Report Says Schools Need 100Mbps Per 1,000 Users
alphadogg writes "American schools need mega-broadband networks — and they need them soon, a new report says. Specifically, U.S. educational institutions will need networks that deliver broadband performance of 100Mbps for every 1,000 students and staff members in time for the 2014-15 school year. That's the conclusion reached by the State Educational Technology Directors Association. Why the need for speed? For one thing, more and more schools are using online textbooks and collaboration tools, said Christine Fox, director of educational leadership and research at SETDA. Broadband access must be 'ubiquitous' and 'robust,' she said, adding that schools should think of broadband as a 'necessary utility,' not as an add-on. The report, called 'The Broadband Imperative,' further suggests that schools should upgrade their networks to support speeds of 1Gbps per 1,000 users in five years."
All the better to torrent with, my dear!
sudo make me a sandwich
Title says it all. The more we pay for education, the less we get. Throw out the bottom 2% (students and administrators) and let the teachers teach.
I suppose that local caching of something as relatively static as a textbook is out of the question? My dead-tree edition books were often cached for 5-20 years. Really, how frequently does arithmetic change from year to year? Literature? Science and "Social Studies" I buy as being a little more dynamic, but still within a year?
Schools needs for relevant content from the internet is fairly limited. Moreover, most of the content in question is static. This is the perfect place to deploy a forward proxy cache like squid.. this can reduce the need for expensive fat pipes to the internet.
I believe their thinking is flawed.
The students aren't going to be streaming 100 kbps of data constantly, they are going to be getting data in bursts.
I'm fairly certain that the students would fair well with 25 kbps of data each, and even that feels high.
A typical webpage might be several hundred Kb, but students won't be accessing one of them per second--they will need 400kbps (assumuing the server has that much bandwidth) for one second every minute (or longer!).
I'd like to see their rationale.
100Mbps for textbooks? Text. Um. If your text requires 100Mbps you're doing it wrong. And stop throwing around 1,000 users as if all 1,000 are going to download a gigabyte file all at the same time. Maybe a few dozen out of 1,000 would be using the network at the same time, and if they're actually reading books online and not streaming lolz cat videos in HD there is no way 100Mbps is required.
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
I worked a few years in a big public research University in New England and I was very underwhelmed by the Internet connection. Basically i hardly ever got more than 20Mbps at most under perfect conditions (read during the holidays, so almost no student on campus sucking the bandwidth to watch pr0n), which is basically what i had at home in Europe back then. Four years later when i left it was still as bad. Now in an European research lab i am generally limited by the LAN speed. Having a slow internet can be a hassle when doing research and when you have large datasets to transfer back and forth (hundreds of GB is not uncommon, and i am a small player). I do not know why the European research network GÉANT is so much faster but it would be a good idea if US university had a look at it.
http://www.geant.net/About_GEANT/pages/home.aspx
After digging through two links at NetworkWorld, here's the original report.
At first, I thought 100mbps seemed a bit low, after all it's only 100kbps per user, but pragmatically it's more like 3mbps per classroom. You don't need to be streaming individual content to each kid. As much as I despise the overt brainwashing that is most K-12 education, if those subservient lemmings can come out with a bit more content between the ears, maybe they'll be better equipped to think for themselves and add value to their surroundings, unlike the current sad state of affairs.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
You can buy a 100 Mb/s connection for yourself if you really want to, this is not a huge cost for universities.
From TFA:
Trust me. They won't even consider that possibility. It's only a problem when it affects them.
And that is the core problem.
Do they have any idea what the price is for that kind of Internet connection?
I'd be looking at huge caching servers first.
Are there any good studies on the cost/benefit of this? So far most of what i have seen on computers in the classroom show that they are not a good investment.
Um. If your text requires 100Mbps you're doing it wrong. Um. If your text requires 100Mbps you're doing it wrong.
It's *not* a "text file". It's more likely a locked down PDF or a similarly "heavy" format.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
10 mb for every 100 users
1 mb for every 10 users
OR expand them
1 gb for every 10,000 users
All of you are being short sighted. You are assuming this is for K12 only, but even then.
1. higher speed will allow collaboration between schools and universities.
2. higher speed will allow for classroom simulation using remote computation services.
3. higher speed will allow for more real-time Q/A with experts in the fields that would be located at Universities (extension of #1)
4. Even current projects (such as remote astronomic observation, remote control of instruments) are taxing the schools network.
Speaking as a Network admin at a major university, the amount of bandwidth-per-user really depends on the levels of control the school is allowed (or willing) to apply to the user's Network usage.
For example, in our residences, students are told they have unfiltered access to the Internet, as in, they are allowed to use any software they wish. The only stated restrictions are overall bandwidth related on a per-day basis. Behind the scenes, a we use packet shaping hardware to limit the total amount of per-user bandwidth usable for such things as P2P or VoIP (to prevent super-nodes) but otherwise leave it alone. In this model, 100Mbps per 1000 students is inadequate, but only just barely. We currently have it at approximately 120Mbps per 1000 students.
Under tighter control circumstances, where P2P is disabled and/or other controls, caps, and so on are enacted, you can likely get away with less bandwidth. Other networks we distribute have such tighter controls, and allow us to dial the number down further to around 70Mbps per 1000 students (without any web censorship).
I submitted my homework, but the intertubes are full and until they are cleared you won't receive my homework.
Being a student myself, I must say 100mbps can sometimes not be enough, there should be a "cloud connection" of some sort. (For some sysadmins, 12mb/s is not enough for them)
Our highschool has a very nice budget -- they even get new Linux servers for Novell client every year, and we're probably going to get rid of computers which have Windows 7 on them this year. The problem with our schools network always seemed to be it only took a room full of people copying files to take a network down. This year, our school unblocked YouTube, just for the teachers. We also moved into Google Apps as our main working set. Does anyone see a problem with this?
During the end of the year during end of course exam testing, around half of the 50 or so teachers spent all the day on YouTube because their curriculum was finished. The school network never had a catastrophic failure, but announcements were made to "stay off YouTube," with the IT department (which happens to be a joke; they didn't see they unblocked YouTube for the kids also!) scrambled to make sure that the 50-100 out of the 1,000+ didn't have to retake their test again.
It was hard enough for them to get flash working on these computers.. Then again, people shouldn't be able to stream videos, it would only take 30 people to saturate the connection.
My wife is a kindergarten teacher. In order for her students to access the content she is required to teach them they must first logon to the machines in the computer lab. (I'll avoid a diatribe on the woes of the poor password practices they are forced to teach these minions...) It can often take 1/3 of her classes computer lab time just to log on; granted much of this wasted time is due to the fact that kindergarteners can't remember their passwords but, an equal amount is also caused by the lag caused when the network is flooded with their logon requests (she has less than 20 students).
Once they've accomplished the herculean task of getting the little minions logged onto the lab computers the real fun begins. Most of the content is only available online from the publishers of the text books the school uses. Adding insult to injury the publishers sites are difficult to navigate often requiring the students to manually type in long cryptic URLs that would make torrent users eyes bleed. While much of the content is colorful, animated and has pleasing sound effects try and imagine what accessing this content is like on a network that can't handle a few dozen simultaneous logons.
While I'm a fan of using online resources, the schools (as directed by their boards of education, county governments etc.) seem to have truly put the digital cart before the horse in the mad dash to move toward education online. Also without competent, which of course often means properly paid, tech support (she was once told by a tech the printer wouldn't print because she was using a japanese USB cable) adding bandwidth is pointless.
Do they have any idea what the price is for that kind of Internet connection?
When you get up to buying a gig, not as much /Mbps as the smaller allotments. But you are right, that would be a stretch for most institutions, mainly because their routers/firewalls/content-filtering/etc is not sized for the number of connections/pps that such a pipe would support. They'd be looking at a full re-buy and reprovisioning of their entire gateway path.
Someone had to do it.
Coming soon in Ask Slashdot: "I was assigned to set up a school network (about 100Mbps for 1000 users)..."
I would say caching servers is still doing it wrong. If thousands of students in a single building need access to "online textbooks and collaboration tools", why aren't those services hosted either on the premises or in some kind of colocation facility with a dedicated pipe?
Rather than place what cannot be more than 10gb of textbooks for the whole school on a local server for students of the school, lets run $10,000/mo fiber to every classroom. The insanity of government waste obviously knows no bounds. The audacity of government "IT managers" is nauseating. What? Is everyone stupid now? We can't count? I know that textbooks don't require a 100 or 1000mbit connection! I don't care if you have 10,000 people per 100mbit! Get a fucking clue! Store commonly downloaded things localaly. Shit, you morons, put the fucking textbook on the local machine (DUH!). Since when is this moronic behavior acceptable?
While Rome burns the ubermench in the government fiddle away with these "solutions". Now we'll be told for every dollar that we spend on this internet connection we can expect to see 1 trillion dollars in returns in as few as 5 years! Of course, as with every single estimate the government makes, it will be off by orders of magnitude and end up costing 1 trillion dollars in 2 years. At the end of the day I predict that the schools in question will have <10mbit connection at the price of 1000mbit connection, it will somehow drive up the price of internet service for everyone and increase educational spending greatly. All of which will have a negative impact on grades.
And really, fellow geeks, who thinks that computers on a kids desk during class are anything but a huge distraction from learning? I know if I had a computer at my desk during school, I'd be all about hacking the shit outa that machine and 0% on the lesson. More than anyone, the government is bound by the law of unintended consequences.
What is the point of asking kindergarden students to log in? Just set up computers without a log in, and reimage the hard drives nightly.
Palm trees and 8
I'd be looking at huge caching servers first.
Christine Fox: "What's that?"
Someone mod parent up. Their requirements clearly indicate the need to repeatedly access same content. Which means that you could cut your bandwidth usage by 999 times when that content, accessed by 1,000 students, is cached locally when the first student accesses it. Can you imagine the cost savings of such a responsible solution instead of knee-jerk response resulting in head-on capacity accommodation?
Bow before me, for I am root.
Trust me. They won't even consider that possibility. It's only a problem when it affects them.
That's because using metaphors that don't fit is stupid. Wondering whether there will be enough bandwidth is a real problem and it sucks to have to worry about it when you're trying to get something done. With as much bullshit as we've laden educators and students alike with, they shouldn't have to wait for lag when accessing educational resources.
Do they have any idea what the price is for that kind of Internet connection?
Schools used to get a deal, don't they still?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As a visitor to the US (from Canada eh!) I think you are wasting your money.
Your kids can not spell, can not do basic math, can barely print their own names.
Your high school graduates are functionally illiterate: most can not spell well enough to use an online dictionary.
Your educational system is fundamentally broken, and nobody is addressing it.
If ignorance is bliss, you have the happiest students in the developed world.
Because, The Cloud... It's always good!
Back in my day, we didn't have no fancy schmancy com-poo-tours with interwebs. We had a hammer! And a CHISEL! AND WE LIKED IT!!
SETDA noted that users who stream high-definition video will require download speeds of 4Mbps.
So now our kids need high definition video in the classroom so they can learn English, math, science, and computer programming! There seems to be a dearth of common sense here.
100meg a second for 1000 users. There must be a typo there. In theory my connection is this speed (well 55meg is the fastest I've actually seen). I would hope most users in the western world get between 20 and 50meg. I would expect a school would have multiple connections approaching 1Gig. There has to be a mistake in the story somewhere. Or its 2008?
Today's content providers seem to jump through every possible hoop to defeat caching.
You would think that a video provider would use some indirect URL to first log the access attempt and then point to a static location where the actual video is provided, and that can be cached locally, but no...
In a new deployment, including a caching proxy probably is a waste.
E.g. our existing proxy now has a byte-% hit ratio of 11%, falling all the time.
No - wrong
Next up. "West Virginia supplies 1 Gbps Networking to all schools using $100,000 routers and money from ARRA funds after it discovers that the T1 line routers they bought last year were obsolete!"
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Considering we have two more wars to fight in the coming year, can't even imagine where the money is going to come from.
So all of them online at once would get 0.1 Mbits. Nice job.
In our building every apartment has 100 Mbits, both directions on fibre. 5 dollars per month. I tested it downloading diablo 3, clocked it at 80 Mbits. Try again gimps.
So the State Educational Technology Directors Association says we need more ... State Educational Technology. What a stunning conclusion for this completely neutral and unaffiliated group to come up with!
What schools really need is more education and less "State".
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
reason is:
1) advertising
2) hits counting etc
3) copyright/control issues
Over here, $250/month gets your a dedicated 45Mb/s circuit if you're a school/library/hospital. Most of the cost is in the circuit. Once fiber starts going live state wide over the next 5-10 years, I expect 1Gb being dirt cheap.
I found a PDF about that 1Gb/s/user. It is actually 100Mb/s/user internet side and 1Gb/s/user WAN side. So a highly connected WAN and a decent internet connection.
I found a quote "1,000Mbps service for about $10,000 annually". Sounds like a good price to me. MMmmmm.. whole sales costs.
>>> 'Can I watch my teacher's algebra video when I get home?'
Aren't they exaggerating a bit? I watch hulu and youtube video with only 0.3 Mbit/s. It's called "video compression". So yes the student at home does need broadband to watch his teacher's video, but he doesn't need a monster amount. Comcast's or Verizon's Economy Service (1 to 1.5 Mbit/s) will provide more than the minimum.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Broadband means shared. It's the antonym of baseband which means one signal passed over the medium. When the group uses a technical term incorrectly in the title, you know the rest of the document is complete crap. The marketing departments of too many cable and phone companies have perverted the meaning of that word in the public's mind.
We used approximately 200Kbps per user average throughout a normal day. That was at my company, 100 users, unlimited Internet use, all heavy users. Peaks went up to 500Kbps per user. Once per day, it went up to 2-3Mbps per user for a minute.
I'd guess it's approximately adequate for the normal Internet usage for a school.
I would expect 1,000 normal users to take between 50-75% of the bandwidth. There would be a need for a burstable gigabit for storms. And I would see a Gigabit for 1,000 users in less than 10 years, so better be prepared now.
No matter what, I would fit 10G equipment, and at least a GE line, with 100Mbps provision. That would allow the line to go to 100% 100Mbps, instead of having protocol loss. That would also allow the ISP to simply flip a switch on the BGP to get more, instead of more equipment.
All in all, you can get equipment and installation for 5K$, and less than 5K$ per year bandwidth. Yeah, that's less than $10 per user per year.
>>>With as much bullshit as we've laden educators and students alike with, they shouldn't have to wait for lag when accessing educational resources.
30 years ago my school spent millions-of-dollars on computers (Apple IIs and TRS-80s). It was a gigantic waste of money whereupon we student learned NOTHING. I can't help wondering if THIS new plan will also be a gigantic waste of money. The best way to learn is to exercise the computer *in your head* not the one on the desk.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
I would never let my child use a online version of a book. paper or bust.
There are only two reasons for doing so:
Limiting (completely eliminating) resale after use and
Hooking our kids on technology that they don't really need (I see it today with cellphones).
Being (completely) dependent on technology is never a good thing. But that is what all this technology is teaching our kids. Why learn anything when there are online textbooks and wikipedia for our kids to reference?
Sure a cellphone (an example of technology) is a nice luxury... But I'd rather spend time with my kids.
As for the online books, they can keep them!
That's funny; I need 100 Mbps for ONE user - and would actually like more than that. OK I only have 16 now but I NEED 100.
My local school district has several Verizon FiOS 115 Mb/sec connections for the district of 4,000 K-12 students. It isn't that expensive, but it is essentially residential-grade service.
They pay about $200/connection per month, probably $1K/month - much cheaper than the subsidized business class service the district had before, and much faster.
Our in school wire network is Fast Ethernet to the desktop, Gigabit backbone.
It was non-trivial to get this service at a public school, due to rate regulations.
Ken
why would the school ( assuming public school) not upload to you tube? HD content and let google manage it
Why aren't you people taking a lesson from harddisks?
Was it so long ago, that you don't remember the upper limits on harddisk sizes that were at one time thought to be enough for everyone?
8Gb under DOS? (even less for different versions)
32Gb under win95?
128Gb under 98?
512Gb in ME?
2Tb in XP?
now we're going to be hitting 16Tb, 256Tb, 128Pb barriers?
If people had clued in after the first 2 or 3 failures, think of how much effort could have been saved!
Over time, new uses of the internet in classrooms be found - things like tele-lectures, virtual tours, conferences, and who knows what other kinds of uses we can't even imagine yet.
Someone once told me of an old quote: "I'm not rich enough to buy cheap stuff". Are you rich enough to be digging up the cables to all of your schools every 4 years to increase your bandwidth by just the bare minimum to get by in the coming year? You know you're going to need more bandwidth eventually. Plan for it.
One of the points: try to talk to someone at a school about squid services. Watch the blank stare. The web is simply magic; our technology training of teachers is still in the dumpers.
Yes state your argument about a solution by using absolutes.
Lets ban all hammers, because hammers don't work well trying to put in screws.
Cloud Solutions, fill a gap, and it is good that it fills the gap, are there solutions that isn't fit for the Cloud, yes you bet, but don't blame the technology, blame the poor implementation.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
How much pr0n and torrentz do they need to download?
Do they have any idea what the price is for that kind of Internet connection?
I'm sure they do, it's not that hard to price out. Do you have any idea how much heat and AC cost a school with 1000+ students every year? In a 4 season climate it absolutely dwarfs any ISP costs. And gets more expensive every year, while Internet access gets cheaper.
Sorry.. but this statement is just B.S. Apple IIs and TRaSh-80s were the gateway for hundreds of future computer users and programmers. Students learned TONS on them, though maybe not was initially intended.
I agree with the point made often around here is that there is magical thinking when it comes to educational computer use. Today you need good guides. Computers in the classroom also mean something totally different when most homes have smart phones and PCs. However, you have to be careful... Apple IIs in schools enable a new era... it's not fair to say that they didn't. However, today kids already have already had the exposure to computers that the AppleII gave my generation so you need to take it to the next step and get under the hood.
WHOA...!
think if the ISP's who sponsored this study...
Cheap storage VM.
A dedicated county/city wide server farm would probably be easier to manage and update than a per-school server rack.
For self-paced learning you do.
Thank HTML5 for the death of caching as much as the advertising.
It is all apps now. And in schools they KNOW they are all incompetent boobs so they want nothing that requires skilled labor to maintain. So outsourcing is the word. Everything. Gradebooks, attendance, cafeteria manegement, email of course, Courseware, scheduling and calendaring, yearbooks. If it isn't being delivered from the cloud now it is because they are still fighting over which vendor they want to write a check to. (read as the bidding is still fierce over who will kick back more.. ok, I'm a cynic) That pattern means they need LOTS of bandwidth now and will need an ever growing amount going forward into an HD Video for everything future.
And the vendors love it. It will of course drive lots of sales to schools themselves but when the kids can't do their homework without a constant high bandwidth connection it drives the 'Internet is a 'Right'' meme that leads to even more billions and billions of sweet sweet government money that will only be available to the politically connected.
Democrat delenda est
Depends where you're at. Some places offer gbps for ~$900/mo. I imagine a large, long-term connection like a university could negotiate a pretty good deal.
"I watch hulu and youtube video with only 0.3 Mbit/s" - My bandwidth meter shows about 1MB(8Mb)/s sustained for HD YouTube. You must watch the blurry crap.
He probably lives in an actual forward thinking country with a functioning economy. The AVERAGE broadband data rate in Japan is 61 Mbps; Korea 46 Mbps; Finland 22 Mbps, Sweden 18.2 Mbps; France 17.6 Mbps. The US? 15th place, 4.8 Mbps - well below Portugal and a little better than Hungary and Slovak Republic.
The price in Japan is 27 cents/Mbps; Korea 46 cents/Mbps. The US? Brace yourself. $3.33/Mbps.
These figures are over a year old, but I bet the disparity has not closed.
This requires organization. Good luck...
>>>>>30 years ago my school spent millions-of-dollars..... It was a gigantic waste of money
>>
>>Apple IIs and TRaSh-80s were the gateway for hundreds of future computer users and programmers.
Didn't I say MY school? (checks). Yes..... yes I did. First off in my school the only thing TRS-80s were used for was 10th grade BASIC programming, and it was a joke (10 Print "Hello World". 20 Goto 10). The Apple IIs mostly just sat idle collecting dust unless someone wanted to print a banner to advertise the Spring Dance. It was used like a toy not an educational toy.
Furthermore MY school didn't produce hundreds of users/programmers. The total number was only ~100 per year and 99% of those people graduated to become burger flippers or Walmart clerks. (Which are both decent jobs, but neither needed training in programming.) AS I SAID: Millions of dollars wasted and the students learned practically nothing from those machines.
A few days ago /. published an article about how school internet is being used, not for eduation, but for watching TV or facebook. i.e. Goofing off. Yeah. That's taxpayer dollars well spent (not).
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
I work in K12 technology. I have yet to see how full Internet accessibility enhances the classroom. If administrators would define a subset of sites necessary for education then their bandwidth "requirements" would plummet.
I'd be looking at huge caching servers first.
Unlikely to happen because the copyright holders of the online textbooks, etc. will pitch a fit over the loss of control that would mean.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Yeah, whoosh.
Breakfast served all day!
hmmm.
SETDA is funded, in part, by the likes of Verizon, Comcast, Intel, HP, CDW, Microsoft and TI.. http://www.setda.org/web/guest/sponsors
Moderately efficient textbook formats and basic LRM caching is all the technology you would need to serve textbooks to PCs.
What they are really saying is that they are replacing textbooks with stuff like Khan Academy and Wikipedia (which are fine sites btw), and the kids need the bandwidth to browse the web all day.
I was crazy back when being crazy really meant something. (Charles Manson)
> why would the school not upload to you tube?
You obviously know nothing about the way schools work. There is an entire industry devoted to reinventing every wheel for educational use. Some of it makes some sense, schools have a lot of mandates for privacy and so on, but most of it is simply because. YouTube would be right out, a contract with an edu specific video hosting site would be required, and it would of course require a hefty annual contract with each school system. Each school would have to get a customized portal with the school logo, colors and such or it is a no sale. Access controls are a must. You can't put a picture that includes a student on a school's public facing website without moving a lot of paper for clearances.... meanwhile the local paper's website has the same photo from the game up that day and the kids themselves post everything onto their facebook pages in realtime. And it simply must be this way, the idea that it could be different could never occur. If nothing else, schools simply wouldn't be able to handle the concept of a vendor that doesn't charge.
Democrat delenda est
I love the hulu and the youtube!
Who funded this "report"?
If this is true, and you only move to 100 Gbps by 2020, you'll be 10 years behind Asia.
Not just Japan and South Korea, but Vietnam and China.
Sorry.
Too slow.
Research universities in North America are running 40 times faster than that.
Oh, and the students cell phones will literally suck about 99 percent of that bandwidth capacity up, so even that won't work.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Actually, I tend to agree. I just threw that out there because it was the first thing that popped into my head and made me chuckle. I could see distributing e-reader devices but that really only sounds and looks good on, well, paper (pun unintended) as they're less of a distraction than a full computer but I can't see students taking care of them any better than they take care of text books...which, of course, is very poorly.
Today's content providers seem to jump through every possible hoop to defeat caching.
You would think that a video provider would use some indirect URL to first log the access attempt and then point to a static location where the actual video is provided, and that can be cached locally, but no...
In a new deployment, including a caching proxy probably is a waste.
E.g. our existing proxy now has a byte-% hit ratio of 11%, falling all the time.
You would be correct if your first sentence said "for-profit content providers". Content providers geared towards education and other non-profits should be making their content as cheap as possible to access. Notice I said *should*. Caching web content is absolutely the smart and responsible thing to do when the same content is going to be viewed over and over - especially with content that is static.
There's an AC that responded to this post citing advertising and hit counts as reasons why caching won't work. I would certainly hope that educational content providers are not making their content difficult to cache.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
Very, very few networks require as highspeed data rates as people think they do. You know who has been taking advantage of this fact for years? Carriers. They always have and always will sell you a link that has say an 8 to 1 congested link from the CO to the next heirarchy level up. Why? Because it would cost too much damn money/be impossible to have a network that wasn't oversubscribed anywhere (100Gbps IPoDWDM WAN links of the non-multi 10 or 40Gbps etherbundle variett are just getting turned up in the last year or so). Even say an 80 lamda ROADM can only deliver 8Tbps of optically-switched capacity and it would be absurdly expensive to deploy these in a multi-degree setup everywhere. So, carriers will still sell you and your 7 neighbors the same speed link with an SLA to meet your demand (maybe allow to do a 2x burst over CIR, o joy!), but with the capacity to only deliver an 1/8 of it and most of the time it will work fine because customers nearly always ask for more bandwidth than they need. They'll utilize a capacity planning model and when say there's 40% link utlization on that CO to core link, maybe they'll put in a larger one.
And you completely missed the point he was making.
Quite apart from the cost of this, and any huge likely bandwidth reduction possible through onsite cacheing this is yet another high-tech educational boondoggle. This makes things worse, not better, the kids cant talk properly, read write add-up.
You need to fix the basics first for which you need a chalk-board, chalk and a kane!
Get the lefty progressives out of the education establishment and get teaching back into the hands of teachers in smaller schools.
In education BIG and HI-TECH is almost always BAD.
Give yourselves a head start and close the DoE.
MFG, omb
The point is he is perfectly happy with low quality video streams. If you take a 320p video stream, stretch it to a projector/etc, you're going to have a hard time engaging kids with a blurry mess. If the kids can't make out faces or read text, you might as well have an audio stream.
Do they have any idea what the price is for that kind of Internet connection?
I'd be looking at huge caching servers first.
Kind of kills the idea of textbooks being too expensive.
Maybe I forgot the sarcasm tags, but I didn't say anything about banning clouds or hammers. I was making fun of the general industry buzz about this cool new name for an old technology (remote hosting, with outsourced management - anybody remember software as a service?) that will absolutely solve ALL your problems - be they nails, screws, or making toast!
I can't imagine how we ever go by prior to all of this technology in the classroom? I received my master's using a slide rule and my doctorate with a calculator that cost as much as today's entry level PCs and yet, somehow, we and all of my fellow classmates managed to learn.
I'm all for technology, but throwing technology at a broken education system isn't going to fix it. Teaching kids to do powerpoint isn't very useful if they can't deal with real math and science (let alone read). Distance learning sounds good on paper, but with 1000 students watching passively, who answers their questions? Not the instructor 1000 miles away.
If you want to improve education in the US so that the country can be competitive with other countries, you need to adopt strategies these other countries use, like having teachers who are actually educated in the fields they are teaching instead of having a generic teaching certificate; like having actual homework, longer school days/years and yes, pushing the brightest students into programs where they can excel instead of teaching to the lowest common denominator.
None of those things require high tech solutions. They just require determination by educators, parents and students to turn a failing system around. Somehow, we educated generations of individuals who put men on the moon, built space shuttles and spliced genes and all of that was without high tech classrooms.
Technology is just a tool, one of many. It's not a solution.
How about instead of building and maintaing huge buildings, school busses, etc. why not build a municipal fiber network for your school district to each student as well as the public, and promote home-based learning? Companies already know that telecommuting is serious cost savings for many jobs. I think that with videoconferencing and many other tools, this could transform learning for middle and high school students for many courses.
Because your school is the be all, end all of how any given decision will turn out. If something doesn't work there, it's clearly stupid to do it in any other school district. /sarcasm
They are a business just like everyone else. They are most certainly not going to do anything to make their content cheaper -- produce content cheaper, yes... but reducing the sold price? Absolutely not. They want the same (lame) metrics everyone else wants, so they do everything possible to inflact them -- esp. if the schools are charged based on "usage" (i.e. hit counts, not necessarily the amount of content actually moved.) If the content has been locally cached, accesses will be completely "hidden" from the supplier.
For schools, 1Gbps is about $1500/month in most urban areas and can be done over Cable. Fiber and upwards may cost more. 100Mbps should be available from most ISP's (if they are willing to sell) and most business packets already have 100Mbps options ($250-300/month).
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
What is more important to education then the internet? I mean, since the internet has taken over like a virus, look how well our US schools are doing. Clearly the only way to get the kids on to the right track is to give them MORE internet.
Who gave this idiot who doesn't understand sarcasm a +4 Insightful?
If you take a 320p video stream, stretch it to a projector/etc
The topic was watching teacher videos AT HOME on a student's laptop or PC. The economy line at 1 or 1.5 Mbit/s is more than sufficient to carry a 240p or higher video.
FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
We had to jack our computers into the damn phone lines to dial up (on campus!) into the network. Damn, I'm old.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Let me guess: you force it into 288p mode, and spend a lot of time waiting for the buffers to fill.
An educational film can be a lot more informative if it's in HD with minimal compression errors. You don't want the name of a town o a map to be a meaningless blob or an image of fine anatomical structure to be pixelated as if it was a clip of Japanese porn. Yes, in the age of filmstrips, vcrs, and fuzzy television, the directors were able to convey their messages with some degree of clarity.
But things are different now. Narrative techniques have changed to take advantage of the new media, It's no longer necessary to zoom quite so closely on something that the audience can be expected to see..
In Utah and I suspect several states, nearly all of the links are purchased and leased wholesale by one entity (UEN - Utah Educational Network)
Combined with Federal Erate, State and Local funding the vast majority of schools students has Gigabit, and many of the smaller or rural schools have 100 Mb. I know one very rural school that has a 100 Mb Licensed Microwave link going 50 miles to a fiber connected school.
Sorry.. but this statement is just B.S. Apple IIs and TRaSh-80s were the gateway for hundreds of future computer users and programmers. Students learned TONS on them, though maybe not was initially intended.
Sort of. I was a student, and I learned tons on an early computer. It wasn't the computer in my school that we were allowed to access for one hour a week to play games on though. It was my computer at home. The limited access to computers at school, the limited amount of things you were allowed to do with them, and the limited knowledge of anyone in the school about them meant they taught me absolutely nothing.
YMMV.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
The report writers? Maybe, maybe not. But the original report's sponsors, Verizon and Comcast, certainly do.
Yes, but you have a lesson plan, why are you streaming it?
Should be loaded locally before hand, not JIT.
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
Meh. I don't agree that technology in the schools has done nothing more than waste bucks and actually dumb down kids. For the past 10 years I kept worrying that this new generation born with devices around them a whole lifetime would spell fierce competition for my sys admin job. I'm still waiting for them.... I believe in many cases it's sucked the physical social skills and creativity right out of the youngsters. I think it's time for them to start figuring out how to think in OFFLINE mode again.
In a larger metro area? Initial infrastructure costs would probably be in the tens of thousands, but network infrastructure isn't really an optional expense for larger educational institutions these days. Going with the 1Gbps per 1,000 users, about $10k USD for two devices to handle routing for a handful of 1Gbps uplinks with the necessary failover, roughly $1,000 per 1Gbps commitment, and about another $1k yearly for support contracts. At an institution with 10,000 students, that's $120k/year for the transport, plus $1k/year for support. Or about $6 per student per semester. Not exactly prohibitively expensive considering the "technology fees" charged these days, much less so considering the general cost of tuition.
At those prices, fuck caching.
Ideally that is only part of the step. What you can do is interconnect all schools globally (upon mutually acceptable terms) allowing for more specialisation within particular schools but other schools having access to that specialisation. Create a school specific internet, one that is safe for children to connect to from home not only for homework but also for safe browsing, safe social network, and safe entertainment.
Lots of bandwidth enables the sharing of resources, reduces the replication of administration and service costs, enables are greater spread of global understanding between the young in a supervised educational environment and enables the create of a children safe network 24/7. Connect universities to primary and secondary schools and student teachers can gain supervised access to students in order to evaluate the student teachers and provide students falling behind with free tutor services.
Prospective employers can add to the school network providing free training packages, that of course promote working for the company but also ensure extra education courses target the employers needs. With lots of bandwidth and every student with a computer you start to create a lot more flexibility within the system and can more effectively tailor the education experience to try to being the best out of what is available from each student, no miracles of course.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
When I was doing research on how to improve classrooms, I noticed that most teachers don't know how to properly incorporate technology in a classroom so it becomes a worst environment to study at. Rather, there would be very few that would be qualified to learn how to properly incorporate any of this. So I think until they solve this little problem, they should worry less about providing gigabit internet to their students and to focus on becoming better teachers. Various countries, many at that don't even use internet or fast internet in their schools and they outrank the US. Internet speed is not the problem here.
Price for 100Mb connection?
Where I live, about 60 euros per month..
Price for 1Gb? Depends on what you want your uplink to be, but with a decent Docsis3 implementation, this is quite easy to get, and if it costs 600 euros per month, I'm sure that's not too terrible for 1000 students.
Splut.
Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
1.5 Mbit/s is more than sufficient to carry a 240p
Let me know when you mention 720p
Here in Alberta the government started a project about 10 years ago to create a world class fiber network that spans the entire province, including rural areas. This network would be designed to allow public institutions such as schools, universities and hospitals access to broadband that would not otherwise be afforded to them. While the network is built and maintained by private companies, the government imposes service and pricing contracts and regulates and provides corresponding subsidies for public institutions, however private users (such as smaller ISPs to provide public Internet access) can also buy service.
What this foresight has meant for us in a K-12 school division in rural Alberta is we can provide even our small schools (less than 500 users) with over 100Mbps of bandwidth and we have direct access to peering exchanges for major networks such as Akamai et al.
I guess my only point is that I'm thankful someone had the vision and foresight to actually put this in place back when "broadband" was still a new concept to many urban Albertans.
You wrote, "The topic was about watching videos at home? Silly me, and here I thought the topic was about schools." My response: It helps if you follow the thread you are replying to, so you don't get lost:
ARTICLE: "Can I watch my teacher's algebra video when I get HOME?" (emphasis added)
CPU6502: "I watch hulu and youtube video with only 0.3 Mbit/s..... The student at home doesn't need a monster amount. Comcast's or Verizon's Economy Service (1 to 1.5 Mbit/s) will provide more than the minimum."
BENGIE: "If you take a 320p video stream, stretch it to a projector/etc....."
ME: "The topic was watching teacher videos AT HOME on a student's laptop or PC." Not on a projector.
FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
If you look at hulu or youtube's stream rate, 240p video is only 248 kbit/s. Sometimes a little higher at 320k with a quality just slightly below DVD.
Point is that 1-1.5 Mbit/s via the $20 economy broadband is more than enough to watch the teacher's videolecture from the kid's bedroom, so you don't need a huge gigabit line.
FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
If this kind of bandwidth is necessary for the operation of the institution, then it doesn't really matter what the hardware upgrade costs are, because they're the costs of doing business. You can't operate without paying them. That being said, if you need 1Gbps/1,000 users by 2015, and it's purely for academical purposes, then you're likely dealing with a bunch of streaming video and audio, or large applications. That kind of traffic doesn't need content filtering, and any router you'd sensibly put in front of servers hosting that kind of content will be able to handle the traffic at trivial cost. Firewalling also shouldn't be a large cost-issue in an environment with relatively few, long-lived flows, even at those speeds.
>>>Sorry.. but this statement is just B.S. Apple IIs and TRaSh-80s were the gateway for hundreds of future computer users and programmers.
Yes.
At HOME.
I too learned programming via my Atari 800 and Commodore 64, but it was at home. Not in the schools where the teachers didn't know what to do with them, and the 8 bit computers just collected dust. A gigantic waste of money.
Even now you won't find too many computers in college classrooms. The professors understand that learning happens *in the brain* through exercising it. Anything that slows/interferes with that process is a hindrance, not a help.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Damn. Must be nice to have all that tar sands oil money to throw at your infrastructure.
Bow before me, for I am root.
My response: It helps if you follow the thread you are replying to, so you don't get lost:
You should try following your own advice sometime.
Price is what the market will bear.
My son lived in Riga Latvia, and since the war and the Exodos of the Russians from latvia, metal was so expensive, that citizens stole copper from wiring, elevators, etc. The local communication companies found it cheaper to install fibre to all residences. Yes, his apartment had 8 megabit access. He could download a movie in three to four minutes. I downloaded a 3.5gbyte Linux distribution at the limiting speed of the host. (about 5-6 minutes). If I recall, the state owned the communications company.
So, back to the school needs. Yes, it is possible, the constraint is that it is a question of monetizing bandwidth. It may mean that all residents go from dsl to fibre, except in very far off regions of the state.
If the desire is there, it can be done, and the bank will not be broken.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
As an anonymous coward who has worked in the ICT area of the dept of Educational in Australia, I can say that high speed network access for students has many flow on benefits.
When I was there we had some of the fastest links to the net in the states. But due to the decentralised nature of the environment they weren't vastly utilized.
Like the parent said, either caching dense data centrally within the org or better still on a cloud solution (eg amazon) where students can access videos etc remotely through a common portal should be considered.
Having said that, we were extremely geographically spread out, so ymmv.
First upgrade all teachers minds to 100mbps then I will support your cause. Teachers arent even smart enough to use that much bandwidth.
If you and I can both reasonably share a 1MB connection (that is still broadband remember, and ISP make everyone on your road share the same connection) then why does an institute of 5000 infrequent users need a dedicated 500mbps connection. Thats Huge!
Remember that the connection will HAVE to be dedicated, that gives each of their Mb aroud 4-10 times the clout of one of our distributed connection, they won't have a router at the end of the road joining them up with the rank and file, they will have a direct connection to the Tier 2 (international internet lines basically).
And each installation will cost us tens of thousands for the work, the hundreds per month for the line rental... per building.
This kind of connection gives a small 1000 kid school a service that belongs to a small business server connection.
Its a school. HD is a luxury I would rather not have a school pay well over 5 times the current connection costs for.
Blurry or not, its still just algebra. If its such a bit deal put it on mediafire, link it in the schools moodle network and have the children download it the watch it.
The idea that everyone in the school would be using the internet is more than a burst format (webpages) was stupid anyway.