Computers and Academic Freedom (news version) September 22, 1991 Vol. 1, No. 28 [For the week of September 16 to September 22, 1991 If you believe that sys admins should select newsgroups the way that librarians select books and magazines, you will find the first two notes useful. The first note is a short list of suggestions gathered from the American Library Association's "Workbook for Selection Policy Writing".<1991Sep21.215316.833@eff.org> The second note is the full text of the Workbook, including a complete sample policy.<1991Sep21.193707.22331@eff.org> The next notes contrast traditional libraries and computer libraries. The first note list similarities and differences <1991Sep17.172347.9216@eff.org>. The second note clarifies the comparison. For example, "Netnews" is not compared to a library, but to rather a set of publications. It is a Netnews service that compared to a library. The note also creates a "Hypothetical Netnews Bill of Rights" by slighting rewriting the "Library Bill of Rights".<1991Sep18.152828.6297@eff.org> The next note argues against the proposition that all selection is censorship and that exclusion of some newsgroups might increase liability.<1991Sep16.135211.16610@ms.uky.edu> Next, a note says that if the owner of a computer system is the U.S. government it must act within the constraints of its charter (the Constitution).<1991Sep18.200431.12028@eff.org> Then, a note opins that availability of a newsgroup on another easily accessible system would be a valid selection criterion.<1991Sep22.024825.5272@eff.org> In the middle of September, someone posted a note to uiuc.general, the general campus newsgroup at the University of Illinois. At least two student were offended by the note and said that University discipline could be applied to the poster. Enclosed is a note that argues that University discipline is not appropriate because it would infringe on the poster's contractual and constitutional right to free expression.<1991Sep17.195000.9335@m.cs.uiuc.edu> The next two notes are about magazine selection. The first note observes that recreational magazines including Playboy are inexpensive and popular. It conjectures that a general lack of library subscriptions to such magazines indicates that offensiveness plays a bigger role in selection than librarians admit.<6665D4606E821004@ccmail.sunysb.edu> The second note says that funds for academic departments and libraries are so tight that even inexpensive magazines loose out to periodicals that are needed more.<199109191903.AA09665@eff.org> The last note points out recent article in the Harvard Law Review. The Review article discusses e-mail monitoring and the law.<910919001657.20205765@DARWIN.NTU.EDU.AU> - Carl] In this issue: Carl M. Kadie 32 >ALA "Workbook for Selection Policy Writing" Carl M. Kadie 1102 - Carl M. Kadie 72 >What is a library? Carl M. Kadie 66 > Wes Morgan 44 >Academic Privacy Question Carl M. Kadie 30 >Ownership rights Carl M. Kadie 16 >Academic Privacy Question Carl M. Kadie 93 >Freedom of Expression (Re: Discrimination against ... Sanjay Kapur 45 >Academic Privacy Question John Atkinson 22 > Mark Neely 179 >What is a library? Computers and Academic Freedom News Editor: Carl M. Kadie (kadie@eff.org) Circulation: William W. Arnold (caf-talk-request@eff.org, warnold@eff.org) Publication: Helen C. O'Boyle (helen@eff.org) To contribute to the list, send email to "caf-talk@eff.org". Your note will appear immediately on the caf-talk mailing list and in the alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk newsgroup. Back issues are available via anonymous ftp to eff.org. The directory is pub/academic/news. Abstracts of CAF-news are in file pub/academic/abstracts. The CAF archive is also available via email. For information, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the lines "help" and "index". Disclaimer: This CAF-news was compiled by me, Carl M. Kadie. It is not an EFF publication. The views I express and editorial decisions I make are my own. The addresses for the list are: comp-academic-freedom-talk@eff.org - for contributions to the list or caf-talk@eff.org listserv@eff.org - for automated additions/deletions (send email with the line "help" for details.) caf-talk-request@eff.org - for administrivia Also, if you read newsgroups, look for alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk and alt.comp.acad-freedom.news. From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Re: ALA "Workbook for Selection Policy Writing" Message-ID: <1991Sep21.215316.833@eff.org> References: <1991Sep21.193707.22331@eff.org> Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1991 21:53:16 GMT Here are some suggestions from the Workbook: You should have a selection policy. The policy should name by professional position those persons who will have selection responsibility. The policy should explain the selection criteria and procedure. (The Workbook contains many suggestions.) The policy should address controversial materials. It should include a statement on intellectual freedom and why it is important. The policy should include a procedure on reconsideration. The Workbook include sample procedure, letters, forms, and principles. For example: e. In accordance with statement of philosophy, no questioned materials shall be removed from the school pending a final decision. Pending the outcome of the request for reconsideration, however, access to questioned materials can be denied to the child (or children) of the parents making the complaint, if they so desire. (The Workbook includes a complete sample policy.) - Carl -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu I do not represent EFF; this is just me. From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: ALA "Workbook for Selection Policy Writing" Message-ID: <1991Sep21.193707.22331@eff.org> Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1991 19:37:07 GMT I've scanned in ihe American Library Association's "Workbook on Selection Policy Writing". Although aimed at textbook and library book selection in grade and high schools, it also seems applicable to newsgroup selection. It includes information about how create a selection policy and how to handle complaints. It also includes a sample selection policy. I'm posting a copy here. It will also be available in the CAF Library Policy archive. [The archive is accessible via anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.3). It is in directory "pub/academic/library". File README is a detailed description of the items in this directory. The archive is also accessible via email. For information on email access send email to archive-server@eff.org. In the body of your note include the lines "help" and "index".] If you find any scano's please, report them to me. - Carl ------------------------------- WORKBOOK FOR SELECTION POLICY WRITING* Every school system should have a comprehensive policy on the selection of instructional materials. It should relate to and include all materials, e.g., textbooks, library books, periodicals, films, video cassettes, records, cassettes, and CDs. The reason should be obvious: haphazard patterns of acquisition will result in waste because some - perhaps many - materials will overlap in content, or will be unrelated to changing patterns of instruction. A comprehensive policy on the selection of instructional materials will also enable school professionals to rationally explain the school program to the community. And, most important in a crisis, when there are complaints about social studies texts, human development materials in the media center, or fiction in the English class, the use of the "objectionable" item can more easily be explained. A good policy on the selection of instructional materials will include basic sections on objectives, responsibility, criteria, procedures for selection, reconsideration of materials, policies on controversial materials and other special areas of concern to your particular system. ------------- *For further assistance or encouragement, please contact the Office for Intellectual Freedom of the American Library Association, 50 East Huron Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611, (312) 280-4223. ------------- Basic Components of a Selection Policy OBJECTIVES. In developing your policy, you should state in succinct terms what it is your system is trying to accomplish in its educational program, and, in somewhat more detail, the objectives of selection. Your overarching goal may be very broad. For example, for the School District: o Instructional materials are selected by the school district to implement, enrich, and support the educational program for the student. Materials must serve both the breadth of the curriculum and the needs and interests of individual students. It is the obligation of the district to provide for a wide range of abilities and to respect the diversity of many differing points of view. To this end, principles must be placed above personal opinion and reason above prejudice in the selection of materials of the highest quality and appropriateness. For the Library Media Center: o The main objective of our selection procedure is to provide the students with a wide range of educational materials on all levels of difficulty and in a variety of formats, with diversity of appeal, allowing for the presentation of many different points of view. o The objective of the media center is to make available to faculty and students a collection of materials that will enrich and support the curriculum and meet the needs of the students and faculty served. More specific goals should be established by professionals for each learning level. The objectives for selection should reflect the specific goals of the instructional program. In the case of textbooks, the goals may vary from subject to subject. For example, in the sciences, one principal goal might be accuracy in terms of the latest scientific knowledge, and in history, balance in the presentation of conflicting points of view. In the case of materials in the library media center, the goals may include meeting individual learning needs abilities and learning styles, providing background materials to supplement classroom instruction, providing a broad range of materials on controversial issues to help students develop critical analytical skills, etc. RESPONSIBILITY FOR SELECTION. Your policy should name by professional position those persons who will have responsibility for selection of textbooks and other instructional materials. In most states in the U.S., the locally elected or appointed school board, by law, has broad powers and responsibilities in the selection of instructional materials. This authority should be delegated by policy to appropriate professionals for day-to-day exercise. While selection of materials involves many people, including administrators, supervisors, teachers, library media specialists, students, and even community residents, the responsibility for coordinating and recommending the selection and purchase of library media materials should rest with the certificated library media personnel. Responsibility for coordinating the selection and purchase of textbooks and other classroom materials may rest with appropriate department chairpersons or with textbook or media evaluation committees. Write into your policy under Responsibility for Selection (or similar title) exactly who is responsible for selection of materials, e.g.: department heads, curriculum specialists, directors of curriculum and instruction, librarians or media specialists. Sample statement of responsibility for the School District: o The elected Board of Education shall delegate to the Superintendent of Schools the authority and responsibility for selection of all print and non-print materials. Responsibilities for actual selection shall rest with appropriate professionally trained personnel who shall discharge this obligation consistent with the Board's adopted selection criteria and procedures. election procedures shall involve representatives of the professional staff directly affected by the selections, and persons qualified by preparation to aid in wise selection. Sample statement of responsibility for the Library Media Center. o The library media specialist will work cooperatively with staff members to interpret and guide the application of the policy in making day-to-day selections; however, final responsibility for selection of materials for the library media center lies with the media specialists. CRITERIA. In terms of the subject matter covered, your policy will include criteria, and the application of criteria, relevant to your objectives, excellence (artistic, literary, etc.), appropriateness to level of user, superiority in treatment of controversial issues, and ability to stimulate further intellectual and social development. Consider authenticity, appropriateness, interest, content, and circumstances of use. You will probably want to include technical criteria in your policy, for example, clarity of sound in audio materials and cinematography in videocassette. Specific criteria should be spelled out to guide all professionals involved in selection in deciding on specific items: o Staff members involved in selection of resource materials shall use the following criteria as a guide: a. educational significance b. contribution the subject matter makes to the curriculum and to the interests of the students c. favorable reviews found in standard selection sources d. favorable recommendations based on preview and examination of materials by professional personnel e. reputation and significance of the author, producer and publisher f. validity, currency, and appropriates of material g. contribution the material makes to breath of representative viewpoints on controversial issues h. high degree of potential user appeal [no point i - cmk] j. high artistic quality and/or literary style k. quality and variety of format l. value commensurate with cost and/or need m. timeliness or permanence n. integrity The following recommended lists shall be consulted in the selection of materials, but selection is not limited to their listings. a. Bibliographies latest editions available, including supplements) American Historical Fiction Basic Book Collection for Elementary Grades The Best in Children's Books Children and Books Children's Catalog Elementary School Library Collection European Historical Fiction and Biography Guide to Sources in Educational Media Junior High School Catalog Reference Books for School Libraries Subject Guide to Children's Books in Print Subject Index to Books for Intermediate Grades Subject Index to Nooks for Primary Grades Westinghouse Learning Directory and as a part of the vertical file index, other special bibliographies, many of which have been prepared by educational organizations for particular subject matter areas. b. Current reviewing media: AASA Science Books and Films American Film & Video Association Evaluations Booklist Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books Horn Book Kirkus Reviews Library Journal School Library Journal Wilson Library Bulletin o The following criteria will be used as they apply. 1. Learning resources shall support and be consistent with the general educational goals of the state and district and the aims and objectives of individual schools and specific courses. 2. Learning resources shall meet high standards of quality in factual content and presentation. 3. Learning resources shall be appropriate for the subject area and for the age, emotional development, ability level, learning styles and social development of the students for whom the materials are selected. 4. Physical format and appearance of learning resources shall be suitable for their intended use. 5. Learning resources shall be designed to help students gain an awareness of our pluralistic society. 6. Learning resources shall be designed to motivate students and staff to examine their own duties, responsibilities, rights and privileges and participating citizen in our society. 7. Learning resources shall be selected for their strengths rather than rejected for their weaknesses. The selection of learning resources on controversial issues will be directed towards maintaining a diverse collection representing various views. Learning resources shall clarify historical and contemporary forces by presenting and analyzing intergroup tension and conflict objectively, placing emphasis on recognizing and understanding social and economic problems. o The following kinds of material should be selected for the media center: 1. Materials which are an integral part of the instructional program. 2. Materials which are appropriate for the reading level and understanding of students in the school. 3. Materials which reflect the interests and needs of the students and faculty served by the media center. 4. Materials which merit inclusion in the collection because of their literary and/or artistic value. 5. Material which present information with the greatest degree of accuracy and clarity possible. 6. Materials which represent a fair and unbiased presentation of information. In controversial areas, the media specialist in cooperation with the faculty should select materials representing as many shades of opinion as possible in order that students may have available varying viewpoints. PROCEDURES. Your procedures should describe all steps from initial screening to final selection. They should also include provisions for coordination among departments and professionals working at different learning levels, etc.; for handling recommendations from other faculty and students; and for the review of existing materials (for possible replacement, etc.). Include at least a partial list of selection aids such as lists of reviewing sources (if not included in preceding section). You may also want to list sources which should not be used. This will be a large part of your selection policy. It is important to list the type of materials you collect, why you need them, and how you obtain them. Include here your policies on reevaluation (weeding), replacing and repairing materials, etc. Sample procedure statements: o 1. In selecting learning resources, professional personnel will evaluate available resources and curriculum needs and will consult reputable, professionally prepared aids to selection and other appropriate sources. The actual resource will be examined whenever possible. 2. Recommendations for purchase involve administrators, teachers, students, district personnel and community persons, as appropriate. 3. Gift materials shall be judged by the criteria outlined and shall be accepted or rejected by those criteria. 4. Selection is an ongoing process which should include the removal of materials no longer appropriate and the replacement of lost and worn materials still of educational value. * * * * * * * o 1. Requests, suggestions and reactions for the purchase of instructional materials shall be gathered from staff to the greatest extent possible and students when appropriate. 2. Reviews of proposed acquisitions will be sought in the literature of reputable professional organizations and other reviewing sources recognized for their objectivity and wide experience. 3. Materials will be examined by professional staff to the extent necessary or practicable to apply criteria. Preview copies are available for on-site examination by the public upon written request to the District Director of Instruction. 4. Textbooks will be selected after examination by a representative committee of teachers, principals, curriculum specialists, directors of instruction, and others who have professional expertise in objective evaluation of materials. 5. Materials for the District Film and Video Center will be selected by preview committees, curriculum specialists, and through use of professional review sources. 6. Building media center materials selection will be coordinated by the building media specialists, or the principal, where there is no professional staff, involving teachers and curriculum specialists. 7. Area Advisory Councils may be used to review materials recommended by professional selection committees. * * * * * * * o Materials for media centers are selected by the professional media staff with due regard to suggestions from the faculty, parents, and students. Final selection is made by the media specialists of the school in which the center is housed. Professionally recognized reviewing periodicals, standard catalogs, and other selection aids are used by the media specialists and the faculty to guide them in their selection. SPECIAL AREAS. Some miscellaneous items to consider in your policy are gifts, sponsored materials, expensive materials, ephemeral materials, jobbers and salespersons, locked case, special requests, etc., free and inexpensive materials, professional materials, and procedure for handling lost materials. Do you charge fines, maintain special collections not available to all patrons (e.g., a collection of materials for teachers only), handle special requests? These "special concerns" can be outlined in this section of your policy. Make sure to include your procedures for integrating gifts and sponsored materials. Usually, it is stated that criteria for inclusion of gifts and sponsored materials are the same as for purchased materials. POLICIES ON CONTROVERSIAL MATERIALS. Here, or in another place in your policy you should include a statement on intellectual freedom and why it is important to maintain. You may wish to include the test of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances," and the LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS. (A copy is included at the end of this booklet.) Sample Statement on intellectual freedom: o The school board subscribes in principle to the statements of policy on library philosophy as expressed in the American Library Association LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS, a copy of which is appended to and made a part of this policy. RECONSIDERATION. Occasional objections to instructional materials will be made despite the quality of the selection process; therefore, the procedure for handling reconsideration of challenged materials in response to questions concerning their appropriateness should be stated. This procedure should establish the framework for registering a complaint that provides for a hearing with appropriate action while defending the principles of freedom of information, the student's right to access of materials, and the professional responsibility and integrity of the school faculty. The principles of intellectual freedom are inherent in the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and are expressed in the LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS adopted by the Council of the American Library Association. In the event instructional materials are questioned, the principles of intellectual freedom should e defended rather than the materials. List here the specific steps that will be taken when you are asked to reconsider materials in your collection. These steps should include: --asking the complainant to fill out a written complaint form. (See attached form as an example.) --assigning a review committee to examine the material in question. --requesting that the committee report their findings to the school board. The procedure for handling complaints should describe every step from the initial response to the complaint through the highest appeal. o Procedure for handling complaints No duly selected materials whose appropriateness is challenged shall be removed from the school except upon the recommendation of a review committee (as provided for below) with the concurrence of the Superintendent or, upon the Superintendent's recommendation, the concurrence of the Board of Education, or upon formal action of the Board of Education when a recommendation of a review committee is appealed to it. Procedures to be observed. a. All complaints to staff members shall be reported to the building principal involved, whether received by telephone, letter, or in personal conversation. b. The principal shall contact the complainant to discuss the complaint and attempt to resolve it informally by explaining the philosophy and goals of the school district and/or the library media center. c. If the complaint is not resolved informally, the complainant shall be supplied with a packet of materials consisting of the District's instructional goals and objectives, materials selection policy statement, and the procedure for handling objections. This packet will also include a standard printed form which shall be completed and returned before consideration will be given to the complaint. d. If the formal request for reconsideration has not been received by the principal within two weeks, it shall be considered closed. If the request is returned, the reasons for selection of the specific work shall be reestablished by the appropriate staff. e. In accordance with statement of philosophy, no questioned materials shall be removed from the school pending a final decision. Pending the outcome of the request for reconsideration, however, access to questioned materials can be denied to the child (or children) of the parents making the complaint, if they so desire. f. Upon receipt of a completed objection form, the principal in the building involved will call together a committee of five to consider the complaint. This committee shall consist of the curriculum director and from the school involved: the principal, the library media center director, a teacher, and a PTA representative. g. The committee shall meet to discuss the material, following the guidelines set forth in Instructions to Evaluation Committee and shall prepare a report on the material containing their recommendations on disposition of the matter. h. The principal shall notify complainant of the decision and send a formal report and recommendation to the Superintendent. In answering the complainant, the principal shall explain the book selection system, give the guidelines used for selection, and cite authorities used in reaching decisions. If the committee decides to keep the work that caused the complaint, the complainant shall be given an explanation. If the complaint is valid, the principal will acknowledge it and make recommended changes . i. If the complainant is still not satisfied, he/she may ask the Superintendent to present an appeal to the Board of Education which shall make a final determination of the issue. The Board of Education may seek assistance from outside organizations such as the American Library Association, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, etc., in making its determination. SAMPLE LETTER TO COMPLAINT Dear _______________ : We appreciate your concern over the use of _________________ in our school district. The district has developed procedures for selecting materials, but realize that not everyone will agree with every selection made. To help you understand the selection process, we are sending copies of the district's: 1. Instructional goals and objectives 2. Materials Selection Policy statement 3. Procedure for Handling Objections If you are still concerned after you review this material, please complete the Request for Reconsideration of Material form and return it to me. You may be assured of prompt attention to your request. If I have not heard from you within two weeks, we will assume you no longer wish to file a formal complaint. Sincerely, Principal INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATING COMMITTEE Bear in mind the principles of the freedom to learn and to read and base your decision on these broad principles rather than on defense of individual materials. Freedom of inquiry is vital to education in a democracy. Study thoroughly all materials referred to you and read available reviews. The general acceptance of the materials should be checked by consulting standard evaluation aids and local holdings in other schools. Passages or parts should not be pulled out of context. The values and faults should be weighed against each other and the opinions based on the materials as a whole. Your report, presenting both majority and minority opinions, will be presented by the principal to the complainant at the conclusion of our discussion of the questioned material. STATEMENT OF CONCERN ABOUT LIBRARY/MEDIA CENTER RESOURCES This is where you identify who in your own structure, has authorized use of this form - Director, Board of Trustees, Board of Education, etc. and to whom to return form. Name ___________________________________________ Date ____________ Address ________________________________________ City ___________________ State ______ Zip ______ Phone # _________ 1. Resources on which you are commenting: ___ Book ___ Audiovisual Resource ___ Magazine ___ Content of Library Program ___ Newspaper ___ Other Title _______________________________________________________ Author/Producer ______________________________________________ 2. What brought this title to your attention? 3. Please comment on the resource as a whole as well as being specific on those matters which concern you. (Use other side if needed.) Comment: Optional: 4. What resource(s) do you suggest to provide additional information on this topic? Revised by the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee, January 12, 1983 SELECTION POLICY SCHOOL DISTRICT #1 PART 1 SELECTION OF LEARNING RESOURCES: I. STATEMENT OF POLICY The policy of the Board of Trustees of School District #1 is to provide a wide range of learning resources at varying levels of difficulty, with diversity of appeal and the presentation of different points of view to meet the needs of students and teachers. II. OBJECTIVES OF SELECTION A. For the purposes of this statement of policy, the term "learning resources" will refer to any person(s) or any material (whether acquired or locally produced) with instructional content or function that is used for formal or informal teaching/learning purposes. Learning resources include textbooks, other books, supplementary reading and informational materials, charts, community resource people, agencies and organizations, dioramas, filmstrips, flash cards, games, globes, kits machine readable data files, maps, microfilms, models, motion pictures, periodicals, pictures, realia, slides, sound recordings, transparencies and videocassettes. B. The primary objective of learning resources is to support, enrich and help to implement the educational program of the school through the interaction of professional personnel and other members of the school community. It is the duty of professional staff to provide students with a wide range of materials at varying levels of difficulty, with diversity of appeal and the presentation of different points of view. C. To this end, the Board of Trustees of School District #1 affirms that it is the responsibility of its professional staff: --To provide materials that will enrich and support the curriculum, taking into consideration the varied interests, abilities, learning styles and maturity levels of the students served; --To provide materials that will stimulate growth in factual knowledge, literary appreciation, aesthetic values, and societal standards; --To provide materials on various sides of controversial issues so that young citizens may have an opportunity to develop under guidance the practice of critical analysis and to make informed judgments in their daily lives; --To provide materials representative of the many religious, ethnic, and cultural groups and their contributions to our national heritage and the world community; --To place principle above personal opinion and reason above prejudice in the selection of materials of the highest quality in order to assure comprehensive collection appropriate to the school community. III. RESPONSIBILITY FOR SELECTION OF LEANING RESOURCES A. The Board of Trustees delegates the responsibility for the selection of learning resources to the professional staff employed by the school system, and declares that selections made shall be held to have been made by the Board of Trustees of School District #1. B. While selection of learning resources involves many people (administrators, teachers, students, community persons, resource center personnel) the responsibility for (coordinating the selection of school learning resources and making the recommendation for purchase rests with the principal and professional personnel. IV. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF LEARNING RESOURCES A. The following criteria will be used as they apply 1. Learning resources shall support and be consistent with the general educational goals of the state and the district and the aims and objectives of individual schools and specific courses. 2. Learning resources shall be chosen to enrich and support the curriculum and the personal needs of users. 3. Learning resources shall meet high standards of quality in: --presentation --physical format --educational significance --readability --authenticity --artistic quality and/or literary style --factual content --technical quality 4. Learning resources shall be appropriate for the subject area and for the age, emotional development, ability level, learning styles and social development of the students for whom the materials are selected. 5. Learning resources shall be designed to provide a background of information which will motivate students and staff to examine their own attitudes and behavior, to comprehend their duties, responsibilities, rights and privileges as participating citizens in our society, and to make intelligent judgments in their daily lives. 6. Learning resources shall provide information on opposing sides of controversial issues so that users may develop under guidance the practice of critical analysis. B. The selection of learning resources on controversial issues will be directed towards maintaining a balanced collection representing various views. Learning resources shall clarify historical and contemporary forces by presenting and analyzing intergroup tension and conflict objectively, placing emphasis on recognizing and understanding social and economic problems. V. PROCEDURES FOR SELECTION OF LEARNING RESOURCES A. In selecting learning resources, professional personnel will evaluate available resources and curriculum needs and will consult reputable, professionally prepared aids to selection and other appropriate sources. Among sources to be consulted are: 1. Bibliographies (latest edition available, including supplements): American Film & Video Association Evaluations Basic Book Collection for Elementary Grades Basic Book Collection for Junior High Schools The Best in Children's Books Booklist Children and Books Children's Catalog Elementary School Library Collection European Historical Fiction and Biography Guide to Sources in Educational Media Junior High School Catalog Library Journal Reference Books for School Libraries Subject Guide to Children's Books in Print Subject Index to Books for Intermediate Grades Subject Index to Books for Primary Grades Westinghouse Learning Directory and as a part of the vertical file index, other special bibliographies, many of which have been prepared by educational organizations for particular subject matter areas. 2. Current reviewing media: AASA Science Books and Films Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books Horn Boo Kirkus Reviews Booklists Library Journal AFVA Evaluations School Library Journal Wilson Library Bulletin Other sources will be consulted as appropriate. Whenever possible, the actual resource will be examined. B. Recommendations for purchase involve administrators, teachers, students, district personnel and community persons, as appropriate. C. Gift materials shall be judged by the criteria outlined and shall be accepted or rejected by those criteria. D. Selection is an ongoing process which should include the removal of materials no longer appropriate and the replacement of lost and worn materials still of educational value. PART 2 PROCEDURES FOR DEALING WITH CHALLENGED MATERIALS: I. STATEMENT OF POLICY Any resident or employee of the school district may formally challenge learning resources used in the district's educational program on the basis of appropriateness. This procedure is for the purpose of considering the opinions of those persons in the schools and the community who are not directly involved in the selection process. II. REQUEST FOR INFORMAL RECONSIDERATION A. The school receiving a complaint regarding a learning resource shall try to resolve the issue informally. 1. The principal or other appropriate staff shall explain to the questioner the school's selection procedure, criteria, and qualifications of those persons selecting the resource. 2. The principal or other appropriate staff shall explain the particular place the questioned resource occupies in the education program, its intended educational usefulness, and additional information regarding its use, or refer the party to someone who can identify and explain the use of the resource. 3. If the questioner wishes to file a formal challenge, a copy of the district Selection of Learning Resources policy and a Request for Reconsideration of Learning Resources form shall be handed or mailed to the party concerned by the principal. III. REQUEST FOR FORMAL RECONSIDERATION A. PRELIMINARY PROCEDURES 1. Each school will keep on hand and make available Bequest for Reconsideration of Learning Resources forms. All formal objections to learning resources must be made on these forms. 2. The Request for Reconsideration of Learning Resources form shall be signed by the questioner and filed with the principal or someone so designated by the principal. 3. The area assistant superintendent and the assistant superintendent of curriculm services shall be informed of the formal complaint received. 4. The request for reconsideration shall be referred to a reconsideration committee at the school level for reevaluation of the resource. 5. Requests for reconsideration of materials in district collections shall be referred to the school resource center consultative committee for reevaluation of the resource. This committee may involve additional personnel as appropriate. B. THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE 1. Upon receipt of a request for formal reconsideration of a learning resource, the principal shall: a. Appoint a reconsideration committee including the following membership as appropriate: --One member of the district staff chosen by the area assistant superintendent; --One member of the school teaching staff chosen by the school staff, --One member of the resource center professional staff chosen by the resource center professional staff; --One member of the school consultative committee chosen by the school consultative committee, --Two students chosen by the student body. b. Name a conveyer of the reconsideration committee. c. Arrange for a reconsideration committee meeting within 10 working days after the complaint is received. 2. The reconsideration committee may choose to consult district support staff and/or community persons with related professional knowledge. 3. The reconsideration committee shall review the challenged resource and judge whether it conforms to the principles of selection outlined in the district's Selection of Learning Resources policy. C. RESOLUTION 1. The reconsideration committed shall: a. Examine the challenged resource; b. Determine professional acceptance by reading critical reviews of the resource; c. Weigh values and faults and form opinions based on the material as a whole rather than on passages or sections taken out of context; d. Discuss the challenged resource in the context of the educational program; e. Discuss the challenged item with the individual questioner when appropriate; f. Prepare a written report. 2. The written report shall be discussed with the individual questioner if requested. 3. The written report shall be retained by the school principal, with copies forwarded to the assistant superintendent of curriculum services and the area assistant superintendent. A minority report may also be filed. 4. Written reports, once filed, are confidential and available for examination by trustees and appropriate officials only. 5. The decision of the reconsideration committee is binding for the individual school. 6. Notwithstanding any procedure outlined in this policy, the questioner shall have the right to appeal any decision of the reconsideration committee to the Board of Trustees as the final review panel. D. GUIDING PRINCIPLES 1. Any resident or employee of the school district may raise objection to learning resources used in a school's educational program despite the fact that the individuals selecting such resources were duly qualified to make the selection, followed the proper procedure and observed the criteria for selecting learning resources. 2. The principal should review the selection and objection rules with the teaching staff at least annually. The staff should be reminded that the right to object to learning resources is one granted by policies enacted by the Board of Trustees. 3. No parent has the right to determine reading, viewing or listening matter for students other than his/her own children. 4. School District #1 supports the LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS, adopted by the American Library Association. (A copy of the LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS is attached to this policy.) When learning resources are challenged, the principles of the freedom to read/listen/view must be defended as well. 5. Access to challenged material shall not be restricted during the reconsideration process. 6. The major criterion for the final decision is the appropriateness of the material for its intended educational use. 7. A decision to sustain a challenge shall not necessarily be interpreted as a judgment of irresponsibility on the part of the professionals involved in the original selection and/or use of the material. WKBK.SEL [Scanned by Carl M. Kadie 9/21/91] [Made available by permission of the American Library Association.] LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services. 1. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation. 2. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. 3. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment. 4. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas. 5. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views. 6. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use. Adopted June 18, 1948; amended February 2, 1961, and January 23, 1980, by the ALA Council. [Made available by permission of the American Library Association.] -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu I do not represent EFF; this is just me. From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Re: What is a library? Message-ID: <1991Sep17.172347.9216@eff.org> References: <1991Sep12.185627.26936@eff.org> <1991Sep16.134005.21338@ms.uky.edu> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1991 17:23:47 GMT Wes Mogan's note listed differences and similarities between traditional libraries and Netnews-as-library. Here is my list of differences (based mostly on Wes's) and comments. ------- Traditional: Mostly books Netnews: Computer files These media are functionally similar. Both contain information. ------- Traditional: Information is distributed (mostly) by loaning material Netnews: Information is distributed (mostly) by copying material I think this is a characteristic difference. ------- Traditional: Uses interlibrary loan to loan materials to users of other libraries Netnews: Gives copies of all its materials to other Netnews sites Both Traditional and Netnews meet the goal of sharing information with people outside your system. ------- Traditional: User borrows material Netnews: User reads material on a terminal This difference means that geography is much less important to the Netnews user than to the Traditional user. For example, I've never borrowed a book from outside of my home state of Illinois, but everyday I read Netnews on the eff.org machine in Boston. As Sanjay (I think) and others have pointed out, the difference gives Netnews users more choice ------- Traditional: Usually available to everyone Netnews: Only available to people with computers accounts on that machine I think this difference has more to do with funding than with the type of material. My impression is that library accessibility (for any type of library) is mostly a function funding. ------- Traditional: has a permanent collection Netnews: "Only current transitory holdings" This difference is not as large as it may appear. Traditionals do not keep all material forever. Material that is out-of-date or redundant is deselected to make room for new material. Netnews does not dispose of all material. As Wes pointed out, users can easily create a personal archive of materials. Also, some sites archive material for others. For example, here at eff.org, I archive CAF-TALK. ------- Traditional: User reads Netnews: User reads and writes I think this is an important difference. In my opinion, Netnews is a library *and* a student publication. [I'm put conclusions in another note] - Carl -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu I do not represent EFF; this is just me. From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Re: What is a library? Message-ID: <1991Sep18.152828.6297@eff.org> References: <1991Sep17.180603.10263@eff.org> <9109181420.AA16344@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil> Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 15:28:28 GMT nbc2134@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil (Robert F Solon) writes: .... >To what extent should Nos. 1 and 2 apply? Is every newsgroup a >library, or only Usenet as a whole? What about archives? Are they >libraries? Is each major hierarchy a library? ... I would say that every newsgroup is a publication. Usenet is a set of publications. Netnews is a larger set of publications. Each major hierarchy is a smaller set of publications. None of these are libraries. The Netnews service on a particular machine is a library service. The sys admin who selects which newsgroups will be carried on a particular machine is acting as a librarian. (Most sys admins also, of course, have other duties.) An archive on a particular machine may also be a library. (Archives and news servers on other machines are other libraries.) Maybe if I do a little creative rewriting it will be clear: --------- Hypothetical Netnews Bill of Rights All computers offering Netnews are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services. 1. Newsgroups and other Netnews resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the Netnews provider serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation. 2. Computers offering Netnews should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. 3. Netnews providers should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment. 4. Netnews providers should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas. 5. A person's right to use a Netnews service should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views. 6. Netnews providers which provides resources for user expression or assembly should make such resources available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use. ------ - Carl -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu I do not represent EFF; this is just me. From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) Subject: Re: Academic Privacy Question Message-ID: <1991Sep16.135211.16610@ms.uky.edu> Date: 16 Sep 91 13:52:11 GMT References: <1631971F0E812E9F@ccmail.sunysb.edu> <9109091741.AA23739@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil> In article jsaker@unomaha.edu (Jamie Saker) writes: >Unfortunately, too many information providors (esp. USENET news providors) >adopt a policy of censoring information (either through selectively not >carrying/providing certain newsgroups, or controlling the content of the >groups) without carefully examining this legal issue. Or a library selectively carrying/providing certain magazines or books? >For example, if the University of X imposes newsfeed censorship by >not carrying certain groups, say alt.sex.*, alt.drugs.*, rec.arts.erotica, >and a few other select groups determined to be of a character not >acceptable to the administration, they are accepting the role as >the guarantor of the information to their consumer. Are such guarantees implicit in a *free* service? I could understand the application of such a guarantee if the service was purchased, but not for a free service. >Now, if an article containing offensive material slips by (such as >someone accidentely crossposting material from alt.sex.bondage to >comp.emacs, and a consumer takes offense at the material and sues >the information provider (University of X), since they acted as the >guarantor of the information, they most likely have accepted >responsibility and therefore are liable. If a person borrows a chemistry book from the public library, attempts to make nitroglycerin based on that publication, and causes personal or property damage, is the library liable? (I'd also point out the rather small possibility of an *accidental* crosspost between alt.sex.bondage and comp.emacs......8) ) >Overall, the most rational choice is to either carry the full service, >provide disclaimers (and require acceptance of the disclaimer prior to >the provision of service) or don't carry the service at all. I wonder how many sites in Usenet actually carry a full feed? Does anyone have a guess on this one? -- morgan@ms.uky.edu |Wes Morgan, not speaking for| ....!ukma!ukecc!morgan morgan@engr.uky.edu |the University of Kentucky's| morgan%engr.uky.edu@UKCC morgan@ie.pa.uky.edu |Engineering Computing Center| morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Re: Ownership rights Message-ID: <1991Sep18.200431.12028@eff.org> References: <1991Sep18.195255.11706@eff.org> Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 20:04:31 GMT [This is my response to "What is Usenet?" - Carl] "What is Usenet?" says that the owner can do anything he or she likes. This is generally true, but what if the owner is "The People"? How do We The People decide what we want to do with Our property. I think the answer is that we follow the rules agreed to in the Constitution. As interpreted by the Supreme Court, those rules, for example, prohibit viewpoint discrimination in government-owned forums. (For references that support this opinion, see CAF-news #25, ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/news/cafv01n25.) I'm not suggesting that Netnews as a whole is government owned and must not practice viewpoint discrimination. I believe, however, that a public university could not legally prohibit so-called prolife postings while allowing so-called prochoice postings. Furthermore, my understanding of the law is that the state has wide latitude in deciding which topics it will allow in newly created forums. In other words, a public university administrator has the legal authority to allow gun control discussion while prohibiting abortion discussions. But how *should* an administrator decide which topics to include and which to exclude? I think library policy offers an excellent guide. - Carl -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu I do not represent EFF; this is just me. From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Re: Academic Privacy Question Message-ID: <1991Sep22.024825.5272@eff.org> References: <18655FE32E401E65@ccmail.sunysb.edu> Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1991 02:48:25 GMT SKAPUR@ccmail.sunysb.edu (Sanjay Kapur) asks about this senerio: * neither alt.sex nor alt.boomerang a central to the mission of your machine. * that the cost to alt.sex is slightly lower * that interest in alt.sex is slightly higher * that alt.sex is available on another machine that your users have access to, but alt.boomerang is not. In my opinion, then you would have to use your professional judgement to balance the cost, interest, and ease of access. - Carl -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu I do not represent EFF; this is just me. From: kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Re: Freedom of Expression (Re: Discrimination against ... Message-ID: <1991Sep17.195000.9335@m.cs.uiuc.edu> References: <1991Sep14.225304.5115@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1991Sep17.150121.24441@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1991 19:50:00 GMT dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes: > Your identity CAN be discovered, you CAN face University > discipline for such postings, and there ARE people willing to > make the effort to see that it happens. ffujita@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Frank Fujita) writes: >Freedom of expression does not apply to the use of UIUCnet. If one >owns a press, one is free to print what one likes. If one does not >own a press, the govt is not obliged to provide you with one. > >I do not know if there are any strictures that have been violated, >but our freedom of expression would not make such strictures >unconstitutional. Students on this campus have a contractual and constitutional right to free expression. The contractual right comes from our "Code on Campus Affairs". It says: "STATEMENT ON INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS I. Preamble A student at the University of Illinois at the Urbana-Champaign campus is a member of the University community of which all members have at least the rights and responsibilities common to all citizens, free from institutional censorship;" ... "III. Campus Expression A. Discussion and expression of all views is permitted within the University subject only to requirements for the maintenance of order. [...] B. Members and organizations in the University community may invite and hear any persons of their own choosing, subject only to reasonable requirements on time, place, and manner for use of University facilities. C. The campus press and media are to be free of censorship. The editors and managers shall not be arbitrarily suspended because of student, faculty, administration, alumni, or community disapproval of editorial policy or content." ... "VI. Student Affairs [...] B. Freedom of Inquiry and Expression 1. Students and student organizations should be free to examine and to discuss all questions of interest to them, and to express opinions publicly and privately. [...] 2. Students should be allowed to invite and hear any person of their own choosing. [...] The University's control of campus facilities should not be used as a device of censorship. It should be made clear to the academic and larger community that sponsorship of guest speakers does not necessarily imply approval or endorsement of the views expressed either by the sponsoring group or the institution." The Constitutional right comes from the First (and 14th) Amendments. The University's uiuc.general is a "limited public forum" under the Supreme Court' Public-Forum Doctrine. (Uiuc.general is limited in the sense that only people with computer accounts can access it. It is not limited to a particular set of topics.) Here are is the law for limited public forums: [Quotes are from the decision "San Diego Committee v. Governing Bd., 790 F.2d 1471 (1986)". Quotes within quotes are from the Supreme Court.] '"[C]ontent-based prohibition must be narrowly drawn to effectuate a compelling state interest."' "Having established a limited public forum [the school] cannot, absent a compelling governmental interest, exclude speech otherwise within the boundaries of the forum ...." "Thus the identical broad free speech rights attach to [traditional] and [limited] types of public forums, [ref] although in the latter type of forums those broad rights apply only within the particular boundaries of the specific forum that has been established." For more details see the most recent issue of the "Computers and Academic Freedom News" (vol. 1, no. 25). It is available on-line from m.cs.uiuc.edu as newsgroup alt.comp.acad-freedom.news. If you can't get it there, it is available via anonymous ftp it from ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/news/cafn01n25. - Carl -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign From: SKAPUR@ccmail.sunysb.edu (Sanjay Kapur) Subject: Re: Academic Privacy Question Message-ID: <6665D4606E821004@ccmail.sunysb.edu> Sender: SKAPUR@ccmail.sunysb.edu Date: 17 Sep 91 15:01:00 GMT Approved: usenet@eff.org >From: sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) > >Libraries select their materials based on demand, cost, and >administrative overhead. Most people involved in libraries that I've >talked with would like any material to be available immediately upon >demand. But they're not going to carry what no one will ever look at, >they won't buy things they can't afford, and they can only keep as >many books as they can succesfully track. > Do you really believe that? Librarians will swear up and down that this is what they do and this is what they are taught in library school but I simply do not believe it. There is too much factual evidence to the contrary. >For many Usenet sites, including the ECC at UKY, the newsfeed is free. >The cost of maintaining usenet is the cost of disk space, plus a >certain (small, in my own experiences with B and C news) adminstrative >overhead. Carrying or not carrying a newsgroup amounts to 2 minutes of >editing a file. > >A decision not to carry "vice" groups surely cannot be argued on >the basis of resources. Instead, the decision has apparently been made >by a subjective interpretation of which newsgroups the administrators >feel are appropriate. > Just as the decision not to carry Penthouse or Playgirl or Hustler by a library. Certainly there is demand for them. People will read them. Compared to other magazines, journals and books, the cost is low. What is the justification "your local librarian" gives for not carrying them? My best guess for the real reason: Fear of censorship. Also quite a few librarians are women and tend to be offended by the degradation of women in these magazines. I know Librarians should not let their personal opinions interfere with the management of a library, but Librarians are also human beings. > >Sean >-- Sanjay Kapur |Internet: Sanjay.Kapur@sunysb.edu Systems Staff, Computing Services, |Bitnet: SKAPUR@USB State University of New York, |SPAN/HEPnet: 44132::SKAPUR Stony Brook, NY 11794-2400 |Phone:(516)632-8029, FAX:(516)632-8046 From: ATKINSON@Kentvm.Kent.edu (John Atkinson) Subject: Re: Academic Privacy Question Message-ID: <199109191903.AA09665@eff.org> Sender: ATKINSON@Kentvm.Kent.edu References: Date: 19 Sep 91 18:37:06 GMT Approved: usenet@eff.org > Compared to other magazines, journals and books, the > cost is low. The subscription price for a library is NOT what it would be for you -- do you really know what "low" is? > What is the justification "your local librarian" > gives for not carrying them? My best guess for the real reason: > Fear of censorship. > >I disagree with you here. Me too. I don't know about all university libraries, but most if not all magazines here are purchases from funds allocated to departments, and the purchases are dictated by the departments. Everyone wants more than they can afford. I'm afraid that Hustler would be far down on the demand list below good serials that we don't currently have the money for. With a limited fund, I doubt that Playgirl will make it ahead of Psychometrika or even Psychology Today. There has been much anguish when serial purchases must be cut back, so no "low" price is insignificant. From: MCNAB_PD@DARWIN.NTU.EDU.AU (Mark Neely) Subject: Re: What is a library? Message-ID: <910919001657.20205765@DARWIN.NTU.EDU.AU> Sender: MCNAB_PD@DARWIN.NTU.EDU.AU Date: 19 Sep 91 00:16:57 GMT Approved: usenet@eff.org Whilst thumbing through the recent offerings of the _Harvard Law Review_ I stumbled across an interesting note entitled: _Addressing the new hazards of the high technology workplace_ see (1991) 104 _Harvard Law Review_ 1898 The author of the note looks at three main areas: "This Note argues that in the absence of legislative solutions, electronic performance monitoring and electronic mail intercept- ion are regulated by a system of free market and common law mechanisms that fails to protect workers from abusive practices. It then proposes legislation to ensure that new technology in the workplace enhances rather than degrades the quality of worklife." The note discusses various aspect of computerisation in the workplace, such as computer crime and corporate vulnerability; electronic performance monitoring; and the practice of monitoring e-mail. Whilst I was particularly interested in the article because of its discussion of the recent cases against Epson and Nissan by employees who had had their e-mail monitored and read, the article is worth reading for its treatment of the other issues as well. I want to take some time to quote some material from the note (which is almost of article length). Unfortunately the authors' name is not mentioned (though I assume it is one of the _Harvard Law Journal_'s editors). In any event, the note encompasses a well balanced and indepth treatment of the aplication of laws in CyberSpace (and the workplace). The note is neither too legalistic, nor is it superficial. As such I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in this area. NB:- All the typos are mine :) Mark Neely Research Student Northern Territory Univ. Law School Darwin, NT Australia ------Begin Quotes Introduction ... ...the advent of computer technology in the workplace has created new opportunities for abuse for which existing legal catagories have been inadequate. The new hazards involve computer crime, which arises from corporate computer systems' vulnerability to intruders; electronic performance monitoring, which subjects employees to extensive and some- times intrusive supervision by their employers; and electronic mail interception, which exposes employees' electronic mail messages to their employers' scrutiny. Each of these hazards presents serious public policy concerns. ... Computer crime - Corporate Vulnerability ... Compared with traditional thefts, in which the loss is limited to the amount a thief can carry off corporate premises, sophisticated computer crimes have the potential for much greater damage and face a much lower chance of detection. ... The legal definitions of "property", "theft", and "damages" were often too narrow to encompass the new generation of crimes involving computer- based information. ... Electronic Performance Monitoring - Supervised Employees ... Electronic monitoring allows supervisors to monitor continuously, to monitor everything, and to monitor in secret, none of which is possible with strictly human observation. ... Electronic monitoring consists of at least three different practices: computer-based monitoing, service observation, and telephone call accounting. ... In a 1987 report to Congress, the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) found that electronic monitoring raised serious concerns because it "can be abused and...has potential for invasions of employee privacy, as well as assaults on their autonomy, personal dignity, and health." ... Due to electronic monitoring's detrimental efects on workers, several critics of the practice have argued that monitoring ultimately will impose costs on employers in the form of high turnover, low morale, and rising health care costs attibutable to stress-related disorders. ... No statutes specficially address workplace electronic monitoring. ... Under the common law tort of invasions of privacy, "intrusion into seclusion" has been the one cause of action considered possibly applicable to the case of electronic monitoring. The tort requires an intrusion into a private place that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. [Note - The author goes on to say that the public nature of the workplace would seem to make such a claim laudible. But this is not so in the case of e-mail monitoring: electronic mail between employees is something that cannot be seen by other employees (at least, not in the ordinary course of office affairs), and has - by its very nature - an air of privacy surrounding it. Such an argument is enhanced by the fact that an employee must first log onto his account by entering a username and *password* before being able to read his e-mail.] ... Some union contracts regualting the use of electronic monitoring have been negotiated. ... Electronic Mail - The Ambiguous Status of Electronic Mail ... Conflict arises mostly because employees' and employers' expectations of electronic mail differ. Employees often consider electronic mail to be their private property, as they do their personal letters. They use it to write private notes to their co- workers, sometimes about their personal lives or reflecting their negative opinions of their supervisors. The password requirement of their electronic mail accounts foster the belief that their mail is not available for others to read. Employers, by contrast, argue that electronic mail is a business resource to be used for business purposes. Electronic mail message become part of the company computer system and therefore, emplyers assert, are company property. Employers also claim legitimate business reasons for reading their employees' electronic mail, including the need to ensure that employees do not use the system for personal communications. ... In a 1985 study, OTA observed that "when mail is sent in electronic form, the existing protections are weak, ambiguous, or non-existent." OTA noted that legal claims, if any, could arise only from unauthorized goverment interception of messages or under computer theft laws. ... In the absence of a statutory directive, workers may invoke the common law tort of invasion of privacy to contest the interception of electronic mail messages. Because it pertains to the workplace, such a claim suffers from the same limitations as it does in the electronic monitoring context. [See my note above] Even if employees could succeed in establishing that their messages were private and not merely their employers' property, they would still need to prove that their expectations of privacy were reasonable and that their employers' interceptions were not excused as legitimate business practises. -----Close quote If anyone has any information regarding this new area of law, please feel free to pass it on :) Mark N. -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu I do not represent EFF; this is just me.