Public weighs in on school iPad debate

Respondents in an online Argus-Courier poll said the Petaluma City Schools District should scrap its program that gives an iPad to each student. The program has been criticized by some parents because of the loose Internet filter that allows students to access some inappropriate content. More than 35 percent said the district should end the program, while nearly 30 percent said they wanted a more restrictive Internet filter. Another 17 percent said do nothing, while 15 percent said make the Internet filter less restrictive.

Here are some comments:

--

“All older students can find anything that you are worried about on their phones. The restrictions on the internet are ridiculous and sometimes offensive. I have a friend who is lesbian and tried to search something for a school assignment but when she tried it said that ‘lesbian’ is not an acceptable search. That is offensive and totally unnecessary.”

--

“Come on now parents. Figure it out. Be grateful to have them and stop complaining.”

--

“Call me old fashioned, but iPads are not required for learning.”

--

“Filters are a complete waste. Any child can just as easily use his parent’s computer at home for adult sites and other restricted sites. These kids are given free iPads and what do a few parents do? They look a gift horse in the mouth.”

--

“Get rid of them. The whole thing is nothing more than a marketing scam, anyway. Does anybody really think Apple is giving away all these iPads for nothing? They’re collecting all the data they can get on your kids, and my kids, and every kid in Petaluma so they can know everything about them and try to sell them stuff.”

--

“Huge amount of money spent on something for which there was spectacularly inadequate planning. Teachers aren’t using the iPads in any new or special way.”

--

“I’m a teacher and the iPads, even when working, are more trouble than they are worth. Students try successfully to bypass the filters and get access to everything. And when the Internet is not working, things grind to a halt.”

--

“I’m confident that the filters that are used are beyond sufficient and far better than the filters that most parents have at home. It is the responsibility of the parents to talk to their kids about the internet and to monitor their children’s usage.”

--

“If they cannot be used properly by the students then take them away. That simple. I’m sure these kids see this at home or even more violence and sexual content in their video games that their parents buy them.”

--

“It’s obvious to me that filters should be different for elementary vs. high school students. I’m not sure why this is even being debated, it just seems like common sense. What’s bothering me about this issue is that I’m not seeing discussion around teaching kids how to be responsible with technology.”

--

“It serves no purpose that a pencil and paper can’t other than teaching the kids they don’t actually need to learn anything and wasting bond money.”

--

“More restrictive filters would hinder high school students trying to do research for their papers. Less restrictive is really not an option. Perhaps scrapping the iPad program should be considered. Or hey, here’s a thought: perhaps parents should try parenting.”

--

“We have filters at work for adults. Should absolutely have them for the kids. I think this would protect them from themselves.”

--

“Waste of funds. My senior has not used his once this year. Most of the other parents tell me there students do not use theirs either.”

--

“This was a bad investment from the start. A real waste of $4 million.”

--

“The teaching of safe technology usage needs to be the responsibility of the parent and the schools as a team. Not one or the other. The internet is a large and dangerous place, the children need to be taught how to navigate it safely and appropriately as a majority of their careers and future schooling will depend on it.”

--

“Parents should instil a sense of respect and responsibility in their children so they can make correct decisions. Believing filters will protect children is wishful thinking.”

--