February
25th
  11:25:26 AM

School laptop ‘spying’ policy: why did they even think of it?

Lynn MatskoA lawsuit in Pennsylvania over a school district’s remote monitoring of student laptops shows there is a price to pay for digital learning -- and not just the initial price of a MacBook. There are ongoing maintenance and theft costs, and, as this case shows, there can be costs in trust and community relations. And lawyers.

The Lower Merion School District has a policy of providing all students with laptop computers and has bought 2,620 of them over the last two years at a cost of $1000 each. They come with webcams installed, and the district’s technology department has used tracking software in the webcams to locate 42 laptops reported lost or stolen during the current school year.

Couldn’t they see this is an invasion of privacy, even if the person was guilty of theft? Did they really not think of what images might be captured in students’ homes or other locations, and how damaging that could be to the dignity of individuals and trust between them and the school?

The lawsuit against Lower Merion was instigated by the complaint of 15-year-old Blake Robbins, a student at the district’s Harriton School, that the school spied on him at home. His family claims that he was confronted by an assistant principal, Lindy Matsko, about using drugs when, his lawyers assert, he was eating candies.

Mrs Matsko, who has two 15-year-old sons, has hotly denied in court this week that she ever monitored a student via a laptop webcam or ever authorised such a thing. Robbins says that “someone accessed my webcam and provided Ms Matsko with a screenshot and a webcam picture of me alone in my bedroom.”

His sister told a radio station that she and all her girlfriends at Harriton were “very scared, because we don’t check to see if the lid [of the laptop] is closed when we’re changing. We take them in the bathroom when we’re in the shower to listen to music.”

What do you expect when you give a kid a free laptop?

The complaint has been filed in federal court and is no doubt being carefully watched, not only by schools. Aside from privacy issues it raises a number of questions -- not least about using expensive technology with students and then trying to limit the costs by spying on suspects. Is it really worth treating all your students as potential offenders in order to train them in one learning method -- assuming that it is even effective?



 
about this blog | Bookmark and Share

Search this blog

 Subscribe to FamilyEdge
rss RSS feed of posts

 Recent Posts
How men contribute to Australian happiness
24 May 2012
Truth or lies: a parenting challenge
23 May 2012
Girl violence and the parent gap
21 May 2012
Ottawa exhibition modified after complaints
17 May 2012
Self-control is the only magic bullet
16 May 2012

 MercatorNet blogs
Style and culture: Tiger Print
US political scene: Sheila Liaugminas
News about bioethics: BioEdge
From the editors: Conniptions

 Archive
May 2012 | Apr 2012 | Mar 2012 | more >>

 From MercatorNet's home page

Sensing the sacred
25 May 2012
Is there a sense of the sacred that even the non-religious can share?

Could geoengineering save the planet?
25 May 2012
And who is thinking about the ethics of a technological quick fix?

A thought experiment about marriage
24 May 2012
A world in which sexual intimacy could not produce children would never have come up with the idea of marriage.

Australia’s lifeline: its precarious sea lanes
23 May 2012
Large, isolated and rich, Australia needs to cultivate a friendship with the US to survive in an dangerous world.

It’s only natural
22 May 2012
The bitterest debates today in the public square often turn on what is "natural". The Chinese sages had a lot…


 Tags
education of children, family breakdown, schools, China, demography, anger, obesity, child development, suicide, family, morality, brain, gendercide, United States, sex education, large families, family structure, Hollywood, pornography, dating, Africa, trafficking, child welfare, adolescence, Obama, South Africa, parenting, prostitution, sexual behaviour, marriage, women, European Union, family meals, childcare, cohabitation, United Nations, family policy, happiness, character education, girls, parental rights, character, mental health, self-control, single motherhood, baby boomers, work-life balance, France, divorce, Canada, media, child behaviour, psychology, immigration, health, fashion, homosexuality, child safety, television, gender equality, adoption, teenagers, work, UK, birth control, working mothers, celebrities, internet, unemployment, one-child policy, family economics, abstinence, child abuse, violence, education, social networking, teen pregnancy, abortion, men, research, motherhood, family values, feminism, young adult, friendship, fertility, family relationships, social media, Sweden, fathers, media ethics, economics, New Zealand, same-sex marriage, AIDS, contraception, child obesity, technology, commitment, fatherhood, children, HIVAIDS, sexualisation of children, recession, polygamy, ageing, smacking, emerging adults, books, Spain, Australia, poverty, gender, video games, youth, children's health, child wellbeing, religion,