Pubdate: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 Source: Pendulum, The (NC Edu Elon University) Copyright: Elon University Pendulum2010 Contact: http://www.elon.edu/pendulum/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2852 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?225 (Students - United States) SCHOOL-ISSUED LAPTOPS BEGIN TO RAISE PRIVACY, FIRST AMENDMENT QUESTIONS There have always been conflicts between the rights of schools and students' First Amendment rights. Beginning with the court case Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court decided that students don't lose their First Amendment rights simply by walking through their schoolhouse doors. Since that decision in 1969 though, many other court cases have occurred that seek to limit students' freedoms. New Jersey v. T.L.O set the precedent that students have less privacy in schools. The Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls set the precedent that random drug testing of students involved in extracurricular activities does not violate the Fourth Amendment. People have regularly questioned what role the school has to limit the rights of students while in school or during a school-related activity. It has rarely been questioned what role the school has to limit the rights of students while in their own homes - until now. The Lower Merion school district in Pennsylvania is an area affluent enough to be able to issue all of its high school students laptops. In all, it provided laptops to about 2,300 students. Blake Robbins, a high school sophomore, was issued a laptop by his school. He claims an assistant vice principal from the school took advantage of the camera embedded in the device to monitor his activity at home. The lawsuit claims assistant vice principal called in Robbins in to discuss "improper behavior" at home, citing pictures obtained from the school-issued laptop. Robbins said officials mistook candy for pills and thought he was selling drugs. The school's officials admitted to using the webcams to find 42 alleged missing laptops. They did this without the knowledge of the students or their families. There have been other cases of schools trying to stretch their authority, without educational purposes, beyond the schoolhouse doors and into the homes of students. Last week, a high school student in Chicago was suspended for creating a Facebook fan page for students titled "anyone who has had a bad experience with or plain dislikes" a particular faculty member, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. On school grounds it makes sense the administration should be able to limit the rights of the students while at school, but once the student exits the school building, parenting should be left to the guardians of students. Some claims have been made that justify the school's action by saying the school has the right to act "in loco parentis," or in place of the parents. Public school teachers are employees of the government and by entering the personal abodes of students, they are violating the Fourth Amendment, not serving the greater good by providing extra parental care. A district spokesman for Lower Merion school district said only two employees in the technology department have access to activate the webcams, and they had limitations. They could only access webcams to locate missing laptops and the remote activations could only capture images, not record sound. The potential for abuse, even with these limitations, is endless. Many teenagers keep their laptops in their rooms. The fine line between a professional and unprofessional relationship with a student and school officials gets blurred if school officials can see into students' rooms and have authority over what students do in their own homes. Many students have admitted to now covering up their webcams with tape to prevent this from happening. If students are expected to surrender their rights as they enter the school, teachers should surrender their control as students exit the school. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom