Acceptable Use Policy:

Caroline County Public Schools

Samantha Lorraine Biskach

University of Maryland University College

February 28, 2016

ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY 1

Acceptable Use Policy Project: Caroline County Public Schools

Audio/Visual Presentation Link

An AUP, or Acceptable Use Policy is a clear set of standards and expectations of

technology use that ensures the avoidance of digital harm towards network users. Having a clear

AUP in an educational organization prevents abuse of the [school] districts computer network

from both staff and students (Consortium for School, 2011). Since schools are becoming more

acclimated to the digital tools of the 21st century, an AUP is a crucial procedure for all school

districts to follow. When dissecting the Acceptable Use Policy mandated by Caroline County

Public Schools, specific components should be clear and comprehended by all to ensure the

safety of all members of the educational system.

Typically, an AUP should have the following components: a preamble [or purpose],

definition of the AUP, an acceptable uses section, an unacceptable uses section, and a violations

section, however, additional components may be added or dismissed for the specific needs of a

school district (Glencoe, 2001). For Caroline County Public Schools (CCPS), two polices have

been put into place, one for students and one for employees. Though both documents seem

similar, there are components more detailed in relation to the Acceptable Use of Technology for

Employees than for the student based AUP (CCPS, 2016). For the Purpose, Policy

Statement, and Rationale portions of the documents, I found that both Acceptable Use

Policies were identical. Stating, the importance of employees, students, and parents engaging,

collaboration, learning and sharing in these digital environments is 21st century learning is a

positive way to introduce the guidelines to Caroline County. However, some suggestions may be

made in order for this essential technology-use guideline to be easily comprehended by all.
ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY 2

For both students and employees, both documents begin with a Policy section that

highlights what the Regulations portion of the document will entail. One recommendation for

the AUP would be to condense Policy and Regulation into one overall document, as opposed

to two separate forms. Also, when researching other school districts, such as Montgomery

County Public Schools, their AUP procedure includes one document for all users of

technology (MCPS, 2016). According to this reputable school district, user by the AUP

standard is defined as any MCPS staff member, student, or other individual authorized to use

MCPS computer systems. Other individuals may include parents, volunteers, and contract or

temporary staff (MCPS, 2016). By not having separate documents for both employees of the

district and one for the students, everyone is clearly made aware of the expectations of every user.

For example, a teacher would no longer have to research the student AUP in order to ensure

guidelines are being followed as mandated by the schools technology-use expectations. If there

are specific components of the AUP that would only need reference to employees, this could be

made aware in the document without having to write an entirely separate Acceptable Use Policy.

As a continued analysis of the Acceptable Use Policies given by Caroline County Public

Schools, the same file has been distributed since 2012 without updating to current standards of

technology (CCPS, 2016). Since education is constantly evolving, a school districts AUP needs

consistent updating for the fast moving, digital world. In the era of classrooms having lessons

embedded with technology, an AUP should be reformatted as a live-document, able to change

with each new Web 2.0 tool or digital medium used in classrooms. Having a live-document on a

Google Doc, or at least updated yearly by an AUP committee, would adhere to the ability to

model and facilitate safe, healthy, legal, and ethical uses of digital information and

technologies (ISTE, 2016). Furthermore, a recommendation of adding a Revisions History

ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY 3

section of the document would allow readers the ability to reference how current the form is and

to what extent the AUP has been updated over time. As a scenario, Each time the document is

changed or amended, an established AUP committee may record the date at the conclusion of the

document. Then, a notice of the change would be distributed to all users of the school districts

technology. When technology is concerned, communication with users is key in keeping all

literate on the expectations of use. Since classwork and lessons in Caroline County has been

moving towards the use of online classroom platforms, as Google Classrooms and Edmodo, it is

imperative that the AUP is understood equally by all users.

According to the SANS Institute (2014), the Unacceptable Use of Technology portion

of an AUP should be clear and precise as to what is expected of technology users. Unfortunately,

the Caroline County document does not cover areas such as Social Media and educational

platforms as Google Classroom lucidly. If a school strives to incorporate the use of a third party

educational platform, the district must address or link to the third party terms of service and use

policies. For example, Caroline County schools are making efforts in becoming a Google school,

it is imperative to include a stipulation in the AUP document about using Google Apps for

Education (GAFE) and similar programs. Both students and teachers are able to communicate

online through GAFE, so to ensure the privacy and safety of all users, expectations of online

classroom tools will keep all users well aware of expectations digital classroom usage.

Finally, Compliance Policies, Sanctions, or Violations components should be included in

an AUP, but this does not appear evident in the documents provided by Caroline County.

According to Montgomery County Public Schools (2016), their AUP specifically states,

noncompliance with the procedures and standards stated in [their] regulation is proper cause for
ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY 4

disciplinary action (MCPS, 2016). Then, this document continues with a bulleted list of

infractions that could be made by the user of technology with the accompanying consequence.

Though policies of technology use has been presented in the Caroline County Public Schools

AUP, specific consequences for causing infractions has not been included. Representing the

consequences of technology misuse continue to ensure the safety and importance of Acceptable

Use Policies in a given school district. Overall, experts believe teachers should know how to

use technology to deliver alternative kinds of pedagogy as inquiring learning, models, and

simulations, however, in order to safely navigate throughout the digital world, updated and

clearly stated Acceptable Use Policies must be executed in all school systems (NEA, 2016).
ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY 5

References

Caroline County Public Schools-CCPS. (2016). Technology. Retrieved from

http://www.cl.k12.md.us/node/107

Consortium for School, N. (2011). Acceptable Use Policies in a Web 2.0 & Mobile Era: A Guide
for School Districts. Consortium For School Networking

Glencoe. (2001). Acceptable use policies. Retrieved from

http://glencoe.com/ps/computered/pas/article.php4?articleId=398

ISTE. (2016). Iste standards coaches. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/20-

14_iste_standards-c_pdf.pdf

Montgomery County Public Schools-MCPS. (2016). User responsibilities for computer systems,
electronic information, and network security. Retrieved from
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/igtra.pdf

National Educational Association- NEA. (2016). Technology in schools: the ongoing challenge
of access, adequacy, and equity. Retrieved from
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB19_Technology08.pdf

SANS Institute. (2014). Acceptable use policy. Retrieved from https://www.sans.org/security-

resources/policies/general/pdf/acceptable-use-policy