Seems logical to me, assuming the license fees are reasonable.
It is logical to a point, yes.
Apple has been heavily criticized for this for decades. In the 1980s they put a bunch of Apple computers in classrooms in the (very correct) hope that it would drive sales of their computers in homes, and sales of their software. It did both. They discontinued it for a time...
... but Apple restarted the program. My daughter's high school has an agreement with Apple where every student gets an iPod loaded with digital books, and the school has little padded crates of ipads in most classrooms that the teachers are encouraged to use, loaded with assorted Apple education products and ebooks the students can find on the apple store. The real money is when a student loses or breaks their school-provided ipod, or when the students otherwise buy the software and books for their own personal devices.
On the one hand, it is seen as a benefit. Schools get computers, educators and students get software and ebooks. Yay.
But the trojan horse is that the students are now deeply immersed in the Apple ecosystem. They'll ask parents for Apple brand at home since that is what they use at school. They'll buy Apple brand with their own money since that is what they are familiar with. And when the school wants things that are not on Apple's free list, the school funds will be directed to the company.
