BYOD Chromebook setup fee in a school - any justification?

[Dos_Box]

I've been helping a friend of mine's sister with sorting out a Chromebook for her son (the school no longer provides Chromebooks and you have to purchase your own). @ICTDirect_Dave very kindly helped me out in supplying one at an excellent price!

 

I've just got a message this morning that the school want £30 to setup each pupils Chromebook.

This seems very excessive, and if any of you coud provide me with any info as to what could take up so much time that this fee is as high as it is I would be most greatful, as it does seem rather OTT.

[Primus]

It's the cost of the management licence.

[synaesthesia]

Sounds like the management fee which is something around the £28 mark? Although why they'd want to manage a chromebook that doesn't belong to them...

[TheHyperTechie]

What Primus said,

 

£30 is roughly the cost of a device license. Surprised they aren't supplying the license though, considering you are paying for the cost of the device.

[Steve21]

Sounds like the management fee which is something around the £28 mark? Although why they'd want to manage a chromebook that doesn't belong to them...

 

Normally with a "BYOD" scheme (or more a 1:1 scheme rather than BYOD) if you choose to buy your own it's still managed and deployed in the same manner during their school life - This ensures all the filtering/monitoring/apps etc are all installed and licensed

 

Steve

[Dos_Box]

Thanks all, and as @HyperTech said, surely the licencensing is paid for by the school?

It does seem cheeky to make parents pay out for a device then charge them on top of that for something the school would have had to pay per head\device for anyway?

[PotNoodleTech]

The school should be paying the device licence fee if they are the ones insisting it needs to be enrolled in the school google tennancy.

 

I'd be telling them where to naughty word off.

 

The child can use their school logon and password on a non enrolled chromebook and just carry on as normal.

[TheHyperTechie]

The school should be paying the device licence fee if they are the ones insisting it needs to be enrolled in the school google tennancy.

 

I'd be telling them where to naughty word off.

 

The child can use their school logon and password on a non enrolled chromebook and just carry on as normal.

 

Exactly this... Its the schools job to ensure the device is safe and secure for pupil use (when connected to their/any network). If they insist on this, they should be the ones paying for the license (In my opinion)

 

Its like asking a student to contribute towards their Microsoft license so they can use the office suite.... they shouldn't have to as its down to the school to provide the necessary tools and services needed.

Edited July 1, 2024 by HyperTech

[synaesthesia]

Also once the user is gone and the device is powerwashed, the license doesn't magically disappear - the school is effectively profiting?

[localzuk]

My thought is that its a little cheeky, but also with budgets as they are it isn't surprising. The school needs to be sure that filtering and monitoring is happening, and the only real way to do this with a Chromebook is to add it to Google Workspace and enforce app installation etc...

 

Licenses are not transferable, so if the child changes device or leaves, the school would not be able to reuse that license. Meaning it is a one off cost for that specific device.

 

So, I can see it from the school's POV.

 

The alternative is not enrolling it, and the school potentially saying it cannot be used in school as they cannot be sure it is being properly filtered etc...

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

Also once the user is gone and the device is powerwashed, the license doesn't magically disappear - the school is effectively profiting?

No, as licenses aren't transferrable - once a device is removed, the license is un-unusable.

[Dos_Box]

Licenses are not transferable, so if the child changes device or leaves, the school would not be able to reuse that license. Meaning it is a one off cost for that specific device.

 

Ah, that would make sense.

But still...!

[TheHyperTechie]

My thought is that its a little cheeky, but also with budgets as they are it isn't surprising. The school needs to be sure that filtering and monitoring is happening, and the only real way to do this with a Chromebook is to add it to Google Workspace and enforce app installation etc...

 

Licenses are not transferable, so if the child changes device or leaves, the school would not be able to reuse that license. Meaning it is a one off cost for that specific device.

 

So, I can see it from the school's POV.

 

The alternative is not enrolling it, and the school potentially saying it cannot be used in school as they cannot be sure it is being properly filtered etc...

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

 

No, as licenses aren't transferrable - once a device is removed, the license is un-unusable.

 

Unless you are replacing the device with an exact model, in which case the license can be moved.

[localzuk]

Unless you are replacing the device with an exact model, in which case the license can be moved.

But, as parents are buying there own and there's dozens of different models, the likelihood of reuse is very low.

[paulkerton]

Also once the user is gone and the device is powerwashed, the license doesn't magically disappear - the school is effectively profiting?

It does. The license is tied to the device.

[synaesthesia]

Well, that I did not know. Quite bad IMHO!

[PotNoodleTech]

It does. The license is tied to the device.

 

It's not, it's tied to the make and model of device so you an re-use the license.

 

Either way, parents shouldnt be paying school licensing costs - full stop.

[gszech]

Our School is asking parents to pay a £70 fee to cover the cost of the Chromebook and safeguarding licenses + Chromebook bag.

We pay for the Chromebooks and pupils can take them home for free when they finish year 11. If the device is damaged parents need to order a replacement device from the school, unless you are pupil premium which in this case everything is free.

 

In this case it's weird that parents can order any Chromebook model. Some of them will splash out on brand new Chromebook Plus and other will buy refurbished unit from eBay. Where is the equality in this for pupils ?

[Steve21]

It's not, it's tied to the make and model of device so you an re-use the license.

 

Either way, parents shouldnt be paying school licensing costs - full stop.

 

Under that logic, you can re-use a school calculator/stationary/cooking items etc etc, so why are students/parents paying for it? It's still a requirement for that school in terms of equipment.

 

I don't see why it being a license is any different, if the parents are signing up to the school knowing they have to buy a Chromebook already there is obviously some element of an understanding they're paying for items linked to ICT.

 

Steve

[Aprice]

Yeah, wouldn't be happy with this. If you own the device I would have reservations about the school enrolling it in their MDM.

[TheHyperTechie]

Our School is asking parents to pay a £70 fee to cover the cost of the Chromebook and safeguarding licenses + Chromebook bag.

We pay for the Chromebooks and pupils can take them home for free when they finish year 11. If the device is damaged parents need to order a replacement device from the school, unless you are pupil premium which in this case everything is free.

 

In this case it's weird that parents can order any Chromebook model. Some of them will splash out on brand new Chromebook Plus and other will buy refurbished unit from eBay. Where is the equality in this for pupils ?

 

Yeah I don't disagree with a payment for misc. items such as bags, chargers (if broken) etc. But anything to do with how the device functions I just can't get on board with. Its the schools responsibility... so why are the parents paying?

Edited July 1, 2024 by HyperTech

[Ratcliffepg]

We stand the cost of the management licence, as they can be reused. We supply the devices and bill the parents. That way everyone has a common device.

[localzuk]

Legally, schools can charge for this - it is not a core cost for learning at the school, as it is an "optional extra". If it were a compulsory requirement to have a Chromebook, then the school legally would have to buy the device as well as the license.

 

BYOD is, in most schools I've come across, something that schools allow, rather than require. This is often then linked to requirements for how the device can be used - e.g. must be enrolled in filtering/monitoring solutions so schools are complying with KCSIE requirements. So, the end result is - if you want a device in school, then you have to comply with the requirements. It isn't unreasonable to have a small cost like this to facilitate it. The alternative is not having a device in school.

[gszech]

Yeah I don't disagree with a payment for misc. items such as bags, chargers etc. But anything to do with how the device functions I just can't get on board with. Its the schools responsibility... so why are the parents paying?

 

Two reasons really:

1. The £70 fee introduces ownership responsibility. If the 1:1 would be free pupils would just trash the device.

2. We looked at offering the 1:1 for free but there was no budget for it.

 

You can think of it this way: Year 7 pupils get a new Chromebook for £70 and they can keep it after Year 11.

Not a bad deal.

[TheHyperTechie]

Legally, schools can charge for this - it is not a core cost for learning at the school, as it is an "optional extra". If it were a compulsory requirement to have a Chromebook, then the school legally would have to buy the device as well as the license.

 

BYOD is, in most schools I've come across, something that schools allow, rather than require. This is often then linked to requirements for how the device can be used - e.g. must be enrolled in filtering/monitoring solutions so schools are complying with KCSIE requirements. So, the end result is - if you want a device in school, then you have to comply with the requirements. It isn't unreasonable to have a small cost like this to facilitate it. The alternative is not having a device in school.

 

I totally understand this, and in some ways agree. I think I am just really surprised more than anything that this is the route schools take to essentially fund a 1:1 device scheme. The way I see it though, is that schools are legally required to ensure devices meet the DfE's filtering and monitoring standards. This means they have no choice but to implement the necessary precautions for this to happen, if they need those devices forced to a particular SSID (which requires a device license) while at school in order for them to receive the correct filtering level, its down to them... and I think it's quite cheeky for the parents to be paying for it to happen!

Edited July 1, 2024 by HyperTech

[gszech]

Most of the 1:1 schools I've talked to are either:

1. Asking parents to order their own Chromebooks and ask them to cover the management costs - like in this threat.
   
2. Asking parents to pay for everything - usually a one-off payment between £250 - £375
   
3. Paying for everything just to find out that few years later they can't afford it.
   

 

No. 1 creates an equality problem (pupils using different devices). Parents still need to pay for devices and management. There is an issue that parents' own device is managed by the school so Timmy can't watch Netflix at home on the device that parents paid for.

No. 2 is just wrong.

No. 3 - Most of the schools don't take the damages into consideration and they struggle to repair the Chromebooks damages. I've seen so many Chromebooks graveyards where the screen replacement screen cost almost as much as a new device.