wouldn't want their kids reading a sight with 'bad' language, so the school must restrict access to that or they are failing in their duty of care.
Democracy and freedom sound all fine and dandy, but kids can't vote.
As someone who has had to clean up computers after random teenagers have been allowed to do whatever they want on them in an institution that lacks the budget for something like Zenworks or Ghost, I hope you choke to death on your own balls.
As someone who's seen the havoc they can wreak in a science lab, you have my sympathy.
Gorak on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
It isn't what it does block, it's what it doesn't.
Every 3 pages you find one usable site through Google.
best solution is to restrict access on school computers, but give students an open wifi network.
I'd rather eat my own face than take responsibility for a thousand or so of other peoples' kids with unrestricted net access. I know the sort of things I look at on the net and I know how quick parents are to blame teachers.
best solution is to restrict access on school computers, but give students an open wifi network.
I'd rather eat my own face than take responsibility for a thousand or so of other peoples' kids with unrestricted net access. I know the sort of things I look at on the net and I know how quick parents are to blame teachers.
best solution is to restrict access on school computers, but give students an open wifi network.
I'd rather eat my own face than take responsibility for a thousand or so of other peoples' kids with unrestricted net access. I know the sort of things I look at on the net and I know how quick parents are to blame teachers.
they're going to be doing all that shit anyway
Being able to list off all the great lengths you went to to stop them will be a lot better defense than "well we knew someone would eventually get around it so we didn't bother to restrict anything".
best solution is to restrict access on school computers, but give students an open wifi network.
I'd rather eat my own face than take responsibility for a thousand or so of other peoples' kids with unrestricted net access. I know the sort of things I look at on the net and I know how quick parents are to blame teachers.
they're going to be doing all that shit anyway
Being able to list off all the great lengths you went to to stop them will be a lot better defense than "well we knew someone would eventually get around it so we didn't bother to restrict anything".
yeah, but like I said, I think high schoolers, or hey, juniors and seniors in high school, can handle using the internet on their own computers.
Most people will just go on facebook anyway. If anyone gets caught accessing content that breaks school rules, well, it's essentially the same thing as bringing porno, a print-out of goatse or a copy of Mein Kampf to school.
best solution is to restrict access on school computers, but give students an open wifi network.
I'd rather eat my own face than take responsibility for a thousand or so of other peoples' kids with unrestricted net access. I know the sort of things I look at on the net and I know how quick parents are to blame teachers.
they're going to be doing all that shit anyway
Being able to list off all the great lengths you went to to stop them will be a lot better defense than "well we knew someone would eventually get around it so we didn't bother to restrict anything".
yeah, but like I said, I think high schoolers, or hey, juniors and seniors in high school, can handle using the internet on their own computers.
Most people will just go on facebook anyway. If anyone gets caught accessing content that breaks school rules, well, it's essentially the same thing as bringing porno, a print-out of goatse or a copy of Mein Kampf to school.
My experience dictates that high-schoolers especially juniors and seniors on average can't not-break the computers that the other students need to use given free-reign of the interwebs, and while you may believe what you just said, parents don't give a fuck what you believe and the PTA can wreak a brand of hell upon the lives of anyone working for a school that you've obviously never even heard of.
Being able to list off all the great lengths you went to to stop them will be a lot better defense than "well we knew someone would eventually get around it so we didn't bother to restrict anything".
yeah, but like I said, I think high schoolers, or hey, juniors and seniors in high school, can handle using the internet on their own computers.
In theory, yes. But it's not the school's or the child's place to make that decision - it's the parents'. You'd need informed consent from the parent of every single child.
Most people will just go on facebook anyway. If anyone gets caught accessing content that breaks school rules, well, it's essentially the same thing as bringing porno, a print-out of goatse or a copy of Mein Kampf to school.
If the school had a very easy method for preventing porn entering the school and they neglected to implement it they would be negligent. It would be like Blockbuster putting hardcore porn on the shelf next to Toy Story.
Being able to list off all the great lengths you went to to stop them will be a lot better defense than "well we knew someone would eventually get around it so we didn't bother to restrict anything".
yeah, but like I said, I think high schoolers, or hey, juniors and seniors in high school, can handle using the internet on their own computers.
In theory, yes. But it's not the school's or the child's place to make that decision - it's the parents'. You'd need informed consent from the parent of every single child.
Most people will just go on facebook anyway. If anyone gets caught accessing content that breaks school rules, well, it's essentially the same thing as bringing porno, a print-out of goatse or a copy of Mein Kampf to school.
If the school had a very easy method for preventing porn entering the school and they neglected to implement it they would be negligent. It would be like Blockbuster putting hardcore porn on the shelf next to Toy Story.
my theory is that the pornokids, if stripped of IT, will resort to doing it the old fashioned way. And there has been stuff like that going on since the dawn of school, or porn. or both. it's kind of futile to assume high school is going to be as sterile an environment as a continental chain that makes most of its money by catering to families.
best solution is to restrict access on school computers, but give students an open wifi network.
I'd rather eat my own face than take responsibility for a thousand or so of other peoples' kids with unrestricted net access. I know the sort of things I look at on the net and I know how quick parents are to blame teachers.
they're going to be doing all that shit anyway
Being able to list off all the great lengths you went to to stop them will be a lot better defense than "well we knew someone would eventually get around it so we didn't bother to restrict anything".
yeah, but like I said, I think high schoolers, or hey, juniors and seniors in high school, can handle using the internet on their own computers.
Most people will just go on facebook anyway. If anyone gets caught accessing content that breaks school rules, well, it's essentially the same thing as bringing porno, a print-out of goatse or a copy of Mein Kampf to school.
My experience dictates that high-schoolers especially juniors and seniors on average can't not-break the computers that the other students need to use given free-reign of the interwebs, and while you may believe what you just said, parents don't give a fuck what you believe and the PTA can wreak a brand of hell upon the lives of anyone working for a school that you've obviously never even heard of.
the position i was arguing was that schools can regulate/monitor activity on their own computers, but should let students access whatever they want if they bring their own computers and connect through wifi. One day kids will be able to do that anyway, when universal public wifi is a reality, or on the go wifi becomes affordable.
If kids break school rules, they've still broken school rules, and should be punished accordingly. I don't agree that internet access makes it dramatically easier for people to sneak anything into school.
my theory is that the pornokids, if stripped of IT, will resort to doing it the old fashioned way. And there has been stuff like that going on since the dawn of school, or porn. or both. it's kind of futile to assume high school is going to be as sterile an environment as a continental chain that makes most of its money by catering to families.
It's also futile to think that we can end all crime so let's disband the police force.
All it takes is for one kid to go home and tell his parents that someone showed them porn using the school's network to create a total shit-storm of litigation.
my theory is that the pornokids, if stripped of IT, will resort to doing it the old fashioned way. And there has been stuff like that going on since the dawn of school, or porn. or both. it's kind of futile to assume high school is going to be as sterile an environment as a continental chain that makes most of its money by catering to families.
It's also futile to think that we can end all crime so let's disband the police force.
All it takes is for one kid to go home and tell his parents that someone showed them porn using the school's network to create a total shit-storm of litigation.
Even if steps were taken, such as banning the offending computer from the network or the kid losing laptop previleges? I don't know if such an application exists, but couldn't there be a scan of URL's accessed that would look for certain keywords, which would raise a red flag? IT may sound like a logitical nightmare, and I'm sure it would be in some schools, but I think that in any given school, you're not going to find more than 3 people trying to look at porn/ D.W Griffiths films at a time.
If kids break school rules, they've still broken school rules, and should be punished accordingly. I don't agree that internet access makes it dramatically easier for people to sneak anything into school.
That's the key word here. If the school provides a facility that allows children to access material they shouldn't be accessing, then they will be held legally liable regardless of any rules they put in place saying "don't do this".
It's why the science department has locks on the cupboards with dangerous chemicals.
Whats the point in giving free access and then banninating people for going on restricted sites? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the defenses as well? Whats the point in them not being there?
my theory is that the pornokids, if stripped of IT, will resort to doing it the old fashioned way. And there has been stuff like that going on since the dawn of school, or porn. or both. it's kind of futile to assume high school is going to be as sterile an environment as a continental chain that makes most of its money by catering to families.
It's also futile to think that we can end all crime so let's disband the police force.
All it takes is for one kid to go home and tell his parents that someone showed them porn using the school's network to create a total shit-storm of litigation.
Even if steps were taken, such as banning the offending computer from the network or the kid losing laptop previleges? I don't know if such an application exists, but couldn't there be a scan of URL's accessed that would look for certain keywords, which would raise a red flag? IT may sound like a logitical nightmare, and I'm sure it would be in some schools, but I think that in any given school, you're not going to find more than 3 people trying to look at porn/ D.W Griffiths films at a time.
If you can scan the URLs as they are accessed and flag them based on keywords, then why not block them as kids are attempting to access them rather than let them see it and then punish them later?
That little red flag shows that the school has identified a site as unsuitable but failed to prevent children accessing it. That's negligence and any half-competent lawyer could win that case in his sleep.
Whats the point in giving free access and then banninating people for going on restricted sites? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the defenses as well? Whats the point in them not being there?
a) They will block legitimate sites.
b) Can cause complacency in teachers monitoring what students are doing in I.T. etc (oh they can't be screwing around, all the non school sites are blocked) which can actually be counter productive to the intended aim.
Whats the point in giving free access and then banninating people for going on restricted sites? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the defenses as well? Whats the point in them not being there?
a) They will block legitimate sites.
b) Can cause complacency in teachers monitoring what students are doing in I.T. etc (oh they can't be screwing around, all the non school sites are blocked) which can actually be counter productive to the intended aim.
a) It's better to block a few legitimate sites and then unblock them individually at the request of the teacher than to allow unfettered access.
b) That's the most ludicrous argument against site restrictions I've ever heard.
Whats the point in giving free access and then banninating people for going on restricted sites? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the defenses as well? Whats the point in them not being there?
a) They will block legitimate sites.
b) Can cause complacency in teachers monitoring what students are doing in I.T. etc (oh they can't be screwing around, all the non school sites are blocked) which can actually be counter productive to the intended aim.
a) It's better to block a few legitimate sites and then unblock them individually at the request of the teacher than to allow unfettered access.
b) That's the most ludicrous argument against site restrictions I've ever heard.
Talking from personal experiance there ass. But don't bother actually arguing against the point, just call it stupid. That's the best way to refute points m I rite?
I just wanted to share my experience with this. I worked part-time for my college's library for about two years. It's a small, private Christian school with a really awesome campus and great professors, but that's not the point. The school decided to do some renovating and moved their small, outdated computer lab into the library in order to give more students access to computers. This was a good idea in theory. Hell, I was excited about it.
When the fall semester started up and students were given their first taste of the new computer lab, things went smoothly at first. Then I started to notice something funny was going on. The same students would go back there and sit for hours, day after day. Then I started receiving complaints that there were no computers available to study with. My boss was at lunch so I took it upon myself to go back there and check things out. Every student back there was on myspace or facebook. There was literally not one computer open for people to study with. Not having the power to do anything about it myself, I told my boss about it when she got back, and she told me she'd take care of it. So her idea was to put up little signs around the library reminding students that our computers were for academic purposes only. Guess how much good that did.
Things got progressively worse, but the IT boys at our school were sitting on their thumbs doing nothing about it. The students using myspace were sucking all the bandwidth out of what few computers did manage to get freed up for academic use. Then the computers used for testing new students began to lock up in the middle of tests, rendering all the work useless. This caught the dean's ear, and she bitched to the IT boys to do something about it. They checked their charts and sure enough, the computer lab was using so much of the school's bandwidth that the tests could not be processed. They blocked all social networking sites and proxy sites a day later, much to the student body's chagrin. Everything went smoother after that, but I did get my share of dirty looks thrown at me the next day.
tl;dr: I dont think schools should block social networking sites as long as the students are adult enough to use them responsibly.
You could do what the UW did and just put up signs that say if your not doing work you can be kicked off which solves the crowded problem. Also how the hell does myspace suck up bandwidth? I'd say the solution is to get a competent IT department and a good internet connection.
The federal universal communications tax on your phone bill pays for internet access in schools. With how cheap bandwidth is, and how much cheaper it gets every day, there's really no excuse for not having a fast enough internet connection for normal web browsing habits
Posts
Game sites are the last thing they need.
You're browsing on their dime. They get to dictate what you can, and cannot look at on the internet. Suck it up.
I miss when Hotmail wasn't owned by Microsoft.
And these grades are based more or less on your performance, right?
So if a student finishes his work, and understands the material well enough to get an A without studying, why should the school care that he is goofing off a little on the school computers? If the student hasn't done his work and hasn't studied the material, then that will be reflected in his grade.
Does the school have a right to do it? Sure. But it's a shitty thing to do.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I guess if we use a lot of sexual content and curse then schools have every right to block us.
Fucknuggeting cockmongerers.
And if they don't get an A?
In all seriousness, game sites, especially PA should be blocked. When children are sent to school its under the idea they are there to learn and socialize with their peers. If they have free time on their hands they should invest that back into their school work while they are at school, perhaps finish up an assignment from another class?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Might it have been better spent actually trying to learn how to program, and not just share code with friends to get an A? In hindsight that seems like such an obvious 'yes.'
Just because you can get A's in high school doesn't mean you should have carte blanche to do whatever you want on the school's time. They can and should block everything that isn't directly related to student use, which is basically the entire goddamn internet. If you're done with your assignments early, congratulations. You can bring a book, or take a nap. School's aren't tasked with making sure you aren't bored. If it takes some boredom to reduce a significant amount of unsupervised goofing-off that goes against school rules, tough shit.
And I love the arguments that go, "well bored.com wasn't blocked but stuff like Wikipedia was!" That only means the school IT department hasn't got the unblocked site on their list yet. The (cheap) way that most schools handle that stuff takes a lot more effort than just clicking a "filter" button, and requires a semi-competent IT department.
One site being unblocked shouldn't be viewed as evidence of a double-standard, because it's not an endorsement of that site. It's just under the radar, and accessing it frequently is more likely to get it on the blacklist.
In short, while the certainly have the right to do things like this, they ought not to.
Just blocking porn is hard enough, they should concentrate on that.
Then it's reflected in their grade, just like if they goofed off at home, or daydreamed in class.
I don't think that blocking gaming sites at school is going to suddenly turn a mediocre high school student into a good one. If they're unconcerned with the consequences, then locking down the firewall isn't going to cause them to shape up. It's only going to make them hate coming to school even more.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I'm finding that I have exponentially less sympathy for teenagers with every passing year.
I can't fathom a mind that'd find it unfair and unjust to have Penny Arcade blocked at school, but I know I probably thought the same way back then.
As someone who has had to clean up computers after random teenagers have been allowed to do whatever they want on them in an institution that lacks the budget for something like Zenworks or Ghost, I hope you choke to death on your own balls.
You've never tried teaching, have you? Schools have this little thing called a "duty of care". If a kid accesses something at school that the child's parents don't want them to access then the school is responsible. It's obvious that some parents wouldn't want their kids reading a sight with 'bad' language, so the school must restrict access to that or they are failing in their duty of care.
Democracy and freedom sound all fine and dandy, but kids can't vote.
As someone who's seen the havoc they can wreak in a science lab, you have my sympathy.
Every 3 pages you find one usable site through Google.
But we play that one site's games so hard.
I'd rather eat my own face than take responsibility for a thousand or so of other peoples' kids with unrestricted net access. I know the sort of things I look at on the net and I know how quick parents are to blame teachers.
they're going to be doing all that shit anyway
Being able to list off all the great lengths you went to to stop them will be a lot better defense than "well we knew someone would eventually get around it so we didn't bother to restrict anything".
yeah, but like I said, I think high schoolers, or hey, juniors and seniors in high school, can handle using the internet on their own computers.
Most people will just go on facebook anyway. If anyone gets caught accessing content that breaks school rules, well, it's essentially the same thing as bringing porno, a print-out of goatse or a copy of Mein Kampf to school.
My experience dictates that high-schoolers especially juniors and seniors on average can't not-break the computers that the other students need to use given free-reign of the interwebs, and while you may believe what you just said, parents don't give a fuck what you believe and the PTA can wreak a brand of hell upon the lives of anyone working for a school that you've obviously never even heard of.
In theory, yes. But it's not the school's or the child's place to make that decision - it's the parents'. You'd need informed consent from the parent of every single child.
If the school had a very easy method for preventing porn entering the school and they neglected to implement it they would be negligent. It would be like Blockbuster putting hardcore porn on the shelf next to Toy Story.
my theory is that the pornokids, if stripped of IT, will resort to doing it the old fashioned way. And there has been stuff like that going on since the dawn of school, or porn. or both. it's kind of futile to assume high school is going to be as sterile an environment as a continental chain that makes most of its money by catering to families.
the position i was arguing was that schools can regulate/monitor activity on their own computers, but should let students access whatever they want if they bring their own computers and connect through wifi. One day kids will be able to do that anyway, when universal public wifi is a reality, or on the go wifi becomes affordable.
If kids break school rules, they've still broken school rules, and should be punished accordingly. I don't agree that internet access makes it dramatically easier for people to sneak anything into school.
It's also futile to think that we can end all crime so let's disband the police force.
All it takes is for one kid to go home and tell his parents that someone showed them porn using the school's network to create a total shit-storm of litigation.
Even if steps were taken, such as banning the offending computer from the network or the kid losing laptop previleges? I don't know if such an application exists, but couldn't there be a scan of URL's accessed that would look for certain keywords, which would raise a red flag? IT may sound like a logitical nightmare, and I'm sure it would be in some schools, but I think that in any given school, you're not going to find more than 3 people trying to look at porn/ D.W Griffiths films at a time.
That's the key word here. If the school provides a facility that allows children to access material they shouldn't be accessing, then they will be held legally liable regardless of any rules they put in place saying "don't do this".
It's why the science department has locks on the cupboards with dangerous chemicals.
Whats the point in giving free access and then banninating people for going on restricted sites? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the defenses as well? Whats the point in them not being there?
https://medium.com/@alascii
If you can scan the URLs as they are accessed and flag them based on keywords, then why not block them as kids are attempting to access them rather than let them see it and then punish them later?
That little red flag shows that the school has identified a site as unsuitable but failed to prevent children accessing it. That's negligence and any half-competent lawyer could win that case in his sleep.
a) They will block legitimate sites.
b) Can cause complacency in teachers monitoring what students are doing in I.T. etc (oh they can't be screwing around, all the non school sites are blocked) which can actually be counter productive to the intended aim.
a) It's better to block a few legitimate sites and then unblock them individually at the request of the teacher than to allow unfettered access.
b) That's the most ludicrous argument against site restrictions I've ever heard.
Talking from personal experiance there ass. But don't bother actually arguing against the point, just call it stupid. That's the best way to refute points m I rite?
The federal universal communications tax on your phone bill pays for internet access in schools. With how cheap bandwidth is, and how much cheaper it gets every day, there's really no excuse for not having a fast enough internet connection for normal web browsing habits