Pros And Cons Of School Blocking Students

Decent Essays
Professor Sam Wineburg of Stanford University adamantly opposes the practice of schools blocking students from certain websites and databases such as Wikipedia, Twitter, and Instagram. Dr. Wineburg suggests that if students only have access to information chosen and filtered by the institution, their ability to choose what to believe, and how to think will not develop. If students do not have access to sites such as Wikipedia, once they are able to browse freely, they will be unable to tell what is reliable. By imposing these restrictions, schools are failing to allow students to think freely. More importantly, they are depriving students of furthering their intelligence by choosing themselves what information is valid and what is not. These constraints essentially tell students what to believe; therefore, once they go beyond classroom doors and browse freely, they will be incapable of finding sources on their own. Furthermore, blocking sites only worsens the spread of fake news, since students believe everything they read. I agree with Dr. Wineburg in that schools should not block certain websites. Blocking students from sources or only allowing certain online databases not only limits students’ ability to expand their knowledge, but harms their free thinking and forces them to believe the information placed in front of them, ultimately contributing to students spreading fake news.
Dr. Wineburg’s opposition to schools blocking students from unvetted websites is backed by
Get Access