# data[].attributes.body
Upon completion of a Master of Education in Administration, I hope to be employed as an elementary school assistant principal in Wichita Falls, the town where I currently reside.

# data[].attributes.body
I spoke with Mr. Jacobs, the assistant principal at the elementary school I am currently employed with, about legal and ethical issues within his position.

#1: As the school's 504 coordinator,  disability rights must be followed by all educators in compliance with Title ll regulations.

#2: With standardized testing season approaching, all teachers and staff must abide by the oath signed and complete the training to administer the test. Reporting any test irregularities to the respected personnel and documenting any reports is a legal requirement.

#3: Disciplining students forced Jacobs to understand the new David's Law, which passed in 2017, that incorporates the common issues of cyberbullying and harassment of students.

#4: Confidentiality is a reoccurring issues Jacobs battles with teachers and parents alike. It is important that teachers understand the confidentiality laws and that the school has a routine in place to help follow these laws.

#5: Regularly monitoring the safety of the school and the students is a challenge. There are multiple codes and guidelines to follow such as regulating the people entering the building, making sure doors are locked, testing all alarms, and completing safety drills.

(J. Jacobs, personal communication, March 18, 2019)

# data[].attributes.body
A periodical within Education Week (Levin, 2019), dives into to the topic of the growing use of technology in the classroom yet without the proper training of teachers and administrators. This lack of training increases the risk of students safety and legal matters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Born in the 20th century, most superintendents and school board members are not experts in issues of technology, much less cybersecurity. As schools are growing increasingly reliant on 21st century technology for teaching, learning, and school operations, this lack of expertise has consequences and introduces new risks to school district operations.

Consider that of the 18 peer groups investigated by the Multi-State Information Sharing & Analysis Center in a recent review, local K-12 schools were reported to have the least mature cybersecurity risk-management practices of any state or local government agency. Similarly, a survey published last year by the National School Boards Association found that school officials are less prepared for cyberattacks than their peers in private sector companies.

As they juggle other critical priorities, superintendents and school board members may wonder what the scope of their responsibility should be in weighing cybersecurity risks and protecting against threats. After all, isn't that the purpose of cybersecurity insurance and the role of district technology staff? Why would district leaders be expected to do more? In what ways could they do more?

The hard truth is that we won't see fewer data breaches, fewer successful phishing attacks, and fewer ransomware incidents in schools until superintendents and school board members jointly embrace their cybersecurity governance responsibilities. Just as district leaders maintain the responsibility to manage risks to students' physical safety and health in the context of natural and man-made incidents, they also need to take a lead role in ensuring that their school systems are appropriately managing the digital risks to school communities introduced by the embrace of technology. These include risks to the confidentiality of data collected by school districts and their vendors, risks to the integrity (i.e., the accuracy and completeness) of that data, and risks to the availability of IT systems and data integral to the day-to-day experiences of students, teachers, and administrators.

There are three primary ways that superintendents and school board members-working in partnership with district technology staff-need to exercise their cybersecurity governance responsibilities.

"The hard truth is that we won't see fewer data breaches, fewer successful phishing attacks, and fewer ransomware incidents in schools until superintendents and school board members jointly embrace their cybersecurity governance responsibilities."

The first is via their ability to set priorities for their school district. Every district needs to develop, formally adopt, and implement a plan to manage the cybersecurity threats and risks they are facing. Such a plan should identify the district's critical IT and data assets, and detail how risks to those assets will be mitigated through policies, practices, and/or technology tools. It should explain for which risks insurance will be purchased, and-given that there are no 100 percent guarantees with cybersecurity-which risks will be accepted.

In addition, a district cybersecurity plan should include procedures and guidelines for how the district will respond to cybersecurity incidents experienced by the district (or its vendors) when they inevitably occur. This is a question of liability-districts have been sued for negligent cybersecurity practices in the wake of significant incidents-as well as legal compliance under evolving federal and state privacy, cybersecurity, and data-breach notification laws. Indeed, district leaders would do well to anticipate that when their district experiences a significant data breach or cybersecurity incident, school community members, government agencies and law enforcement, insurance providers, and the media all will come to them seeking public answers and accountability.

Superintendents and school board members also need to show leadership on cybersecurity through their authority over the budget process. As part of their fiduciary oversight of school districts, superintendents and board members should be able to crosswalk their cybersecurity risk-mitigation plans to budget expenditures and track that spending over time. That is not to suggest that there is a magic dollar figure or percentage of a school IT budget that should be spent on cybersecurity-related activities as evidence of good practice. But by working with district technology staff to make explicit budget assumptions and expenditures, district leaders can ensure and document that cybersecurity measures are being supported and are keeping pace with emerging threats and protections. In cases where spending does not match the need, budget transparency can help garner the data necessary to re-allocate or seek out additional funding.

"District leaders would do well to anticipate that when their district experiences a significant data breach or cybersecurity incident, school community members, government agencies and law enforcement, insurance providers, and the media all will come to them seeking public answers and accountability."

Finally, superintendents and school board members need to put in place a process to assess the quality of their cybersecurity plans and spending at least once a year through clear organizational metrics. Such metrics should include-at a minimum-a reporting of the number, variety, and severity of cybersecurity incidents affecting or targeting the district and its vendors and partners, as well as one or more measures of the cybersecurity awareness of district staff. The process of determining and periodically tracking progress against a small set of meaningful metrics will go a long way toward moving cybersecurity risk management from district technology staff's hands alone to weaving it throughout the culture of the district.

This Education Week examination of K-12 cybersecurity is the second of three special reports focused on the needs of K-12 district technology leaders, including chief technology officers. Each report in the series features exclusive results of a new, nationally representative survey of CTOs, conducted by the Consortium for School Networking, an organization representing K-12 district technology officials.

District leaders are not only accountable to the public for managing cybersecurity threats; they are themselves disproportionately targeted by hackers. That means it's critically important for superintendents and school board members to set a good example via participation in cybersecurity training and awareness events and strict adherence to district policies.

"District leaders are not only accountable to the public for managing cybersecurity threats; they are themselves disproportionately targeted by hackers. That means it's critically important for superintendents and school board members to set a good example via participation in cybersecurity training and awareness events and strict adherence to district policies."

Schools' reliance on technology for teaching, learning, and school operations will continue to grow. Every district needs to adopt a plan to manage cybersecurity risks, make sure they're putting the money and resources into supporting that plan, and track the success of their strategy over time. District technology staff can't do all of that work on their own. Superintendents and school board members should commit to creating a culture across their districts that anticipates cyber risks, rather than waiting to respond to attacks from malicious actors after the fact.

Web Only

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why K-12 Cybersecurity Is Only as Good as the Leadership at the Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Born in the 20th century, most superintendents and school board members are not experts in issues of technology, much less cybersecurity. As schools are growing increasingly reliant on 21st century technology for teaching, learning, and school operations, this lack of expertise has consequences and introduces new risks to school district operations.

# data[].attributes.body
This periodical from Education Week (Samuels, 2018), discusses how the federal government is trying to reduce the number of students qualifying for Special Education Services. In their efforts, Texas parents are now concerned that students are being denied services when in other states they would qualify.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
After a decade of effectively capping the number of students identified for special education, Texas developed an extensive, multimillion plan for how it plans to rectify what was deemed a violation of federal special education law.

But in a review, the federal office of special education programs says it wants to see additional corrective actions by the state, and that it plans to send a team to visit next year to make sure that work is being done.

A disability advocacy group says it appreciates that the federal government did not simply rubber-stamp the state plan and that federal officials plan to visit Texas again.

"We just hope that they will get outside Austin, and visit with parents and educators across the state," said Steven Aleman, a policy specialist with Disability Rights Texas.

Investigative Followup

A 2016 investigation by the Houston Chronicle revealed that special education enrollment in Texas had been declining for years, driven by districts' efforts to meet a state enrollment benchmark of 8.5 percent.

The articles captured stories of children whose disabilities would automatically qualify them for special education services in other states.

For example, a young child with Down syndrome was initially denied special education services because he could read on grade level. Another child, who was born prematurely and was legally blind, was denied services because she could hold written materials close enough to her face to read.

The federal office of special education programs found Texas in violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in January, after conducting its own investigation and holding a listening tour around the state.

In a January report outlining the violations, federal officials said they were told that the state's dyslexia guidelines required that children with difficulty reading must present an additional disabling condition before they could even be evaluated for special education services. This runs counter to federal special education law, which does not require a child to be suspected of multiple disabilities before a screening takes place.

Federal officials also criticized Texas' use of response to intervention. RTI is an instructional framework that focuses on addressing problems early with students who show signs of academic weakness.

Many state educators said they thought a child had to go through multiple levels of interventions before a student could be screened for having a disability. But in 2011, the Education Department informed states that RTI can't be used to delay or deny a special education evaluation. Teachers also said they weren't clear about how much progress children should be making to move out of RTI.

In 2017, Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, signed a law that would bar the Texas Education Agency from placing a cap or creating a benchmark on special education enrollment.

In a statement responding to the latest federal missive, Mike Morath, the Texas education commissioner, said the state is already making "significant progress" in carrying out its special education strategic plan.

"We continue to adhere to a commitment to transparency and engagement throughout the plan's implementation," he said.

Funding Needs

Special education enrollment in Texas has now risen to about 9.2 percent of students, higher than the recent past, but still below the national average of about 13 percent. Texas may need to find an additional $3.3 billion over the next three years in order to pay for additional special education services, the Houston Chronicle has reported.

Aleman, with Disability Rights Texas, said that he hopes federal officials will take a close look at student groups he said were hit particularly hard by the old special education policy: English-language learners; students with dyslexia and other learning disabilities; and, students in foster care.

This federal review also comes at a time when the state legislature is not in session. Aleman said it's important that state officials exercise their oversight role when they return to Austin in January. "It's going to be just as essential to us that they're informed and caught up to speed," he said.

Published in Print: October 31, 2018, as Feds Plan Fresh Oversight of Texas Spec. Ed. Plan

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Feds Plan Fresh Oversight of Texas Special Education Plan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After a decade of effectively capping the number of students identified for special education, Texas developed an extensive, multimillion plan for how it plans to rectify what was deemed a violation of federal special education law.

# data[].attributes.headline
Legal and Ethical Issues of Interest to Me- Laws Concerning School Safety with Technology 

# data[].attributes.subject
Legal and Ethical Issues of Interest to Me- Laws Concerning School Safety with Technology 

# data[].attributes.body
The legal issue I found that interests me is the topic of school safety specifically with technology. I chose this topic because it is a constant relevant issue for administration and teachers alike with the rising use of technology in the classrooms.

# data[].attributes.headline
Researching Laws Concerning School Safety with Technology

# data[].attributes.subject
Researching Laws Concerning School Safety with Technology

# data[].attributes.body
Through researching in the Angelo State University library, I came across an article titled, "Legal Issues in Educational Technology: Implication for School Leaders. This article evaluates the rapid increase of technology in schools and how the government is having a hard time keeping up by placing current technology laws into affect.

Reference
Quinn, D. (2003). Legal issues in     educational technology: implications for school leaders.Educational Administration Quarterly. Vol. 39, No. 2.187-207. DOI: 10.1177/0013161X03251152

# data[].attributes.headline
Researching Laws Concerning School Safety with Technology

# data[].attributes.subject
Researching Laws Concerning School Safety with Technology

# data[].attributes.body
In researching legal issues with the use of technology in the classroom, I found a website called Study.com. This website hosted an article titled, "Ethical Issues with Using Technology in the classroom." This article is broken up by multiple heading that each discuss a legal or ethical issue on this topic, such as confidentiality, cyberbullying, and communication of students online.

# data[].attributes.headline
What I've Gathered From Researching Legal and Ethical Issues with Technology in the Class

# data[].attributes.subject
What I've Gathered From Researching Legal and Ethical Issues with Technology in the Class

# data[].attributes.body
Technology is a rapidly increasing mode of education in today's schools. It is increasing at such a fast rate that federal and state laws are struggling to keep up. Understanding the ethical and legal issues of technology in the classroom will benefit educators because the use of technology will only increase as the years go by.

Several legal issues are presented within the articles I reviewed. One issue refers to the First Amendment as a way to protect the students. Harassment and cyberbullying is another legal matter discussed that directly impacts administration and how to handle such matters. Student privacy and confidentiality are issues that all educators must be diligently monitoring. Educators now have multiple avenues for students to post comments on boards for the classroom such as Edmodo and Google Classroom.

As an administrator, I would need to be well educated on the various sites teachers are using in their classroom as well as making certain educators are aware of the privacy settings and that they closely monitor the postings. It would also be important to make a mandatory internet safety course that the students participate in so that they are well aware of the dangers of the internet.