Slashdot Mirror


Ann Arbor Schools Want $45M For Tech, Partly For Computers To Run Google Docs

An anonymous reader writes "The Ann Arbor Public Schools defended their request for a $45 million bond for new computers by claiming that Apple eMacs aren't good enough for their Advanced Journalism class. A teacher told reporters that new PCs are needed to run WordPress, Google Docs, and Adobe InDesign CS6. WordPress and Google Docs are server-based applications that can be accessed with nearly any web browser. InDesign CS6 has not been released yet and its system requirements are unknown. As a web developer, I am impressed by the online newspaper published by the journalism class, but I question the need for new hardware. The district previously claimed that the old computers couldn't run its standardized testing software, although they far surpass the vendor's specifications. Does modern education really require cutting-edge computers, or are schools screaming 'think of the children' to win over tech-illiterate voters?" Whatever the answer to that question, exaggerated system requirements aren't the only driving force; the $45 million bond sought would not be dedicated only to replacing journalism program computers, note; it would also be used to fund other infrastructure upgrades, including some lower-tech updates, like new sound amplifiers in the district's classrooms. Ann Arbor schools' web site says that the district has (as of 2010, at least) 16,440 students. What are tech outlays like in the public schools where you live?

18 of 248 comments (clear)

  1. Seems a little inflated... by gr3yh47 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    $2700 and change per student seems a little high for a tech budget...

    1. Re:Seems a little inflated... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When you're spending other people's money, and taking a cut for yourself ("adminstration"), the object is to waste more, not less.

    2. Re:Seems a little inflated... by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Funny

      IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN!

    3. Re:Seems a little inflated... by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      " They have strong incentives to be wasteful."
      STFU. I word with civil servants, and they are far, FAR more responsible with money then people in the private sector.

      "Just about anyone here could do better with less even with Apple kit."
      No. Just about everyone here thinks that, but have never done a wide scale implementation of a reliable service and equipment.
      The parent to this thread makes the mistake of thinking its only machines. Infrastructure costs a lot of money.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Seems a little inflated... by datavirtue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You must have stepped through the stargate because in my world public servants don't give a rat's ass about saving money unless we are talking about THEIR budget. Many times the wasteful spending happens outside the realm of a departmental budget. Special projects are always justified and then the money is spent.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    5. Re:Seems a little inflated... by donny77 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm sorry, donated equipment only reduces acquisition cost. What about SUPPORT costs? It is much cheaper to support 1000 identical machines as you can use imaging, stock minimal replacement parts and so forth. Having 1000 machines with 50 different configs is going to increase cost and up-time. Typically these institutions are running somewhere around 1 technician per 500-700 machines while the "private" sector is supposedly around 1 technician per 150-250 machines. But, it's not YOUR problem right? Make them use donated stuff!

    6. Re:Seems a little inflated... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I work in Education. As unfortunate as that example is, things like this are not that uncommon. I get reminded at least weekly, sometimes daily, how STUPID (yes, I'll use that word) our educators really are, especially when it comes to Technology. However they have a pieces of paper that tells them they are "smart and smarter than everyone else" via their degree and teaching credential.

      And 45 Million for technology is not that steep for a school district. Infrastructure (LAN, WAN, Servers, Cabling etc). When people complain about 45 million being too expensive, they haven't done larger projects like upgrading infrastructure. Infrastructure costs money, and needs to be replaced about every ten years for networking equipment. While I'm sure there is what some people call "waste" in the 45 million, it probably isn't quite as bad as many think.

      And if they are doing a 45 Million dollar bond, I'd make damn sure it went primarily for infrastructure and not computers or peripheral equipment. In a school system that size, 45 Million should just about cover top down infrastructure coverage.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    7. Re:Seems a little inflated... by JBMcB · · Score: 5, Interesting

      " They have strong incentives to be wasteful."
      STFU. I word with civil servants, and they are far, FAR more responsible with money then people in the private sector.

      LOL really? Travel about 50 miles due east to the wonderful world of the Detroit Public school system. Just Google them to see how insanely wasteful that district is. They built a brand new campus for one of it's better high schools, and replaced *everything* The old building was left full of lab equipment and textbooks - to rot. Some of it was new. They had an entire warehouse full of brand new office supplies and textbooks that was left to rot as well. When an EFM was brought in a couple of years ago, he found rampant fraud and mismanagement throughout the entire system - to the point where the district had no idea how much it owed to suppliers.

      Now travel forty miles north to Pontiac, MI. A recent review of their school system's finances revealed $135,000,000 in unaccounted transactions over a four year span in the 2000s. That's $135 million in money spent - and they have *no idea* where it went. The average number of irregularities in an audit of that size is maybe a couple dozen. There were over 28,000. There were $200,000 in payroll irregularities, which should *never* happen. The city had the report completed two years ago, and they kept it under wraps and did nothing about it in that time span.

      I could go on and on. The pressure to limit waste in private enterprise is clear - less waste equals more profit. There is no profit motive in the public sector. The reverse is true - the more you spend the more budget you get. If you are a politician you can legally buy votes by cranking up pension benefits that you won't have to worry about funding. It's a broken system.

      --
      My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    8. Re:Seems a little inflated... by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's nice, but I actual work with government finance people, and various other public servants. Every day.
      Which turned out to be a nice surprise when I first started doing government audits, and then later got a government job.

      Of course may where you are the public servants happen to fall into every unproven yet stereotypical and exaggerated characture ever conceived.

      I can't speak for your experience, only for my hundreds of audits in both sectors, and my decades of work experience.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Seems a little inflated... by obsess5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I worked in software development. I've met teachers who are smart in their fields and in technology. I've never met a teacher who thought they were smarter than everyone else because of their teaching degree. I've met a lot of software folks who weren't too smart or whose knowledge was a mile deep and an inch wide. Teaching is no different than any other profession - you have the same distribution of talent.

    10. Re:Seems a little inflated... by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's what I don't get. You can fault them for buying eMacs then, but they're old unsupported machines today. The article doesn't actually mention 2004, but if we assume they bought them at the start of 2004, you're talking about an 800MHz G4 processor with 128MB of RAM and a 1280x960 CRT.

      Any software that requires an Intel mac (as I'm sure the more recent versions of Adobe's CS products like InDesign would) just won't run, and these things can't run a modern web browser (so Google Docs probably won't work right) since 128MB of RAM just isn't enough for modern web use (remember the OS needs a chunk of that).

      So, yeah, I'd actually say they should have replaced these things long ago. They're close to useless today.

  2. eMacs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apple stopped production on the eMac line back in 2006. Assuming they got the last one for sale, that means a 6 year lifespan. Sounds like they're due for a replacement.

    1. Re:eMacs? by gman003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Due for replacement? That's putting it mildly. Especially since:
      a) They're way unsupported, even by Open Source. First off, they're PowerPC chips - the highest version of Mac OS you can put on them is 10.5, which quite a lot of programs don't support - even some open-source ones. And I've tried installing Linux on an eMac - I never actually got it working. So their best option may be upgrading.
      b) The eMac was the "cheap, low-power" Apple computer. It used cheaper, lower-end parts, often already outdated (it used G4 chips until the end, while iMacs made the jump to G5 two years earlier). I can totally believe that they're unable to run Illustrator. Even current versions of Firefox might be a bit of a stretch, since I doubt the PPC builds are as heavily optimized as the x86 ones. Keep in mind, this is a machine with 256MB of RAM and, at best, a 1.4gHz, single-core processor, about on par with a Pentium II. Most of the students probably have more processing power in their phones.
      c) It's a freaking CRT screen. A 1280x960 CRT screen. I would absolutely hate trying to do graphics work on one of them.

  3. Sigh, slashdot is rather prone to hyperbole by FhnuZoag · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As TFA says, "more than half of the $45.8 million, about $25 million, would be spent to replace the district’s computers — both laptops and desktops.". So that comes down to 1520/student. More importantly, this is for a program of improvements over the next *ten years*, not an immediate replacement job - as the article argues that the >3 years old computers currently in use are obsolete, I assume the money might fund more than one cycle of improvements. At one cycle per 3 years, we're talking ~500 dollars per student, not accounting for inflation, which seems pretty sensible. Anyway this all seems like a storm in a teacup.

    1. Re:Sigh, slashdot is rather prone to hyperbole by TheSeventh · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm going to guess that some of that money per computer is going to be used for software licenses . . . I don't know. Even with an education discount, there's more than just the cost of the hardware.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean that they're not out to get you.
  4. eMacs by jackherer · · Score: 5, Informative
    eMacs are PowerPC based and therefore won't run recent versions of Mac OS and also won't run recent versions of Safari or Firefox. I wouldn't be surprised if this means they don't support Google Docs etc fully or even at all.

    They really are pretty much useless these days, I have just retired an office full of them that have been soldiering on for years but the number of websites that were simply not available to them became too great.

  5. I live in Ann Arbor... by macwhizkid · · Score: 5, Informative

    I grew up and now work in Ann Arbor. Posting as anonymous, for obvious reasons. First, some background. Ann Arbor Public Schools has become a reference model for how not to run a school district. The district routinely has nationwide searches at great expense to find a new superintendent, simply because (1) the average tenure of a superintendent in Michigan is less than two years and (2) none of them are stupid enough to come to a district as dysfunctional as Ann Arbor.

    The current superintendent came from a rural district in Pennsylvania, and was old enough to actually retire from her old district to take the job here. But hell, at least she was available.

    The tech crisis is at least real. Those really are eMacs being used in the classrooms... yes, the eMac that Apple stopped making in 2005. The district has a budget deficit of $14 million, due to a perfect storm of decreasing state funding (Michigan is not exactly a bastion of tax revenue), decreasing local property values, and fewer students (the #1 local tax payer and #2 employer, Pfizer, pulled out in 2007).

    The odd thing is, the district is, by many measures, not bad. But that's due primarily to high student achievement due to the relatively educated population (over 70% of Ann Arbor residents have a 4-year degree or more). Meanwhile, we have high schools that are too big, middle schools that are a disaster, and elementary schools that are actually OK (but not great). On a side note, did I mention that my father teaches for AAPS, and I went to private school? Yeah...

  6. Re:school systems are a big cash cow by Mabhatter · · Score: 4, Informative

    The thing about Michigan is that about half the local school taxes go to the state and get redistributed. The law that allows that also prevents localities from passing separate taxes to compensate, and it limited the rate properties could appreciate That was a good heal fro districts like Klalaska that weren't paying their fair share, but for districts like Ann Arbor that were full of educators and professionals willing to pay taxes for good public schools it slashed their budgets.

    The way around the rule is to put any link of hardware or property improvements in a separate tax do more of your allocation can pay for teachers.