Laptop provision for LAC

[Koldov]

Once again this has landed on my desk!

 

Advise on a laptop...

 

A few things to note:

 

The child is in the last year (6) of our school, so come summer will be moving on.

 

Although it appears it is our responsibility to purchase/provide, there is no IT support expected (or so they say).

 

I have from a previous thread understood there can be "I don't even touch it" to "Yes, we wipe it and put our Windows and Office on" responses.

 

Our BM is hammering me with links expecting me to provide a 'Yes, get this one' answer, but I don't really know what I should be advising on.

 

Personally, the ones being considered (Windows 11 in "S" mode, eUFS storage, Intel Core i3/Pentium Silver, 1 year M365).... I'd have a hard time recommending (in fact I wouldn't).

 

So although it's not really something I want to get too involved in considering the above, I also don't want to advise them that it's OK if it's not (but then again I've never looked into getting a laptop for an 11 year old, so it might be)!

 

A couple of links I've been sent...

 

https://www.argos.co.uk/product/3281840?clickSR=slp:term:laptop:1:2:1

 

https://www.argos.co.uk/product/3080285?clickPR=plp:35:245

 

On the face of it Acer because there's no mention of 'S' mode and it has an SSD (except no M365 mentioned)... but the Lenovo for build quality, i3 as opposed to the 'Silver', and M365 for a year (but eUFS storage and 'S' mode Windows)....

Edited May 13, 2024 by Koldov

[mavhc]

The council has money they can use for buying laptops for LAC, depending on location they might provide a locked down laptop, or give the school money, or give someone money to buy a laptop with no security

 

So check with their social worker about the procedure for your location

[Koldov]

From what I can gather it is to be purchased from the money the school gets.

 

But as far as I can find out, nothing about security, filtering, locking down Windows, providing Office etc...

 

So, pretty much just buy the laptop and give it to the child (or carer I guess)?

[Alex0x7F]

So, pretty much just buy the laptop and give it to the child (or carer I guess)?

 

Pretty much what we've done.

 

School get given the LAC funding and spend it on the laptop. They can use their school account during their time with us for Google Workspace instead of Office.

 

No filtering or AD join etc. Just an out of box experience with a local account.

 

We rewrote our Covid device loaning agreement for them to sign, saying the carer understands it is their responsibility for keeping the device in working condition, they understand no filtering will be applied at home. School not responsible for technical support etc.

[psydii]

The LAC Officer and the DSL should check their notes and decide what level of responsibility the school is to have over this device and its use going forward (hopefully: none). This should be communicated to you in writing.

 

If none, just get a halfway decent Chromebook from Dell 13-15" 8Gb ram 128Gb storage. Make it a current model so they get the full life out of it. They will of course need their own Google account (not a school one) to get it set up.

 

If you know what school they are going to, it might be worth the LAC officer reaching out to them to find out whether a chromebook or a windows device would fit best with their new environment. The default should be Chromebook because you get the best bang per buck, and malware/ransomware is less likely to be encountered. But if your environment was, and their next environment is, Windows then you ought to try to provide them with that (particularly if their next environment has 365 student benefits - they'll get uplifted to the full suite). Just make sure they sign up with a personal account rather than a school one.

 

I'd try to get a laptop built around the Intel N100 or N305.

[Primus]

We've taken the view that since DfE supplied filtering on the Covid devices this was an indication of their expectation. We provide Chromebooks that are restricted to school accounts and are therefore filtered and monitored.

 

We deprovision devices from our Google tenant when LAC students leave as the device is retained by them.

 

I'd definitely be speaking to the secondary school they're going to - you want them to have a device that works when they get there - given how late in the day it is now I'd even suggest waiting and letting the secondary school get it for them - in our case they'd get a brand new Chromebook with Smoothwall filtering and monitoring included for the 5 (or 7) years they're with us.

 

It's worth remembering that LAC students can be some of the most vulnerable - handing them an unfiltered/unmonitored device might not be wise.

[mavhc]

Here I format the laptop to be a school laptop, and then when they leave format it to be a normal Windows install. It's a laptop to do school work on, so it's set up as a school laptop, like all the others

[synaesthesia]

This differs from LA to LA. For us it's generally entirely hands off - order it and hand it over, still sealed in the box. Free to advise parents/carers on how to look after it, security etc but entirely hands off, because the device belongs to them, not the school.

[mavhc]

There may be multiple sources of funding which might confuse the issue.

 

Pupil Premium Plus should be allocated to schools to spend on that student to help them, whether that's more tuition or a laptop, or 17 other things, the school decides. There's no "the laptop must be given to the child" or even sent to their next school, when they leave, although that should be a discussion with their next school.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pupil-premium-allocations-and-conditions-of-grant-2024-to-2025/pupil-premium-2024-to-2025-conditions-of-grant-for-local-authorities#permitteduse-ofppgrant

 

Other sources of funding may have different rules

[synaesthesia]

And indeed one isn't necessarily connected to the other - LAC doesn't always mean PP and vice versa. PP here is usually in reference to the school supporting them as you say and the device would then belong to the school. It's surprising how different the authorities handle some of it too, even just over a county border! (Bedfordshire seems to be way behind Northants for example but some of the Norfolk schools seem to have just about everyone on PP!)

[Koldov]

We've taken the view that since DfE supplied filtering on the Covid devices this was an indication of their expectation. We provide Chromebooks that are restricted to school accounts and are therefore filtered and monitored.

 

Yeah, that's all great if you have that kind of set-up already in place (as you might expect in Secondary/Upper school), not so much in a small Primary especially with no loan/BYOD/1 2 1 schemes and therefore no policies in place and no service to accomplish it...

 

anyway, I doubt it was an indication of their expectation, there was just some wise voice in the back saying, "you know what will happen if we give young children devices and unfiltered access to the internet don't you... and if they get into trouble, you know who they'll blame...?" So, the cynic in me thinks that (along with a possibly genuine wish to keep children safe) it was partly just a massive a$$ covering endeavour.

 

I'd definitely be speaking to the secondary school they're going to - you want them to have a device that works when they get there - given how late in the day it is now I'd even suggest waiting and letting the secondary school get it for them

 

I did ask if that was possible, but it appears this has been passed down to me after it's been delayed for quite some time (because $reasons). Questions are now being asked about why it hasn't happened yet...

 

It's worth remembering that LAC students can be some of the most vulnerable - handing them an unfiltered/unmonitored device might not be wise.

 

This is what I find strange about the whole deal... The LEA (LAC dept. or whatever) give the school money for the child for some reason, then ask the school to buy a laptop instead of just using some of that money to provide one themselves, or give it to the carer directly. I just don't understand why and what this implies... That we are in a better position than they are to know what device to purchase...? Possibly, if it is to provide a device purely for educational purposes, but then why not state that? However it seems to me this is portrayed as the child's own personal device to do with what they wish, not purely for school work and therefore not to have it restricted, filtered and monitored by the school. But (20 goto 10)... then why make the school purchase it...?

 

As the above posts show, there seems to be no B&W guidelines or recommendations, but it shouldn't be up to us decide what they mean and what they expect from us. As @Primus rightly implies... 'that way repercussions lay' unless you can get it in writing from all parties that they understand this was a zero touch provision from your side....

[mavhc]

If it's PP+ money then just allocate a laptop to the child from the normal supply of laptops, configured as a school laptop, they don't get to take it home, you don't have to give it to the next school, but you can.

[CHiLL]

We haven't had a request for a while, but we are usually instructed to buy a laptop, bag and the Office suite. We leave everything sealed and hand it to the student, who is directly informed (and their parents) that this is not property of the school and there is no support available for them.

 

Many years ago, we had a pupil who abused their LAC budget to their advantage and managed to wangle a gaming laptop. The SENDCO at the time simply took the stance "it's not our money, it's from the council and it'll be sent back if not used". Lucky kid.

[PotNoodleTech]

Get them a Chromebook instead - cheaper, easier to use, much less to go wrong, less tech support requirement, automatic upgrades for 5+ years, fit and forget.

[Primus]

 

anyway, I doubt it was an indication of their expectation, there was just some wise voice in the back saying, "you know what will happen if we give young children devices and unfiltered access to the internet don't you... and if they get into trouble, you know who they'll blame...?" So, the cynic in me thinks that (along with a possibly genuine wish to keep children safe) it was partly just a massive a$$ covering endeavour.

 

The following quote is from KCSIE 2024:

"Protecting children from maltreatment, whether that is within or outside the home, including online"

 

The bold section is the new added bit - therefore I think our read was right.