Tim:

Is it required to be an Apple iBook laptop? This seems a little over the top. What if someone in Fullerton has a deal with Dell or HP that can get computers cheaper?

Should parents be required to purchase paper, pencils, pens, notebooks for their child or should the district pay for this?

Do you know if any collaboration was done between the district and the parents prior to the mandate?

I think another important observation is, if the district decided to purchase the computers, could they get Apple ibook laptops? I would say they would have to purchase the lowest bid for computers and it wouldn't be Apple.

Pushing it to a parental mandate avoids these types of lowest bid situations for the district and gets kids quality laptops for school at the parent's expense.

If a student can't afford a computer, what is the district doing? I think this could fall under the Williams case of equal protection and adequacy.

If the district makes it mandatory to purchase a laptop, then a large chunk of students' work is done on the computers while poorer students can't afford it, Fullerton could be subject to an equal protection challenge. To me, the district is promoting educational policies that favor wealthier parents and students over less wealthy ones...

If parents refuse or can't afford laptops, then what happens?

Do their children just sit there and watch the wealthier students do their classwork?

Scott

When attending the University of Arizona, I can recall a debate being raised each year when the Board of Regents met to determine whether or not to institute an increase in tuition.

The Arizona State constitution had a similar article that established that the state's universities shall remain "as free as possible."

And each year, the "hard liners" would complain that the cost, and the subsequent increases, was not "as free as possible" and a violation of the state's constitution.

Meanwhile, the state's universities were losing quality faculty to other universities around the country because they could not compensate them appropriately. The universities were not only competing with other universities but also the private sector, with which they could not compete.

Colleges, like the School of Business, subsequently instituted a "fee" to all business students so they could enrich the education of students in the School of Business.

Clearly, this was a violation of the state's constitution. But the Board of Regents realized that "as free as possible" wasn't free at all. Not even close.

And while it is expected that college students will have a computer at their disposal, universities also provide computer labs for students to use to complete school work.

Perhaps the Fullerton School District should do the same.

My response to Scott Blough's comments:

Is it required to be an Apple iBook laptop?

Yes. You must purchase an iBook and it must be purchased through the District. You also have no administrative rights to the laptop throughout the three-year lease period. The District’s primary argument that Apple is better revolves around the fact that viruses are rampant on PC’s, but supposedly not on Apple. I wonder myself if we did the best “shopping” to get the best deal...

Do you know if any collaboration was done between the district and the parents prior to the mandate?

There was very little discussion before the program was rolled out. Even our School Board has admitted this was a big problem – not enough information was disseminated to the community before they were told to show up (with their checkbook) to pick up their child’s laptop. It wasn’t until parents started asking questions and raising concerns that the Board woke up and saw they had a problem and that their assumption that everyone would happily pay $1,500 for a laptop for their elementary and junior high-aged children was a faulty assumption.

I think another important observation is, if the district decided to purchase the computers, could they get Apple ibook laptops? I would say they would have to purchase the lowest bid for computers and it wouldn't be Apple.

Excellent point! Again, I don’t know what sort of bids they got before going the Apple route.

If a student can't afford a computer, what is the district doing? I think this could fall under the Williams case of equal protection and adequacy.

The District has said no child has been denied a laptop based on financial hardship. However, parents have been pressured to pay up. One parent was asked to show tax returns, pay stubs and submit to a (humiliating) meeting with the Superintendent, Cameron McCune, and the Fisler School principal, Jackie Pearce. Also, most parents don’t want to be viewed as “cheap” or “bad” parents by either refusing to pay (by standing on their Constitutional right to a free public education) or admitting they can’t afford to pay, so most just pony up. It’s so wrong it makes my head spin.

If the district makes it mandatory to purchase a laptop, then a large chunk of students' work is done on the computers while poorer students can't afford it, Fullerton could be subject to an equal protection challenge. To me, the district is promoting educational policies that favor wealthier parents and students over less wealthy ones...

Amen! This is why the ACLU has become involved with this issue. Please visit “www.FullertonParents.org” and check out some of the press coverage on this issue.

Thanks for posting your comments, Scott. Best wishes.

Heather Sutherland
Fullerton Parent

So, the District bought the computers and now are having parents purchase them for their child?

Who actually owns the computers? Parents or the District?

Who sets the appropriateness standards for what can and can't be viewed on the internet for the students?

Where does parental liability and school liability begin and end?

So, there is "means testing" for parents who can't afford to purchase computers? If so, does the district record personal information such as tax returns and so on.

Can the district put forth the guidelines for "means testing" parents. How do they classify who gets help and who doesn't and what is it based on? This will be key to an equal protection argument.

How does the district quantify who gets a computer and who doesn't?

I would ask to see what privacy standards they have in place, how they safeguard such private info, who is approved to see tax returns and so on, at the district.

I would also contact your state assembly representative and the State Board of Education to find out if authority has been granted under the ed code to review parent's personal financial information. That info of bothers me...

Do they run credit checks too? Does the school district really need to see someone's 1040's for a computer?

When school ditrict's implemented the school lunch or breakfast program, they use standards from the federal government for who gets lunch and who doesn't? Do they use that here?

Thanks and I'll visit your website...

Scott

I am also concerned. If these are "leased" by the parents, then they are probably leased by the district. If so, then the district is probably making payments to the laptop provider.

In other words, why weren't parents given the option of lease payments?

What is to happen to the computers at the end of the 3 year term. Do they get turned back in? Do the parents get a refund, or a buy-out option?

Tim

I wonder if the district did an analysis of the costs and overhead associated with:

a. managing the laptops themselves from a technical standpoint

b. Managing the lease program

c. Insuring this property against loss.

For example - parents are responsible for the Internet access at home. Let's say they choose AOL. Then, 3 months later, they choose Time Warner Cable.

According to the program, district staff will be installing the AOL software, then de-installing it, then installing Time Warner software.

huh?

Tim

Florida Supreme Court just ruled their statewide school voucher program illegal! BING!

Arleigh:

I saw that.... There is just too many issues with the seperation between church and state for a voucher program to work.

I believe there is a voucher system in some parts of Wisconsin, but I'm not totally educated on it. I've never seen any numbers that show a voucher system works. Have you?

Do you think it's right to have a mandatory policy that parents must purchase their child a laptop?

Im a Fullerton Resident and Fullerton parent.This blog hasent even scratched the surface of the school districts troubled laptop program.First,I am a parent who is opposed to this program,simply due to schools being public and free.Under McCunes leadership combined with his taxpayer financed band of attorneys this program was implimented at four elementary schools prior to Fullerton Parents whos children attend other district schools,knowledge.Once I got wind of this program,I met Heather at a school board meeting and became informed.McCune was not prepared for parents in large numbers to question his laptop program.I am unable to get answers to my questions about his laptop purchasing costs vs.resale to us parents.Further,financing is cheerfully handled by the school district with our easy monthly payments to them.Who at the district is opening up hundreds of monthly payment envelopes,handling the accounting,banking,not to mention any N.S.F. checks? Miss a payment?Re-po the laptop? I dont know!Wheres the policy on this program!Heres what I do know, and its not pretty.Say my wife works for Apple, and I can buy my laptop for say....$400.00 through her employee discount program.Or closer to all parents involved, you order the laptop DIRECTLY from Apple online, FINANCE it DIRECTLY with Apple,bring it to our Fullerton school,factory sealed,and my child is FORBIDDEN to use it.Gotta buy your laptop from the district.Say you as a parent, feel that public education should be as the constitution says...free...and refuse to purchase their $1,500.00 laptop from the district.McCune now has an answer for you - your child will now be removed from the school and placed in another Fullerton school-a school that has not yet implimented the program ..yet!Now that I have your attention,information leaked out about a book deal McCune and some others on the school board are working on.When confronted, McCune made it clear that he intended that any proceeds from the sales would simply be donated to the wildly popular laptop program.What a giver. Stay posted,we Fullerton parents are not going away...theres more to this program thats just not passing the smell test. Gregg

Again,

If the fullerton school district is transferring students to other schools because they cannot afford the laptop, I don't think this is in the best interest of the student.

So, students who can't afford the laptops will be forced to transfer to other schools in the Fullerton school district? Do those schools have the same API as the mandatory laptop school?

Book Deals??? Now, I've heard everything. How about a made for TV movie...

Anyone want to guess at the book title?

Well, I would call it "Lost in America" but I think that's taken. How about "Left Back" - Oh sorry, taken. "Head of the class?" - Taken... Darn it.

Scrooged?

T

Scott,
I don't know enough about the laptop situation to comment on it, I had heard that laptops would be provided if they could not afford one, but otherwise, I can't really comment on it. (Unlike Chris and Tim I keep my comments to things I actually have knowledge of.) I had heard that in Florida 95% of the private schools refused to accept students who had vouchers. It seems they decided being elite meant keeping lots of kids out. Vouchers are dead! It is time to start talking about things like class size reduction in all grades, programs to instill self discipline with students and outreach programs to better help parents help their kids at home with their schooling.

I am always happy to give Arleigh this illustrious forum with which to insult me! BING!

Tim Keaney

p.s. so how about no more cop outs like "um, I don't know from laptops" and tell us what you think? Or did you misplace the talking points on this one?

In answer to Scott’s questions, apparently the FSD is leasing the laptops through Apple and the District is in turn leasing them to the parents (you can pay in full, annually, quarterly or monthly). The District technically owns the laptop until the end of the lease period, at which time title passes to the purchasing family (however, who really wants a three-year old Apple at that point in time, but I digress...)

There is an “appropriate use” document the kids are required to sign. I haven’t read through it, but I’m sure the child signs off and agrees not to access porn. The laptop is filtered while it’s at school, but is not filtered once it goes home. The laptop is wireless. Therefore, if your neighbor has unfiltered wireless access, your child could conceivably sit in their bedroom, tap into your neighbor’s unfiltered Internet and surf away. Many parents have raised these concerns, but the District has had no real answer other than “they’re your kids - it’s your job to supervise them after hours.” True to some extent, but I think that’s a bit of a cop-out. If a predator preys on a Fullerton child who was on an unfiltered site on a FSD-supplied laptop, hmmmmm....

As for “means testing”, i.e., a financial threshold that allows you to qualify for some sort of aid, there is no clear policy. The District’s website says something to the effect of “if you need financial assistance, talk to your principal.” I know of at least one parent who was forced to provide tax returns and pay stubs. Wrong, wrong, wrong! The District says this info is confidential, but I can tell you that’s not happening.

No connection has been made that I know of between the free lunch program and the laptop program. That is, I don’t think the FSD is using the same qualifications and saying “if you get a free lunch, you get a free laptop.” Again, I’m not positive about that, but one of the issues has been that there is no clear FSD policy on who “qualifies” for assistance. However, please do note that although the FSD will say many, many people have received them for free, they are primarily talking about one of the four pilot schools – Nicholas Jr. High. Nicholas is a Title 1 school and Title 1 funds were used to purchase the laptops. Parents never take ownership of the laptops because they are a school-owned assett. However, there are a small number of parents at Nicholas who have chosen to pay so they can own the laptop at the end.

One quick comment in response to Gregg Plahy’s posting. He asks a great question: “Who at the district is opening up hundreds of monthly payment envelopes, handling the accounting, banking, not to mention any NSF checks?” Good point – I can only imagine what a nightmare that must be! Hey! I have a solution.... What if the FSD chooses to abide by the law and stop charging parents to participate in the laptop program? That would cut out processing all those payments! I’m kidding, but this is no kidding matter. The California Constitution says we have a right to a free public education and that a public school cannot condition a student’s participation in an educational activity upon the payment of a fee. If we don’t fight for this right and we let a school district force us to pay-to-learn, we open up the door to more and more fees being piled on year after year until we are priced out of an education. Let’s not let that happen.

Heather Sutherland
Fullerton Parents for Good Public Education
www.FullertonParents.org

Hi Heather:

I would never want to be perceived as someone meddling in Fullerton's affairs, but has the Fullerton Parents considered filing a recall petition?

It seems that Fullerton School District Trustees are inattentive to the needs of parents in this case and a little public pressure from your group may push the situation in a better orbit for all parties.

Of course, I'm not from Fullerton and don't want to meddle in your district's affairs.

Scott

Hello Scott. Our group has talked recall, but it's a bit of an undertaking and not one we're putting our energies into at present. The ACLU has been in talks with the Fullerton School District about their laptop program and whether or not it meets the free school guarantee (at $1,500 a laptop, it certainly isn't "free"...). Recall, or at least backing some alternative candidates, may be in the future, but for now our group is focusing on persuading the FSD to remove the parent-pay portion of the laptop program. Wish us luck!! Heather

Does the “Free School Guarantee” Really
Mean Public Schools Are Supposed To Be Free?
– What The Law Says --

Much has been said and written about the Fullerton School District’s “Laptops for Learning” 1:1 laptop program, whereby elementary and junior high-aged children at four Fullerton schools have access to an Apple iBook laptop computer 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, at a cost of approximately $1,500 per computer, per child. Fullerton parents (and most recently the ACLU of Southern California) have questioned whether or not the laptop program violates our children’s right a free public education as guaranteed under the California Constitution.

WHAT DOES THE LAW REALLY SAY?

The controlling case with respect to school fees is the 1984 California Supreme Court case of Hartzell v. Connell. In Hartzell, the Santa Barbara High School District, in the face of decreased revenue for public school funding, adopted a plan whereby students would be charged $25 for participation on each athletic team, as well as $25 for participation in each other extracurricular activity (drama, vocal music groups, band and cheerleading). The District’s plan also provided for a fee waiver program whereby students with financial need could apply for a scholarship.

A lawsuit was filed, which claimed the School District’s plan violated California’s free school and equal protection guarantees.

The Hartzell court noted that the California Constitution mandated that the legislature “provide for a system of common schools by which a free school shall be kept up and supported in each district. . . .” The court went on to discuss the history of the free school guarantee in California and its importance to a democratic form of government.

The fees at issue in the Hartzell case pertained to extracurricular activities. However, the court clearly indicated it valued extracurricular as much as curricular activities by stating that extracurricular activities are “no less fitted for the ultimate purpose of our public schools, to wit, the making of good citizens physically, mentally, and morally, than the study of algebra and Latin. . . .’”

The Hartzell court went on to state that “all educational activities – curricular or ‘extracurricular’ – offered to students by school districts fall within the free school guarantee . . . .”

It’s interesting that in attempting to defend charging $1,500 for a laptop computer, the Fullerton School District has repeatedly cited that per pupil funding in California is far below that of other States. The Santa Barbara High School District also raised issues pertaining to budgetary constraints. However, the Hartzell court dismissed those argues and indicated “financial hardship is no defense to a violation of the free school guarantee.” The court also stated that equally accessible “public education is not contingent upon the inevitably fluctuating financial health of local school districts. A solution to those financial difficulties must be found elsewhere . . . .”

The Fullerton School District has indicated that no child has been excluded from participating in the laptop program because of “financial hardship” and that such children can obtain fee waivers or financial assistance. The Santa Barbara High School District also had a fee waiver provision in place. However, the Hartzell court dismissed the School Board’s argument that the fee waiver provision of its plan satisfied the free school guarantee. The Court held “the free school guarantee reflects the people’s judgment that a child’s public education is too important to be left to the budgetary circumstances and decisions of individual families. It makes no distinction between needy and non-needy families. . . . The free school guarantee lifts budgetary decisions concerning public education out of the individual family setting and requires that such decisions be made by the community as a whole. Once the community has decided that a particular educational program is important enough to be offered by its public schools, a student’s participation in that program cannot be made to depend upon his or her family’s decision whether to pay a fee or buy a toaster.”

The Fullerton School District has clearly made the decision that the laptop program is important enough to be offered to our children. As the Fullerton School District is mandated by law to comply with the free school guarantee as set forth in the California Constitution and the Hartzell case, the laptop program must be offered free of charge. Although the requirement to comply with the free school guarantee may create financial hardships for our public school district, or force them to make tough choices regarding what kinds of programs it can offer, the California Supreme Court held that the potential damage to students created by ineffective fee policies clearly outweighs the need for some of these programs.

The Hartzell case achieves the goals of public education and ensures that the children of needy and non-needy families are provided an education. That education can come in many forms, including laptop computers, athletics, choir, drama or band. However, all California public school districts – including the Fullerton School District – must provide all educational activities – curricular or extracurricular – in accordance with the law and in keeping with the free school guarantee.

In summary, the State of California provides for a system of free public education in its Constitution. If a school district cannot afford a particular program, the solution is not to turn to parents to fund their child’s education, as those same parents have already paid for their child’s education through the payment of taxes. To request the parents to pay more would be tantamount to double taxation. The best forum for changes in school fee policies is at the State level (by contacting your State representatives and showing up on election day).

The Fullerton School District’s laptop program is not being funded by the District. Instead, the District has turned to parents and required that they pay almost $1,500 in order for their child to participate in the program. Is this a violation of California law? If it is, are you willing to sit idly by while the Fullerton School District violates your child’s rights? If you let them charge for a laptop, what next — textbooks? science materials? rent on your child’s desk?

My advice? Demand that the Fullerton School District abide by the law and not force you to pay-to-learn.

Heather Sutherland
Fullerton Parents for Good Public Education
www.FullertonParents.org