Dear Bernie,

I am not in a position to judge the benefits or distractions of laptops as part of the curriculum at Lakeside. Both my children seem well-versed in computer and Internet use. While I would not describe either of them as "techies" or "nerds," the general atmosphere at Lakeside and peer pressure compels them both to be literate and handy. Concerning the worth of laptops in the classroom as part of the curriculum, I can only take the word of the two middle school teachers on Tuesday night's panel, selected, of course, by the administration. I didn't feel comfortable merely accepting their viewpoints. I am curious about other opinions and other conclusions drawn from the pilot experiment. Clearly there are multiple points of view but only one was represented on the stage. Where was a representative from the Parents Association and student government, two groups I understand had some type of involvement in the process? I want to ask them what were the questions they were asked and how did they respond. Were the questions limited in scope and based on the assumption that the program was moving ahead? That's like the classically condescending line about the car salesman who turns from the husband to the wife with, "And you get to choose the color." From the responses you received at the Curriculum Review evening, parents are unwilling merely to debate the color.

My main concern is with the sad state of communication from the administration to parents, faculty and students concerning this very important thrust into a relatively unknown area of pedagogy. Confronting me last night were representatives of the oligarchy which sets policy, guides the school, and raises money. The president of the Board of Trustees acknowledged that we, the parents, were the customers. He asserted that the Board recognized the financial realities of the school as it would a business. Since he used the analogy to a business, I will too. As a business person myself, I have witnessed sellers of a product, a good product that I rely on and to which I have loyalty, become arrogant and high-handed in booming economic times. There is great demand for their product and if I don't like the changes made to the product they are happy to see me the door and wish me well in finding a replacement. When the economy turns sour, these are not necessarily the first businesses to feel the pain, but the surest to fail because their competitors have grown strong on the dissatisfaction of their former customers. This oligarchy has lost touch with their lifeblood -- their customers b^@^" and displayed its arrogance last night. It is now imperative that the administration listen to and heed their customers. If last night's meeting was nothing more than window dressing on a done deal, it will have been a sad, sad night for Lakeside.

I graduated from Lakeside 35 years ago. I have made financial sacrifices to afford my children the opportunity to attend the school. At this point, why I will reenroll my current 10th grade daughter is love for, and loyalty to, the school and a belief that there exists enough collective wisdom among parents, faculty, students, and, yes, the administration to create a truly great place for my child to learn. My objection does not concern the structure of school governance; I object to the lack of counsel sought by the administration. There is concern and wisdom all around you; open yourselves to it before making the decisions. I urge you to defer the laptop program until you muster the support of the school community. Recognize that this is one important step in the procedure that you left out. There is no fault in acknowledging an error and undertaking a correction. To do otherwise invites resentment and mistrust.

Sincerely,

Tom Alexander