When I was setting up the laptop programme at my former school in Australia, there was a lot of discussion with many stakeholders about how much access we would give kids to their own laptops. I was really glad that we had a very good System Administrator at that stage who was really keen on working with the kids and the teachers to make a fantastic programme and believed, like me, that the kids would be negative about having to use laptops that were so locked down that they were limited for some of the applications that we envisioned the kids doing. We knew that we could lock the machines down for kids who repeatedly did the wrong thing but if we started off with all the kids locked down, we would have to set up accounts for parents who demanded to be able to put some things on the computers that they purchased and that we would have lots of kids negative about bringing the machine to school.

Given this, I was interested to read the conditions of an Asian International School which clearly ensures that the students machines have administrator passwords that they are unable to access. I was interested to see that they set this level of security for the students. I am wondering how it is received by the kids? A lot of the schools in Australia that I keep regular contact with are dealing with this issue at the moment, given statements by the new Prime Minister about ensuring that every secondary school child in the country will have access to a computer all day at school. Many are discussing laptop programmes.

Copied below is a post about the rights of children and parents to be able to access controls on laptops purchased by them for a school programme. The post is in response to a teacher who is requesting information about allowing for Apple laptops to have filters put on the internet that parents will be able to monitor and modify but kids will not be able to change.  The reply is from an IT coordinator at a private Girls School in Perth that has had a 1:1 programme using Apple computers since the late 80s.

Hi Russel et al
SOE – “Standard Operating Environment” is a commonly used phrase to describe the OS/Software config/setup applied to (usually) a large number of computers in an organisation that allows them the be managed/supported in a more time efficient way. Many organisations (particularly those using Windows) have a quite rigid SOE that wont allow any customisation of its settings or additions to the software suite etc. These environments would certainly not provide “administrator” access of any type, as this could lead to “non-standard” changes being made by users…

In actual fact, my philosophy is more along the lines of an MOE (”Managed Operating Environment”) where we specifically give users (both staff and students) an ability to make quite wide ranging changes to their operating environment. When you provide everyone with a laptop 24/7, it is intended to become quite a personal piece of equipment, and therefore users should have a fair degree of customisability – balanced with some manageability. Users just have to realise that any of their customisations may be lost if we have to re-instate the SOE/MOE due to a Hard disk failure etc.

In a successful 1:1 laptop environment, in my experience you have to do some ’strange’ things…

- IT nazis need to be replaced by IT staff who are committed to making the life of the user easier, rather than making their own life easier

IT staff (and infrastructure) are there for the benefit of users; they are not an end in themselves

Do IT staff still need to be responsible for protecting the infrastructure – YES; Does it make the life of IT staff harder – YES; Is it still the right way to go – YES!

- you need to trust the user and understand that because them stuffing up their machine only harms them and no-one else, they are generally pretty responsible.

- you should monitor rather than block content and use existing behaviour management programmes to deal with transgressors.

In my experience, people learn to be responsible and develop acceptable values when they are provided the opportunity to take responsibility and make decisions for themselves. Blocking content only hides issues related to the values people hold and the responsibilities they are ready to accept.

You don’t learn positive values by writing 100 lines of -”I wont download internet porn” or having it blocked. You learn you are not trusted – even if you could be – and that’s worse for their social and emotional development than the odd bit of skin in my view.

You demonstrate responsibility, self-control and exhibit positive values when you could do the wrong thing, but make a personal choice not to.

Clearly articulated policies about what is considered acceptable and what is not, combined with ‘monitoring’ rather than ‘blocking’ content, is I believe a better alternative. In this way, at least you know those who need additional support to behave acceptably and appropriate action can be taken. We are, after all, institutions of learning where the development of students abilities and values is our ultimate goal.

When you block, you are immediately saying, “I don’t trust you”, which is the worst basis for any relationship and you never know who really needs the help.

Unfortunately, most people act out of fear – fear that someone else will think/say they have done the wrong thing – rather than having the courage of their (educational) convictions. I realise that the locus of control in an independent school is different from either the Catholic or government ’systemic’ situation, but in each case, I believe its a matter of recognising the following:

- no technological or social strategy is perfect or will succeed in all cases

- we should exercise ‘reasonable’ care in the circumstances

- the action we take should be viewed in the wider context of its impacts on student education/development/well-being…

In my view, a reasonable parent today might take steps to block objectionable content from very young children (though most wouldn’t have a clue how – even given the Federal Government’s free software via the NetAlert initiative), but as a parent of an internet connected household that has two boys (now 19 & 21) who have had unblocked access since they were 9 & 11 respectively (via a a ‘public’ computer on our kitchen bench), I think most reasonable parents of children of say, 10 years upward, should expect (and have taught) these kids to know right from wrong – and what the benefits of this trust are; and the consequences of transgression.

I have experience of such monitoring policies in schools, and to date, they have worked very well.

Both parents and students sign the ‘Acceptable Use Policy’ – the students agreeing that they will behave appropriately, and for the parents, that they agree with the policy and will support the school in the development of their child’s values and sense of responsibility, through monitoring the student’s use.

However;

My view would be, that if you have been given clear policy guidelines by a higher authority to which you are bound, then you have little choice to follow/implement it (whether you’re in philosophical agreement or not), however, I feel those making that policy have a responsibility for providing straightforward mechanisms for its implementation. ie. if a system decided everything must be blocked, then I would argue it is their responsibility to block it, not yours – and then ask them justify why they have crippled what has cost millions to put in place – and why they have not put adequate monitoring technology in place.

If sold properly, I think Rudd would even support monitoring rather than blocking, generally speaking.

If its left up to you to make the policy, then consult with the relevant stakeholders (including parents) to get agreement and go ahead. Here you have a chance to put solid educational reasoning forward as to how you believe things should be – but not out of fear of what someone else might say or how you might be judged.

In my experience, the best way to deal with sensitive matters is face to face – a parents meeting or an ‘open’ P&C meeting to discuss the policy.

Once decisions have been made, perhaps a hard copy agreement for both student and parent to sign might be appropriate – less for its legal standing (which is likely weak), but more for its symbolic value (partnership between student, parents and school) in terms of tackling potential dangers online.

With regard to how we block login access to the admin accounts, its a technical issue not for discussion in this forum – but Apple or companies like Xcite logic – an excellent Mac consultancy in Perth – could assist schools in achieving this outcome.

BTW – if any in your community are concerned about what ‘porn’ kids might see (by accident or otherwise) on the internet, find out how many of their households have FOXTEL. Showtime movie channel (part of every basic Foxtel package) screens stuff you wouldn’t believe (Fox call it ‘Erotic Drama’) on Friday nights starting around 9.40 Perth Time for anyone to see – and you don’t need any imagination! So beware leaving the kids home on Friday nights! … and yes, I did ’stumble’ upon it

Happy New Year to all!

Cheers, BRett

A great post and a lot of food for thought.

Paul