The Webster Groves School District recognizes the educational and professional value of electronics-based information technology, both as a means of access to enriching information and as toll to develop skills that students need.
The district's technology exists for the purpose of maximizing the educational opportunities and achievement of district students. The professional enrichment of the staff and Board and increased engagement of the students' families and other patrons of the district are assisted by technology, but are secondary to the ultimate goal of student achievement.
Use of technology resources in a disruptive, manifestly inappropriate or illegal manner impairs the district's mission, squanders resources and shall not be tolerated. Therefore, a consistently high level of personal responsibility is expected of all users granted access to the district's technology resources. Development of students' personal responsibility is itself an expected benefit of the district technology program.
The Board directs the superintendent or designee to create rules and procedures governing technology usage in the district to support the district's policy and to assign trained personnel to maintain the district's technology in a manner that will protect the district from liability and will protect confidential student and employee information retained or accessible through district technology resources.
The district technology resources may be used by authorized students, employees, School Board Members and other persons such as consultants, legal counsel and independent contractors. Use of the district's technology resources is a privilege, not a right. Unless authorized by the superintendent or designee, all users must have an appropriately signed User Agreement on file with the district before they are allowed access to district technology resources. A user does not have a legal expectation of privacy in the user's electronic mail or other activities involving the district's technology resources.
The district will monitor the on-line activities of minors and operate a technology protection measure ('filtering/blocking device") on all computers with Internet access as required by law. Evasion or disabling of the filtering/blocking device installed by the district, including attempts to evade or disable, is a serious violation of district policy. All damages incurred by the district due to the misuse of the district's technology resources, including the loss of property and staff time, will be charged to the user.
The district technology resources are not a public forum for expression of any kind and are to be considered a closed forum to the extent allowed by law. Any expressive activity involving district technology resources that students, parents and members of the public might reasonably perceive to bear the imprimatur of the school, and which are designed to impact particular knowledge or skills to student participants and audiences, are considered curricular publications. All curricular publications are subject to reasonable prior restraint, editing and deletion on behalf of the school district for legitimate pedagogical reasons. All other expressive activity involving the district's technology is subject to reasonable prior restraint and subject matter restrictions as allowed by law and Board policies.
Note: The reader is encouraged to review administrative procedures and/or forms for related information in support of this policy area.
AC, Nondiscrimination and Anti-Harassment
ACR, Nondiscrimination and Anti-Harassment Compliance and Grievance Procedure
EGA, Building and Grounds Security
IGDB, Student Publications
IFDBA, Distribution of Noncurricular Student Publications
JO, Student Records
JOR, Student Records
170.051, 171.011, 177.011-.031, 431.055-.056, 537.525, 542.402, 569.093-.099, 570.223, 610.010-.028.RSMo.
Chapter 573 Revised Statues of Missouri (passim)
P.I. 106-554, Children's Internet Protection Act
P.L. 99-508, 1000 Stat. 1848, electronic Communications Privacy Act
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. 1232(g)
Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.
Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.
Reno v. ACLU, 117 S. Ct. 2329 (1997)
Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968)
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260- (1988)
Bethel Sch, District No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986)
Sony Corporation of America v. University City Studios, Inc. 464 U.S.417 (1984)
Henerey by Henerey v. City of St. Charles School District, 200 F.3d 1128
(8th Cir 1999) Bystrom v. Fridley High Sch., 822 F.2d 747 (8th Cir. 1987)
Urofsky v. Gilmore, F.3d (4th Cir. 2000)
J.S. v. Bethlehem Area Sch. Dist., No. 99-2-00236-6 (Pa. Comw.2000)
Beidler v. North Thurston Sch. Dist., No. 99-2-00236-6 (Wash. Super.Ct.
July 18, 2000)
Webster Groves School District, St. Louis, Missouri.