Slashdot Mirror
Teachers Resist High-tech Push In Idaho Schools
First time accepted submitter Jack W writes "This morning's NY Times highlights the issue of learning in our public schools and the proper role of technology. The Idaho governor and his state school superintendent are advocating a legislative bill for a massive infusion of computers and on-line technology in schools and is meeting resistance from state teachers, particularly the part of the bill that requires high school students to take online courses for two of their 47 graduation credits. Superintendent Luna is quoted as saying, the computer 'becomes the textbook for every class, the research device, the advanced math calculator, the word processor and the portal to a world of information.' The article notes that the governor had received campaign contributions from technology companies and that Apple and Intel had played a part in drafting the bill."
The pointless application of technology just for the simple sake of technology seems a waste.
Now, a subject course where students have to buy and learn to program a $25 computer, no more expensive than a typical textbook, that would be a worthwhile application of technology in schools.
*sighs*
No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
Some students and some classes could and should be taught online. However, these decisions need to be made by school districts, parents, and students. The governor shouldn't be placing a huge unfunded mandate on local schools just because Apple cut him a check.
If you think a little bit...... maybe the teachers are right about things?
Some common idea + "on the internet" doens't make a good patent.
Some same teaching + "on technology" doesn't make for good education.
All high school students know what a computer is and are hardly in awe of the 'portal to the world of information' any more than they are in awe of a telephone.
Doing something useful with it is the key---or spending the same money on something else which may give more value.
Teachers may, with good reason, believe that they will now be forced to use some odd creaky technology (edu-software is like that) without any decent level of tech support after the first year, and they'll waste all sorts of time on powerpoint nonsense instead of getting on with it.
The quality of education is not a result of the amount spent on technology. It is almost pointless to fight it, though, because these decisions are made for political reasons in a vacuum of real debate, metrics, or general considerations about what gets the best results. On some level the teachers have a right to resist this, as it's a further encroachment on their autonomy and freedom to teach as they prefer. On the other hand, if teacher unions did not fight every attempt to rationally measure student success, they might get a seat at the table discussing how to handle certain kinds of problems.
Wrong. Any teacher that fails to teach must be fired. I'm fairly sure some teachers can teach very well without computers/calculators/projectors/...
Don't mistake the tools for the end result.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
1. Lost/Stolen devices. Who pays for replacements? Why?
2. Damaged systems that need replacement. Who pays? Why?
3. Virus infections and such. What's the turn-around time on support for those? Will the school have extras to loan while they "clean" the students' machines?
4. Upgrade policy. Will the freshman class have better equipment than the senior class?
And so forth.
Throwing tech at a non-tech problem is stupid. And tech gets old really fast. And tech needs expensive support.
The first major push for computers in schools had more than just some computers. In addition to putting the Apple IIs (usually) into school computer labs, there were also initiatives like MECC to produce useful software for them, research from educators like Seymour Papert on how to use them to teach technical skills, etc.
By the late 80s this had mostly withered away, so that when my own high school in the 1990s replaced its Apple IIs with Macintosh LCs, the main thing they were used for besides word processing was... running the old Apple II software on the IIe attachment card.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
there has been no established correlation between technology in schools and improved academic performance.
I think anyone who wastes money on shoving technology into schools should be fired. Yet I have a vested interest in it being otherwise (I make ebook readers and tablet computers).
there are strong correlations between economic affluence of the community (i.e. rich folks) and performance in schools. I'm not sure how that can be used to improve our schools, but better than some imaginary assumed linked between technology and success.
The other big waste is text books, why would low-level courses need new text books every 3-5 years. I would rather we spent the money on creating open licensed text books than on a nearly disposable laptop or tablet that becomes worn out or obsolete in 2 years. (I said "the money" as if schools have any just laying around. HA!)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Now, please rail on now about how worthless Chromebooks are and kids can't possibly get an decent education with just the Internet.
Well, ok. With "just the Internet", how does a child learn to identify and prioritize information he receives from the Internet?
You have to have some place to start. Throwing a kid onto the internet and saying "learn it for yourself" isn't a productive way to teach kids anything. How do you counteract the damage if the first website they come across teaches them that 2+2=6 or something equally wrong? How do they realize there is a foundation for all of the advanced topics they will come across, and better yet, which foundations are relevant?
I'm a dues-paying, card-carrying member of a teachers' union (at a community college), but I can't help feeling that this is the kind of thing that teachers' unions in the US have brought upon themselves.
What should happen is that K-12 teachers should be professionals, and they should be treated just like other professionals, such as doctors and engineers. When is the last time you heard an engineer claiming that although his bridge fell down, he shouldn't be held accountable? When's the last time you heard a premed saying that it was unreasonable to expect him to do well on the MCAT, because African-Americans do worse on it, on the average, than whites and Asians, thereby proving that the test is racist? Or a doctor whining that it was unreasonable to expect him to use MRI scanners, because he hasn't had the training?
What left the K-12 teaching profession vulnerable to political interference was its history of failing to hold itself to high professional standards. That opened the door to NCLB and a general tendency of politicians to try to tinker with things that ought to lie within teachers' own sphere of professional competence and discretion.
What the politicians in Idaho are doing is stupid, but that kind of incompetent tinkering is the natural result of K-12 teachers' unwillingness to act like professionals.
Find free books.
In Colorado, on-line schools have been shown to be less effective than face time with the teacher -- dramatically so.
There's no reason to think that doesn't scale, and if it scales that means that those on-line courses would be ineffective.
The plan requires high school students to take online courses for two of their 47 graduation credits.
This sounds like a cost-cutting measure. Online classes are for times when the alternative is not having the class. They're "better than nothing", not "better".
If a school wanted to offer students a course in programming but didn't have anyone capable, then it might make sense to arrange for them to take an online course offered by a third party (preferably a tech school or college in the same area). It doesn't sound like this is anything close to what they're doing.
"We need more computers in the classroom!"
OK, what are you going to do with them?
The school district I grew up in (in yuppieville) has decided that every student should have a tablet computer.
My response was, why?
There is virtually nothing a tablet computer is going to do that can't be done with some combination of pen, paper, and an overhead. And in most cases, the pen/paper/overhead is going to be more effective.
I'm actually surprised the teachers are opposed - in my old district it's the teachers pushing the technology buy. Then again, most of the teachers there kinda stink.
paintball
The best math teachers I had encouraged calculators because they were focusing on the theory. And by golly the kids learned far more and the teacher focused on teaching rather than rote mechanical operations to drill things in by memorization.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
Superintendent Luna is quoted as saying, the computer 'becomes the textbook for every class, the research device, the advanced math calculator, the word processor and the portal to a world of information.'
Here's the only question that matters: What research-based evidence supports this view that a computer is a better and more effective medium for accessing this information than the present status quo of books, the library, the handheld calculator, and a desktop computer?
Because, to put it in terms of business, if there isn't a decent Return-On-Investment with buying all this tech, than no citizen or politician should put money up to invest.
We recently evaluated a new math curriculum/program for our school. When the time came to buy textbooks, almost all of our teachers told us they preferred the online material. The reasons they cited:
Students lose textbooks, or do not want to carry them home. Online resources are more easily accessed.
Parents want to check-in on their student's progress more frequently than a few times per year. Online access allows this.
Teachers like "ready made" interactive materials they can display on smartboards/projectors without having to resort to paper and overheads. It makes class preparation quicker, and the lessons more engaging.
We did eventually buy a few textbooks for students that prefer them, or lack technology resources at home, but the days of one book per student are going away fast.
There is one thing that we know about education. The higher value the student places upon and takes responsibility for learning, the better the student does. If a student wants to learn, they can learn despite bad teachers, or bad online courses. The better the tools and more opportunity a student like this has. The more they will learn.
Sometimes a student lights this flame inside all by themselves.
Sometimes a teacher lights this flame for them.
More often than not though. It is parental involvement at home that makes a difference. Everything from reading to a child, installing the love of learning, to just making sure learn good study habits and get their homework done.
Parents who do not do this at home and rely on teachers to do it because "it is there job" are the real problem. Even the best teacher can not be guaranteed to be able to do this with the number of students and time they have in class. By definition, not all teachers can be exceptional. Many will fail at this because they don't have what it takes to inspire. It is still the parents job at home to do this.
vi +
It remains more or less the same as with books, lab equipment and classroom resources. Why does everyone expect something new when there's no real management and processing difference in what type of resource has been compared.
Yeah, like that time my history book got a virus while I was looking at pictures of naked statues... before anyone realized what was happening, the whole damn library had been infected, and they had to white-out all the pages and re-print everything... What a mess!
P.S. On the plus side, all the students got a week of free vacation, so it's not all bad.