Technology and Society

nyquist_theorem writes: "MSNBC has an interesting article entitled Billy gets a laptop that covers the Harley-riding independent governor of Maine's take on technology and its role in government. While previous coverage on Slashdot covered the governor's plan to give his 7th graders laptops, this article offers a glimpse of that all-too-rare breed, the insightful, technologically aware bureaucrat - in this case discussing the sociological implications of the net in the wake of Sept 11th. The article also mentions some of the other measures the government of Maine is taking to use the net in ways that actually benefit its citizens."

Comments

laptops for 7th graders is bad

[Anonymous Coward]

as this may go against many of the geeks beliefs, i believe laptops would be close to deadly. it is during these years that you need to actually start focusing. i know from experience that whenever i got a hold of a computer during middle and high school , i would use the computer for the purposes they weren't meant for. restrictions could easily bipassed, so instead of reading about biology, i would be "surfing the net" and looking at slashdot, etc. computers = death of brain. just imagine YOURSELF with a computer in middle school during a boring class. what would you do? something bad or good?

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction

[Russ Nelson]

In politics, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The desired action occurs in the short term. The undesired action takes a while to occur. Since everyone can see the desired action, people sometimes praise government action because it seems to accomplish its goals. In the long term, though, government action hurts people. Why? Because governments find it hard to take action which hurts in the short term (thereby producing the long-term gain).
-russ

Not a great idea

[UserChrisCanter4]

I graduated from high school not too long ago. I was one of the generation that was supposed to be propelled forward by the "computing revolution".

IMHO, computers have no place in schools, at least not until upper level classes where a computer is necessary (say, a basic computer literacy class, but more importantly, programming courses). My experience with computers in school consisted of the following:
1) "Educational games" that were neither fun nor particularly educational. Among the ones I remember were those I played during the monthly trek to the "math lab" in Junior High; stupid things where you added numbers and a correct answer would advance you closer to a goal. Whoop-de-do... I could have learned those fractions a lot easier in a classroom.
2) A few "multimedia" computers in the library playing movies of cheetahs. This was during the era when "multimedia" was first rearing its head. Each one of these 486s with a CD-ROM and monitor probably cost the district $3,000, and possibly more.
3) Computer "literacy", which taught basic point-and-click on ancient (even at that time) Apple IIe units. A wonderful waste of a semester.

Which left us with the one actually useful application (outside of CS): Writing lab, so that students who didn't have a computer at home could type their papers.

When I look at these massive expenditures, I can't help but think how angry the teachers must be. A fairly reasonable estimate (even for the dinky little CE machines) for purchase and maintenance of those units would be around $8,000 for a classroom of 28 students. Can you imagine the jump in the quality of teaching applicants a district would receive if even $4,000 of that amount were being given to the teacher?

Instead, districts and states are forced to give in to "feel-good" programs like this. Parents think that these computers are giving their children a "head start" on the "high tech" world out there (buzzwords used for emphasis). What the system is really doing is (inadvertantly) discouraging quality teachers who would have made a far bigger influence on their child's life than ANY computer could have ever made.

Computers do have a place in schools, but that place should be very, very limited. Say, 10-20 computers in a library for research (ideally running linux on a lower end ~500mhz system to save money), a gang of 30 or so computers available in a writing lab for students before, after, and during school, and a classroom of computers for any programming course. Beyond that, I don't think districts or states should squander precious funds that could be paying teachers or repairing schools.

Re:Not a great idea

[carpe_noctem]

I completely agree with the analysis here. I attend a engineering college where all freshman are required to buy laptops. Thus, there are barely any public labs on campus, because it is assumed that all students will simply bring their laptops with them (not such an appealing proposition for the seniors, who have to lug their four-year-old laptops around and can barely run the software for the classes). The public labs we do have are pitifully slow WindowsNT workstations, which are only used by foreign-exchange students. Additionally, all the classrooms are wired to the Internet, so that each classroom can be transformed into a computer lab for math classes, programming classes, and so forth.

And what is the end result of this? Well, let me simply note that IRC, ICQ, SSH, and Email are significantly more interesting than a really dull physics or chemistry lecture...and my freshman grades reflect this. There was a kid in my Differential Equations class last year that used to play CounterStrike nearly every day during class. If a class wasn't constantly using laptops as part of the lecture, it became nothing more than an incredible distraction.

At my college, the best way to recognize the freshmen is to look for the students who carry their laptops around to each of their classes. Upperclassmen, who have learned their lesson well, bring their tried-but-true notebooks and pens. And of course, the real irony is that last year, I had to buy a 3,000$ computer (as if college isn't expensive enough already :), which I don't use in class, and I don't use at home, either because it is nowhere near as powerful as my desktops.

There definitely are times when a laptop policy such as this is very nice, but I think that overall, it is a very dangerous influence to force upon an educational environment.

Follow the yellow brick road

[haus]

While I applaud Mr. King's efforts to improve the services that the state of Maine provides by implementing technical solutions, he should remember that technology is not a solution in and of itself.

I fear that merely throwing hardware at the class of 2006 will provide very few with any significant benefit. Now I am sure there will be the occasional adventurous student who will discover their own means of benefiting from this windfall, but for the masses I believe it will cause more confusion than benefit.

I doubt seriously that the majority of junior high school teachers have the knowledge of how to thoroughly implement the new machines into the their daily lesson plans. Do they know how to reinstall the OS, or how to configure the computer to print to a different printer when the class's primary printer goes belly-up?

Hopefully these issues, and others have been taken into account and resolved, but I would not hold my breath. My guess is that the primary benefit will be the extra strength training the kids will receive in having an extra 5 - 10 lbs in their book bags every day.

Re:I think they should give the teachers laptops..

[SCHecklerX]

And all of this has what to do with what a 7th grader should be learning?

I know I was into computers at that age, but it was a hobby outside of school. School needs to focus on the basic skills (building blocks) that will let that kid make his hobby (the computer) even more rewarding, since he'll actually learn and understand far more than he could ever have on his own.

Do kids really need laptops in school?

[mickeyreznor]

teachers have a hard time getting kids attention in class. why are you giving them another distraction?

How many desktops can you buy for a laptop?

[Mandelbrute]

In a lot of places the education budgets are shrinking.

The old reading books from the 1960's that were put in storage when it was decided that they were too violent are back out again, because there isn't enough money for new reading books (and the kids love them, plus the violence was pretty tame for any time other than the 90's).

If every kid has a laptop, something else has got to go. If there is a desktop for every kid, a bit less has to go. The only advantage of the laptop is that the kids can use them on the bus. If the kid can book out a desktop system that they can use at home, then they have a computer at home. You can buy a lot more than two PC's for the price of a laptop, and you still wouldn't need a full PCs per student. Laptops typically have a short and nasty life in comparison to a desktop system. Also, most schools already have a lot of desktop systems. Just because it's an old box doesn't mean that it can't run matlab and teach the best and brightest students - it just won't run quake II or above.

OK, you got screwed, but...

[fm6]

You're half right. The kind of computing that was imposed on you has no place in the schools. "Educational" software is a total joke. And it's pretty pointless for technologically clueless teachers to be teaching any of this stuff. Most "computer literacy" programs like this are just a half-assed way to con the taxpayers into thinking that the schools are up-to-date.

What use is a few computers in library or the back of the classroom? Suppose you had to learn to read that way. You're only allowed near books a few hours a week, under supervision. Please!

I'm not acquainted with the details of the Vermont program, but there are schools that have gotten good results with classroom computers. They do it by giving the students continuous access to computers. One student, one computer. With wireless LANs so they can use them in the classroom. This has a positive effect on all aspects of learning, not just computer skills.

Computer funding and disuse

[BarefootClown]

First of all, I agree wholeheartedly with your comments about schools' purchases of computers, and their ultimate disuse of them. I graduated from high school two years ago last May, and I saw how our systems were, or were not, used. Probably a million dollars' worth of equipment throughout the district (and I'm not exaggerating--between the labs with IBM Eduquest-series PC's, Novell network software, and token ring networking, to the teachers' systems, Digital machines on ethernet, which were replaced after four (IIRC) years, across a high school, three middle schools, and I don't remember how many elementaries, plus admin buildings), and most of them were only minimally used. Teachers often had only passing familiarity with the systems; one used the system primarily to collect South Park clips (in RealMedia format, no less!), with many others in the same category. Windows licensing no doubt cost a small fortune, to achieve a network with almost as much reliability as a 15-year-old Chevy. All of the copies of Office were at least one version out of date, making it a royal PITA for most students to transfer work from home to school (and no e-mail for students, either--sneakernet only). Bess, that wonderful internet proxy, stopped more useful research than it did pr0n. Students were limited to eight (IIRC) pages of hard copy from the printers at any given time--meanwhile, those of us in Honors English were writing papers that often ran to eighteen. Yes, the systems were a waste. The administration was not exactly the most clueful, either, but what do you expect on a public school salary?

The big thing about the funding, though, is that most of it couldn't have been used any better. Most of the funding for our computers came from grants, with stipulations that the money be used to bring technology into the classroom. I never did find out who donated the money (MS, trying to get another group of kids, and another school, hooked on Wind'ohs?), but the stipulations were clear--no tech, no dough. It would have been nice to have money that could be used to hire some decent teachers (we had a few very good ones, but we had a number of not-so-good ones too...names withheld to protect the guilty...). From what I'm told, this is actually a fairly common situation. If the money were to be given to the general fund, it would be a lot more useful. I understand why it is not, having seen how our administration handled itself (yes, i actually attended school board meetings; dad and I made a sport of embarrassing board members)--I know what would likely have happened. So, while I agree that the money could be better used, before complaining, it might be wise to check out the source of the money, and see if there were other options. The administrators might have their hands tied. 'Course, they might also just be dolts. (OR, not XOR.)

Re:Kids who cant focus with a laptop cant without

[prismatic]

unfortunately, that's not always true.

i was a 4.0 student through most of high school. then i got a computer. i stopped doing my homework, and instead surfed the 'net. i'd play with verious things online, or with the computer, every chance i'd get instead of doing my homework.
now, in college, i can still quite well pay attention in class. but give me an internet connection, and i'll zone out and occupy my time quite wastefully

and i know that i, just like you, am not authoritative for the rest of the population. however, i am an example that these could be quite bad. just as you are an example on how they could be quite good.

shalom

Idiot!

[HanzoSan]

Perhaps if you were willing to teach every programming language to every Linux user on the planet earth, Then they all could contribute to projects.

Problem is, not every linux user is a programmer, the ones which are may not be programmers in C++ or C, and THEN the ones who program in C like myself, may not be good enough at it to contribute anything useful.

Please think before you talk, because such an opinion is exactly why only 0.1 percent of the population is using linux and why Linux is known as the geek OS.

Accept people with open arms, teach them, and motivate them to code, make them like coding, dont yell at them, call them leeches and freeloaders, and push them away.

If you want more coders, or more linux users, advocate coding, if a person cannot code advocate donations to make up for it, or ask them to write documentation, theres many ways to contribute without coding.

Re:This is the coolest governor ever

[davidsmind]

well I don't know about the states but here in canada we have much, MUCH higher taxes abot 50% higher then you guys, plus are government is pretty damn incompetent when it comes to essential services, Like schooling and healthcare.

I think that it is a waste of time

[Anonymous Coward]

giving students laptops. At the end of the day you have to consider what kids are going to be using their puter's for, plus wouldn't they have access to this equipment already? be it windows or linux based?

A much better idea would be to give then some sort of ruggerised palm or winCE device (maybe even pocketlinux when it matures). They have the advantages of being,

Cheaper, even the most expensive examples are still more then a third the cost of a laptop.

More portable

Longer battery life

At least as hackable

Are worth while replacement for calculators, textbooks etc that students already need to carry around.

In short much much better then a laptop. Hell why dosen't this guy give Merc's to every student just so they learn how to drive a luxury sedan, it's only taxpayers money.

This is just another brain dead policy proposed to win votes without thinking things though. Like giveing laptops to the homeless, a while ago.

Re:Algebra, Discrete Math, and Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

not everyone is in college to be a computer dork, big guy. i'd rather have a future doctor spending as little time as possible fucking around with computers and as much time as possible learning how to be a doctor.

powerpoint/word/excel are productivity applications which allow people to create things for just about any field of work and distribute them. oh and they are used in offices everywhere. wow that is bad.

Re:WTF?!?

[sql*kitten]

This stuff scares the hell out of me. We are not teaching our kids to think or research. We are teaching them how to let a computer figure it out instead.

Mod the parent back up, please. For an explanation, read Silicon Snake Oil by Clifford Stoll (who also wrote Cuckoo's Egg). Summary: computers are pretty much useless un education between the ages of 6 and 16. The money would be better spent on museums visits and field trips than on multimedia CD Roms, and on hiring great teachers rather than on bandwidth.

Even the best search engine can only answer questions, it cannot teach how to ask new questions. A word processor can't help you with what to right. A spreadsheet will work out numbers for you, it can't tell you if what you are modelling even makes sense.

Parents who let their kids be educated by laptop are as guilty as parents who dump their kids in front of the TV their whole time. It's simply abdicating responsibility.

Re:This is the coolest governor ever

[OuD]

They need skilled and motivated teachers.

I Agree.

Laptops aren't going to solve anything. It's the people involved that need to be focused on:

Teachers
These people are responsible for making children learn something and if it weren't for good teachers I don't know where we would be right now. Teachers deserve WAY more respect (and money) than most of them get these days. With "teacher" I mean real, trained professional teachers, not untrained substitutes. To anyone unaware: teaching is not at all an easy task, it takes skills to make a large group of children grasp any concept, to make them behave in class etc. (I've worked as a substitute for a year, no formal training).

Teaching should be considered a noble profession, because you get to pass on desperately needed knowledge to the next generation.

Parents
I hate to say it, but in my experience, a surprisingly large number of parents don't really seem to care very much about how their kids are doing in school (parents have problems too). It's almost as if school was just some place you drop off your kids in the morning and pick them up after work. The parents are responsible for making the children realize how important school is, not just tell them the obligatory "you won't get a job unless you go to school", but to really make them understand the value of knowledge.

Most will probably agree that being a parent is certainly not a walk in the park.

I'm not from the US but I think these thing apply globally.

Get a Clue. . .

[foo fighter]

Boy, most of the posts I've seen moderated up have been from people out of school for a decade bitching about 486 machines.

Get a clue people, and do some Google searches for e-learning, online education, and the like.

Cisco's CCNA courses are probably the best example I have personal experience with; you should check out their education web page. http://cisco.com/warp/public/10/wwtraining/whats_n ew/

E-learning is a huge market and a great resource. Online programs utilizing Internet technologies (classes are accessed via a browser) are teaching everything from basic maths and sciences to advanced router configuration and particle physics.

E-learing is in many ways a better solution than teacher led classes:
* Truely individualized teaching is possible.
* Classes are more accessible. If you can't read, the text can be read to you. If you can't hear, it's all available as text.
* There are many innovative uses of multimedia in these online classes. Flash is the most widely used technology for multimedia in online education. Most uses of it for this application have been very, very well done.

Online education is absolutely the future of education IMHO. Do some searching for info on it and I think you will be amazed at what is being done with this incredible application of technology.