Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent tells board his child was singled out after district Chromebooks lacked internet restrictions; board asks tech director for briefing
Summary
A parent told the board his child accessed noneducational and unsafe websites on a school-issued Chromebook and said district protections were insufficient; the superintendent said the district's technology director will be asked to brief the board on security and filtering practices.
During the public-comment portion of the April 28 meeting, parent Austin Klowicki described repeated attempts by his child to access noneducational and, by his account, unsafe websites on a school-issued Chromebook and said the district's filtering and security settings were inadequate. Klowicki said the principal and security coordinator had not provided satisfactory answers and that his child had been singled out when staff applied site blocks he said were not applied uniformly.
Klowicki read a letter purportedly sent previously to an Evans School principal and said he believed Chromebooks should not be issued to students below fifth grade because they can access inappropriate content and distract from foundational instruction. He said his child had been blocked from certain sites but that other children were not blocked, and that the Securly monitoring reports the district provided were not adequate to address his concerns. He asked the board for answers and follow-up.
Superintendent Dr. Flagg acknowledged the concerns and said the district's director of technology would be asked to appear and explain filtering and device-management settings; Dr. Flagg said a fuller explanation would be provided at a later meeting and that staff would review the matter through the district's issue-resolution process when an individual student case is involved.
Why it matters: district device-management and content-filtering practices affect student safety and equity; parents raised both substance (what protections are in place) and process (how the district communicates actions taken on individual devices).
What was said (selected excerpts) "I do not believe that any grade below fifth grade should have a Chromebook due to the fact that children need to work on the basics," Austin Klowicki told the board during public comment. "By the way, none are in place because my kid can access anything," Klowicki said, describing a lack of site-blocking and parental controls on the device his child used.
Board response and next steps - Superintendent: Dr. Flagg said the director of technology would be asked to "come and lay that out" and that the administration would follow the district's formal issue-resolution channels for an individual student case. - No formal board action was taken at the meeting; Klowicki and board members asked for a future briefing by technology staff and suggested adding the topic to an upcoming agenda.
Ending: The district agreed to follow up with technology staff and to brief the board; parents and board members requested clear written explanations of device-filtering settings and the process used when a student's device is restricted or flagged.
