Slashdot Mirror


FBI Seizes Los Angeles Schools' iPad Documents

An anonymous reader writes: The Los Angeles Unified School District had a bold (and expensive) plan to outfit its students with top-of-the-line technology: its 650,000 students will be given Apple iPads to use for school work. The cost? $1 billion. Unfortunately for them, the project has been plagued with problems. Now, the FBI has seized 20 boxes of documents regarding the district's procurement practices and confirmed an investigation. "Hundreds of students initially given the iPads last school year found ways to bypass security installations, downloading games and freely surfing the Web. Teachers complained they were not properly trained to instruct students with the new technology. And questions were raised after emails were disclosed showing that then-Superintendent John Deasy had been in communication with vendors Apple and Pearson before the contracts were put to bid."

142 of 229 comments (clear)

  1. When we give money to the schools ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Schools often tell us that they are lack of fund to give our children top flight education, so we give money and more money and some more money to the schools hoping that they will have enough $$$ to properly educating the children

    But when schools get the money, where do they spend it on?

    On iPADs !

    Instead of spending more money paying high salaries to much better quality teachers, teachers who are more resourceful, more dedicated teachers, and so on, the schools waste money on iPADs !

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If they hired better teachers, what would the teachers' unions do with the worthless teachers?
      In this case I'd like to know what the FBI is investigating. Graft? Or are they investigating the students' "cybercrime" of unlocking the iPads?

    2. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The schools do not need more money, they need parents to be parents, and teachers to teach (instead of being cattle drivers and nursery attendants)

      Kids need to be instructed in the basics first, then add other things on. Read, write, respect & social values (by community not state and absolutely not federal), maths. Then move on to rhetoric, arts, sciences, trades, music etc.

    3. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe they are looking into how badly the students were ripped off by forcing ipads on them.

    4. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How else do you expect the burgeoning masses of youth to learn how to consume?

    5. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      If they hired better teachers, what would the teachers' unions do with the worthless teachers? In this case I'd like to know what the FBI is investigating. Graft? Or are they investigating the students' "cybercrime" of unlocking the iPads?

      The FBI Hasn't been forthcoming with that detail yet. Assumptions abound.

    6. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by kelemvor4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe they are looking into how badly the students were ripped off by forcing ipads on them.

      No joke, there's only the vast majority of alternative products that provide the same benefits at a lower cost. I guess they may lack the fruity logo on the back...

    7. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by wiredlogic · · Score: 2

      Around here the schools compete to have the most badass video sign out front. Teachers get laid off due the diversion of funds.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    8. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Fire them.

    9. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      Social values by community? Are you *trying* to push us back into the era of segregation?

      Sorry, that was a silly question, of course you are, because you're an idiot troll. Try harder next time.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    10. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by cheater512 · · Score: 2

      It's obvious isn't it?

      The FBI want free iPads too so they are getting the emails so they can figure out how the superintendent convinced everyone it was a good idea, and also to figure what bulk discount they got so they can negotiate with Apple better.

    11. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1

      But saying the school has "iPads" sounds better than saying it has "tablets" on advertisements.

      The LAUSD is a series of public schools. They don't have to advertise. If you live in their geographic footprint and you have kids, you are required by law to send your kids there unless you pay for both the LAUSD AND a private school.

    12. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was wondering how long it would take for somebody to start in with anti union bullshit which has zero relevance to the issue at hand. Not long it seems...

    13. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Hungus · · Score: 1

      Social values by community? Are you *trying* to push us back into the era of segregation?

      Sorry, that was a silly question, of course you are, because you're an idiot troll. Try harder next time.

      What has segregation got to do with social values by community?

      Social values by community is like obscenity, the values are set by the people of that community.
      So: Do you take off your hat when you enter a building? Social value by community.
      Do you hold the door open for a female? SVxC.
      Do you use sir when addressing an older individual? SVxC.

      Racists see racism in everything. Those of us who are not, do not.

      --
      Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    14. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      On top of that, within a week of issuance, they were hacked by the kids to break the security "locks" the district had installed.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    15. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Yes, they did.

      Local CBS 2 story

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    16. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's actually not that hard to figure out where the costs of educating our students go (buildings, transportation, fuel, energy, maintenance, books, supplies, etc.), but you have to actually be willing to *look* instead of just blowing a fuse about some imagined problem.

      Yes, there are bad teachers. Yes that sucks. But teachers, in general, don't get paid what they would if they were in *any* related industry. As a result, most of the people you get who teach do so because they *want* to be teachers.

      Your own math shows the problem with teachers' wages. You have (well paid) teachers being paid $2333.33 per student per *year*. That's just $1.08 per student per hour, assuming (falsely) that teachers don't actually work outside of school hours. You can't get a *babysitter* for $1.08/hour (it's actually illegal to pay them that little), much less someone who is expected to *teach* the kids something useful. When you account for the time teachers *actually* spend working, it's closer to $0.65 per student per hour.

      That also doesn't account for what many teachers (especially those in poorer districts) actually have to pay in order to actually do their jobs. I grew up in a thoroughly middle-class district, and at least *two* teachers I knew of spent roughly a quarter of their take-home pay on supplies students needed that the school didn't provide, and they couldn't afford. As I understand it, that's not atypical for teachers in poor districts, so you're now looking (using your own numbers) at a teacher who is earning $0.50 per student per hour of actual work.

      The best part about your bitchy, self-entitled rant about how coddled teachers are? You're not even responsible for a whole $0.01 per student per hour. You just have a bug up your ass about how expensive it is, even though you don't realize how *cheap* it actually is.

      Teachers want the technology to be able to prepare their students for a world in which technology is the *life blood* of the economy and the labor force. You want students who can enter college, trade schools, or even the work force who are *already* familiar with computers and technology, because if they're not they'll be behind the curve, and very likely stay that way.

    17. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If they hired better teachers, what would the teachers' unions do with the worthless teachers?

      Are you implying that the union supported the iPad program since it would prevent the hiring of more qualified teachers?

      The union has been completely against the program from the start.

    18. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Not really new. Apple has long been in the business of convincing schools to buy equipment they don't need, and it started with the Apple ][. Schools are told that they need to get kids ready for the new computer age, they get a bunch of computers, but then they have no training, no one knows what to do with them, and they end up getting dusty either in a warehouse or a seldom visited computer corner of a library or classroom.

    19. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by meerling · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You aren't really paying for other peoples kids to get an education, you're paying back for yours.
      Besides, would you rather have other peoples kids in school learning enough so they might qualify for a job, or running around the neighborhood finding "alternate means of obtaining funds"?

    20. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      teachers, in general, don't get paid what they would if they were in *any* related industry. As a result, most of the people you get who teach do so because they *want* to be teachers.

      That's one way of looking at it. The other way of looking at it, is that by not paying teachers very much, the teachers you get are the ones that couldn't do any better (i.e. they are worse than the teachers you would get if you doubled teacher salaries and could attract better talent).

      You can't get a *babysitter* for $1.08/hour (it's actually illegal to pay them that little)

      You can't pay a teacher $1.08 an hour either... I'm not sure where or why the jump from $1.08/student/hour to $1.08/hour happened...

      If we paid teachers $10/student per hour, they'd be making $300/hour which would probably be more than what the CEO of the company I work for makes. So really it makes sense that the $/student/hour number would seem low given that you need to multiply by 30 to get the hourly wage.

      Teachers want the technology to be able to prepare their students for a world in which technology is the *life blood* of the economy and the labor force. You want students who can enter college, trade schools, or even the work force who are *already* familiar with computers and technology, because if they're not they'll be behind the curve, and very likely stay that way.

      I can't think of a worse way to prioritize already limited resources. There are plenty of more cost effective ways to educate kids in technology, both in terms of being lower cost, and having more value. This is a giant waste of money that would be hard to justify even if LA unified school districts weren't already sucking so hard at doing their jobs (speaking as a person who attended LA unified schools from 1st to 6th grade).

      Some better uses of the money might have been buying computers that are 1/4 the price and still perfectly capable of doing the same things and more (i.e. like programming, etc), albeit at the cost of being fashionable, hiring teachers qualified to teach technology oriented curricula, rather than just buying fancy gadgets and hoping they won't simply be used for entertainment (which is what almost everyone, adults and children, use them for).

      Wasting money is not going to be the thing that saves impoverished children from the poverty cycle.

    21. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The education department figures the system should match their home life.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    22. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      You aren't really paying for other peoples kids to get an education, you're paying back for yours.

      Just burned up my mod points, or this would get a +1, Insightful.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    23. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      ...respect & social values (by community not state and absolutely not federal)...

      So if my kid goes to school in an area that's predominantly Catholic, she'll be taught to venerate the Virgin Mary and that birth control goes against the will of the Almighty? In spite of the fact that I'm a Buddhist and do not share these values? Thanks, but no thanks.

      (Translation: Your Ebbul Fedril Gummint fetish is out of place in this discussion.)

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    24. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      We had a Burroughs programmable calculator. We wrote programs for it using assembler.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    25. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Monoman · · Score: 1

      What do you expect? As usual the administration was more willing to fund equipment, not teaching positions. It made headlines and to the uninformed it read like the admins were giving the students what they need.

      --
      Keep the Classic Slashdot.
    26. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      You have forgotten that the principle under your theory is looking after all the kids in the school.

      Principal. I gather you had the bad teachers you're complaining about?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    27. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      In Europe if you suck at your job then the company needs to offer you training and support to get better before firing you. I can see why US unions would want to make firing people harder if the natural response of employers is to just replace under performing staff immediately.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    28. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by Vermonter · · Score: 1

      Maybe you can clarify, I am genuinely confused at your statement - If my child goes to LAUSD, who pays for that? I assume it comes out of taxes, to which I contribute. Now maybe I misunderstood the parent post, but if I choose to send my kid to private school, I then need to pay both the private school and LAUSD? So I am essentially paying tuition 3 times? I guess I don't understand what you mean when you say you are paying back your child's education before they even have one.

    29. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by 2ms · · Score: 1

      Are you able to provide some examples of the devices that you refer to as being the same as iPads at lower cost?

      When I look at major benchmarks such as Geekbench (where iPad Air gets more than twice as high score as fastest Galaxy Tab), or sophisticated reviews of tablets that contain rich varieties of performance assessments (e.g. Anandtech 1 or 2 where gets similar margin greatest performance than competitors in both general and graphics performance measures), I see iPads generally showing greater performance for the money than any of its major competitors (e.g., Samsung, Google Nexus, Asus, etc).

    30. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Try talking to a teacher sometime. They're CONSTANTLY having their numbers scrutinized and generally feeling they have to justify their position, all while having little to no say over what and how they teach. Meanwhile they have students who have no discipline at home and just refuse to do anything in class; teachers, however, have had their authority stripped away and now can't do anything to reign in troublemakers. Write up a student and they're sent right back to the classroom. No consequences, no reason to behave.

      As was mentioned above, they also spend quite a bit on their own classrooms. My wife has to buy her own paper to make copies of REQUIRED worksheets for her class. She easily spent $300 on supplies and furnishings for her classroom at the start of the school year, in the hopes of providing a setting that would be more engaging to her students. And that was before she even got her first paycheck.

      I just don't understand all the demonization of teachers these days. They're some of the hardest-working people I know, and are far underpaid for what they do. And if you ask any of them why they do it, the answer will never be "For the money."

    31. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Even if this were true, why do you need top-of-the-line gaming performance?

      The vast majority of SCHOOLWORK should be simple animations, video, and static content.

    32. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      That is of course only if he went to that school system. Home school and private school tax payers are still paying.

    33. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by AnOnyxMouseCoward · · Score: 1

      Principle is right. I'm not sure if I'm being whooshed or if you actually had a bad teacher.

    34. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      You have forgotten that the principle under your theory is looking after all the kids in the school..

      Principle is right. I'm not sure if I'm being whooshed or if you actually had a bad teacher.

      Let me see... http://blog.oxforddictionaries...

      Principle is a noun. Its main meaning is ‘a fundamental idea or general rule that is used as a basis for a particular theory or system of belief’.

      A principle is also ‘a rule or belief about what is right and wrong that governs the way in which someone behaves’.

      Principle can also be used as an uncountable noun to mean ‘morally correct behaviour’:

      Principal is most commonly found as an adjective meaning ‘main or most important’.

      Principal is also noun, and its various noun meanings are linked to the adjectival sense (i.e. ‘most important’). A principal may be the head of a school, college, or other educational institution, the leading performer in a concert, ballet, opera, or play, or the most important person in an organization or group:

      From the GP sentense, I would expect that he is talking about the head of school?

    35. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Too true, for all the problems with public education, it's still head and shoulders above any alternative.

    36. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Our system is set up so that those funds are fungible. He can pay any school system for his education, slowly, with no penalties. It's a great system. Home and private school systems still have public cost, although lower then running a school.
      Personally, I would ban them.

    37. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I'm i a "respond to troll" mood today. Go into any urban McDonalds and tally up how many of their workers were born in the USA. That's why the icons are used. The vast majority of public school children graduate with the ability to read, do advanced math, and understand rudimentary problem solving and cause / effect. I can see why a subset of our nation wants to change that, I don't.

    38. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by pnutjam · · Score: 3, Informative

      Only android allows you to maintain your own app store and properly lock down a device (in theory). Ipads require every parent to put a cc into apple's system or do some sort of gift card work around. This alone should make them untenable in a school or corporate setting.

    39. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Administration is where it's at. Anywhere, really. It's best not to be the mule.

      If you're working at a company (or school or whatever) and you're the one making the product or providing the service the institution sells, you are the mule. And the faster/better/cheaper you work, the more profit/power/influence the administrators get. So administrators whip the mules. And it's easy to do because you can track hours and productivity and all that jazz.

      I'm an analyst for a major hospital system. One of my jobs is to produce the monthly financial reports that go out to every department and clinic manager and administrator. These include detailed tracking of every charge each doctor bills, every dime they collect, every work unit they churn out, their write-offs and insurance denials and all sorts of computed metrics about their efficiency, etc etc. Whip those mules.

      Funny, though, with all these reports, nobody's ever asked me to make one tracking how the administrators spend every moment they're working. Nobody's getting monthly reports about how great a job of analyzing I'm doing. Huh. Wonder why that is...

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    40. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      I have to say, any McDonald's I have been to in NY in the past 20 years has had predominantly US born african american employees. Unlikely that any of them went to private school. So I don't really see your point. The assumption that immigrants are somehow less able seems to not be the case at all and has a whiff of xenophobia about it. Maybe not your intention. But the least capable seem to be US born, poor project dwelling kids that just don't have the right environment to encourage them to succeed. Sad really and probably unfixable.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    41. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Lol.. now your just making things up and sounding silly.

      He would still be paying twice or paying for other people's kids. Nothing you mentionex invalidates that.

    42. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      That's just $1.08 per student per hour, assuming (falsely) that teachers don't actually work outside of school hours. You can't get a *babysitter* for $1.08/hour (it's actually illegal to pay them that little), much less someone who is expected to *teach* the kids something useful.

      You're comparing a /student/hr rate to a /hr rate. Teachers are paid by the hour at a decent rate. If half their class is sick and doesn't show up to school, the teacher still gets the full rate for the day.

      If I get paid $100/hr and send 100 emails per hour, that doesn't mean that the $1/email/hr is an unfair wage, especially since my wage has nothing to do with the number of emails I send.

    43. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      To be fair, the donate time and supplies breaks down over a larger deployment. It's a nice fantasy though.

    44. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      yes, private school is something you pay for if you so choose. You pay for your own public school education whether you want it or not.

    45. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Not less capable, but might understand spoken english much better then written. Might also not have had the same opportunity to learn, even though they are just as capable.

      i challenge you to volunteer in an inner city poor school. Those kids are just as interested as wealthy and middle class kids. They also have alot more obstacles to learning. Often, they surmount those obstacle. Sometimes they don't.

      Kids love to learn, sometimes they are too busy learning how to avoid a beating, or how to get a meal. This prevents them from learning math and reading.

    46. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      teachers, in general, don't get paid what they would if they were in *any* related industry. As a result, most of the people you get who teach do so because they *want* to be teachers.

      That's one way of looking at it. The other way of looking at it, is that by not paying teachers very much, the teachers you get are the ones that couldn't do any better (i.e. they are worse than the teachers you would get if you doubled teacher salaries and could attract better talent).

      You can't get a *babysitter* for $1.08/hour (it's actually illegal to pay them that little)

      You can't pay a teacher $1.08 an hour either... I'm not sure where or why the jump from $1.08/student/hour to $1.08/hour happened...

      If we paid teachers $10/student per hour, they'd be making $300/hour which would probably be more than what the CEO of the company I work for makes. So really it makes sense that the $/student/hour number would seem low given that you need to multiply by 30 to get the hourly wage.

      In addition, teachers get 3+ months paid time off each year when you factor in federal and state holidays, winter vacation, spring break, summer vacation, etc. This is a major benefit that is very rarely factored into the salary equation...

    47. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Heads up, it's not the sixties anymore.

      Is that really the best you can come up with?

      Nothing is really new, and those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

      At least you actually responded instead of dumping Overrated mods on me, which just makes it obvious that you really don't have a response because I've got you gutless-wonder racist motherfuckers dead to rights.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    48. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by matbury · · Score: 1

      Don't want to pay for the next generation's education? Who's gonna support you when you've retired? You think your pension and health insurance will still be working if there's nobody earning a decent wage to pay into it? If you wanna be a loner and don't want to pay your way, go and live in the hills and don't use anything that civilisation, culture, and society have produced... including the language(s) you speak.

    49. Re: When we give money to the schools ... by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      REIN. REIN!

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    50. Re:When we give money to the schools ... by leslie.satenstein · · Score: 1

      If they hired better teachers, what would the teachers' unions do with the worthless teachers? How do you define a worthless teacher? Is it one that works the 40hr week, and thats it. And takes the summer time to do some vacationing? In our system, the teachers are required to obtain at least three college/university credits per year related to teaching. That's one summer course.

  2. Duh. What did you expect? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's look at the premise:

    1. Students usually know WAY more about technology than their teachers.
    2. Students also have usually WAY more interest in it than their teachers.
    3. They also know WAY better how to use the internet than their teachers.
    4. Students have WAY more time to spend on breaking security than their teachers have time (and money) to spend on security.
    5. Information flows VERY freely on the schoolyard, especially when being able to transmit that information ups your social status.

    Am I really the only one who is not only not surprised that this happens, but who would have been SEVERELY disappointed if it hadn't?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Duh. What did you expect? by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

      Let's look at the premise:

      1. Students usually know WAY more about technology than their teachers.

      This is becoming less and less true, as people who had computers growing up become teachers.

      That being said, this is slashdot, so most of *us* knew WAY more about technology as kids than our teachers, or than teachers today.

    2. Re:Duh. What did you expect? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      The main point is that ONE student is all it takes. Word spreads fast on the school yard if there's someone that can make your locked-down school iPod a gaming machine, and the laws of schoolyard status dictates that he'll be more than happy to "help" you.

      Teachers cannot compete with that.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Duh. What did you expect? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Also speaking from personal experience, some students just like thumbing their nose at restrictions like that just for the fun of it.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  3. I just don't get it by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't understand why schools are in such a massive rush to buy iPads before they've even figured out how to use them, and where they fit into the curriculum.
    They all chase after the "new-shiny" and plop down a bucket of money before considering or testing the impact, much less training teachers. ...and the fact they were hacked... but yeah. We all had fun doing that on the Apple IIs educational software and with game disks we brought to school back in the 80s. Probably more valuable education looking back. It was fun to strip the "mathbooster" mathematics space-invader game of the actual maths and then play it as Taito originally intended ;)

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:I just don't get it by JThundley · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well you answered your own question there, people want new shiny. Advertising is waaaaaay too effective on some people.

      I think it's good that students got around the restrictions and are doing things they weren't intended to do. As the old saying goes, you don't learn to hack, you hack to learn.

    2. Re:I just don't get it by saccade.com · · Score: 4, Interesting

      +1. Our kids' middle school also jumped on the iPad bandwagon. For the most part, the kids hated it. The iPads didn't displace any textbooks, so it was 2 lbs of extra deadweight in their backpacks (tablet+mandatory case & keyboard). It was a source of stress, because on the rare occasions they were actually used in class, you got marked down if your iPad wasn't charged. Assignments still had be printed out and turned in on paper, so a separate PC/Mac was still required. The tablets were supposedly locked down to prevent loading games, etc. but tech-savvy students usually found work-arounds. And some of the edu-ware screw-ups were truly appalling - like the "spelling test" app that didn't disable the iOS dictionary feature. Fortunately, the high-school principals are saner. Quote one: "No, I won't bring tech like tablets into the school just because it's new shiny. It really has to fulfill a serious purpose or solve real problems". Amen.

    3. Re:I just don't get it by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not really. Around here, school districts have to get their constituents to pass budget override bonds at election-time in order to get the money to do this sort of thing. Many have succeeded, but several have failed.

      What we're seeing is a lack of killer-application to justify these tablet devices over traditional computers. We're not seeing textbooks that are cached in their entirety on the devices and can function without an Internet connection, we're not seeing educational software that gives the students extra assistance or heuristically learns the students' weaknesses to address them. We're seeing the pencil and paper skills simply be transferred to a much more expensive medium with little tangible benefit and a lot of opportunity for loss.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:I just don't get it by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      Because people offering grants are only interested in "new-shiny" not ordinary books and teachers and people voting for school budgets are only interested in "new-shiny" and not ordinary books and teachers.

      Schools have to pursue the money that is offered with the hope that they can turn a bit into something useful.

    5. Re:I just don't get it by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      I can't understand why schools are in such a massive rush to buy iPads before they've even figured out how to use them, and where they fit into the curriculum.

      Because it's easier than thinking.

      And because more kids can be taught to use iPads than can be taught to appreciate literature or mathematics. More "fair" that way, you see.

    6. Re:I just don't get it by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Well you answered your own question there, people want new shiny. Advertising is waaaaaay too effective on some people.

      and let me guess, you are one of those people, smarter than average, upon which advertising has no effect? thank god for people like you that can tell us what to do.

      the article doesn't give the cost of the iPad, but educational institutions don't pay retail. that, and the $1B included upgrades to networking infrastructure to support the devices, which would have been required no matter what.

      while certainly shiny, iPads are pretty capable devices that can run applications for just about anything. they are easier to manage and lock down than a PC. they are tech-illiterate friendly. they aren't a terrible choice for this. what's the alternative? chromebooks? they don't really work offline which was probably a requirement. chinese cheapo garbage tablets?

    7. Re:I just don't get it by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The only consolation is that kids learn to hate Apple hardware early in their education.

    8. Re:I just don't get it by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      My wife is a teacher, she uses her publicly funded iPad for Facebook and recipes. I'd much rather they gave every teacher a guitar instead.

    9. Re:I just don't get it by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      My beef with the iPads is that since they lack a physical keyboard, kids aren't going to learn to type on them. At least with cheap laptops like Chromebooks, there's a crappy physical keyboard and not just a touch interface.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    10. Re:I just don't get it by lightbox32 · · Score: 1

      I generally agree however I've got to say: my community colleges smartboard + projector combo is super awesome. People who don't want to take notes and would rather focus on what the teacher is saying can do so, and then download a .pdf from the instructor's website. It's really slick.

      While it's great that students can focus on the teacher, the process of putting the concepts in your own words and writing them down helps the process of understanding. When I studied I would may times create summaries and "posters" from my own notes, which helped me learn the concepts.

      --
      A camel is a horse created by a committee
    11. Re:I just don't get it by JThundley · · Score: 1

      You'd be correct actually. I don't expose myself to any advertising at all. I used to use mythtv which had commercial auto-skip, now I don't have cable TV at all. I download youtube & twitch videos and use adblock and noscript.

      If iPads are so easy to use, why were professional educators unable to figure them out without training? If they're so easy to manage, why were mere schoolchildren able to bypass a professional IT department's restrictions? If iPads are so capable, why can't I run the browser of my choice on them?

  4. Good job, FBI by brxndxn · · Score: 2

    This is what the FBI should be doing with our taxpayer money instead of going after individual software pirates or trying to push for easier backdoors into consumer devices. Teachers often get handed expensive devices that they don't really need - and they get denied funding on simple things like books, crayons, and copies. Meanwhile, teachers get paid shit and county officials get paid 3-5x as much.. The FBI should be cracking down on these corrupt jackasses.

    --
    --- We need more Ron Paul!
  5. $1 billion for 650,000 iPads by senatorpjt · · Score: 2

    That comes out to $1538.46 per iPad, in case you were too lazy to figure it out and checked the comments to see if it was already done.

    1. Re:$1 billion for 650,000 iPads by TWX · · Score: 2

      buh-buh-buh-configuring! That's it! It costs that much to pay for having them all programmed!

      That's why it's so expensive!

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:$1 billion for 650,000 iPads by farble1670 · · Score: 2

      talk about too lazy. did you even look at TFA?

      "To date, the district has spent $70 million on the project, purchasing a total of 90,713 devices."

      that works out to $771.66 / device, which is pretty good considering it includes the network infrastructure, device administration, and software costs.

    3. Re:$1 billion for 650,000 iPads by Firethorn · · Score: 2

      Ouch. I hope that includes textbook licensing.

      $300 for the iPad
      $150 for insurance on said iPad
      $100 server licensing for things like blackboard
      $300 licensing for all the custom apps and control programs
      $200 per-unit cost of training the teachers and administrators on the things, including the back ends.
      $400 cost to license electronic versions of their text books
      etc...

      Still, the sheer cost smacks of some corruption in the selection process.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:$1 billion for 650,000 iPads by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      These are iPads, they don't need configuring. It Just Works(tm). You just need to Think Different(tm).

  6. IPad is an insult to technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    IPad is not a computer. It's a dumb appliance or toy. Just because the kids can use doesn't mean they know anything about real technology.

    1. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An iPad is a more power computer than any I had access to all through school. It's also a more capable general-purpose computer than those Apple II-series computers and early MacOS 6/7/8 machines that we had use of, and can do more than those MS-DOS-based computers that we had.

      It's all about the software and the peripherals. And the kids appear to have figured out the software part on their own, even though the intent was that they couldn't, let alone wouldn't.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      It's not sold as a computer, but it can be made into one. I turned my iPod Touch into a little remote-accessible Unix system with some compilers and such. I'd be surprised if you couldn't do the same with the current crop of hardware.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    3. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have calculators that are more powerful than the computers we used back at school. That doesn't mean it is a smart idea to go and spend a billion dollars on pocket calculators for everyone.

    4. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is you turned your iPod Touch into something you can shell into and run software, but the display and touchscreen are now inoperable. That reminds me of back when (probably still the case) NetBSD was supported on several models of PowerBook, but you could only shell into them over a serial console, because the keyboard and display weren't working.

      Closed hardware is kinda shitty. Especially when it's extremely closed by design.

    5. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by AJWM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      An iPad is a more power computer than any I had access to all through school

      Yep, if you're talking about the innards.

      It's also a more capable general-purpose computer than those Apple II-series computers and early MacOS 6/7/8 machines

      Nope.

      An iPad is an appliance for running apps, not a general-purpose computer. Go ahead, just try to program on it, or hook it up to manipulate some random gizmo.

      Sure, it can be done -- by someone with the right development tools (which wont run on the iPad) and skills. A far cry from what school kids could teach themselves to do with Apple Basic or Hypercard.

      --
      -- Alastair
    6. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by gnupun · · Score: 1

      IPad is not a computer. It's a dumb appliance or toy.

      An iPad is just a laptop with the keyboard and mouse replaced with a touchscreen input. It also doesn't have other peripherals like hard disk, USB connectors etc. But it is still, just a regular computer that is more portable than a laptop.

    7. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      It also doesn't have the capability of being programmed to run user-created programs (by design Apple prohibits anything but pathetic toy sandboxes.)

      But you're right in a certain regard. An iPad is roughly equivalent to a modern laptop. Except with a modern Laptop all the capabilities to become a general purpose computer can be added.

    8. Re: IPad is an insult to technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not that the hardware doesn't make it a computer. It's the software that dumbs it down that makes it not a computer. It could easily be a good computer if Apple didn't install it's shitty iOS on it.

    9. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      No, the device worked as well as it did before, but with some improvements (a shell to log into wirelessly, compiler, normal contents of binutils, alternate appstores, customized UIs, etc).

      Closed hardware is certainly shittier than open hardware, but exaggerating the point is counterproductive.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    10. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by TWX · · Score: 1

      And what percentage of kids of all ages in public schools program computers? And of that group, what percentage use a common industry language for their programming, as opposed to a toy language along the lines of LOGO or a teaching language like Pascal?

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    11. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      There are dozens more. Nothing is stopping kids from programming and compiling on an iPad.

      ...except for Apple?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      an iPad sucks to type on

      Sounds like an interface problem. Perhaps difficult but not insurmountable. With proper languages and structured editors, you may not need to "type" your program. You're not a typist after all, are you?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      There, there, Mr Jobs, now calm down and take your afterlife meds. You know very well that anything actually close to serious modern programming is banned as per Apple criteria for iOS apps. Compiling, for example, is impossible, since iOS disallows in-device native code generation or execution.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    14. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by TWX · · Score: 1

      *grin*

      I wouldn't mind a game of pac-man...

      No, I don't like tablet computers. As I said elsewhere in this discussion, I don't see an application for them that justifies them over a conventional computer. On the other hand, if there are peripherals like keyboards, stands for them to sit like a screen, etc, then they can be useful like a conventional computer.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    15. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Sounds like an interface problem.

      Indeed, and the interface is the entirety of the distinction between an iPad and a normal computer. So why go out of your way (and pay extra) to introduce that problem?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    16. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      There seems to be a widely accepted hack.

      So apparently, you can download and run arbitrary JavaScript code in Safari. There's also a system for interfacing safari to the OS APIs so you can have app-which-is-not-much-more-than-a-browser stuff. And you can have hidden safari windows.

      The accepted mechanism for running aritrary code in a non browser is to run jaascript in a hidden safari window and pass messages (annoyingly high latency) tothe rest of your app.

      Hideous, but possible to work around and sticks to the letter of the law.

      I guess you could have a local dev environment which compiled everything to Javascript.

      Anyway, yuck!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    17. Re:IPad is an insult to technology by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There is at least one Python development system in the App Store, last I checked.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  7. pricing by outriding9800 · · Score: 1

    Not sure if my math is correct but it looks like the ipads are running 1500 each.. I would rhink they would be a bit cheaper

    1. Re:pricing by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting accessories, software licenses, and a big one is labor.

    2. Re:pricing by sudnshok · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but even taking those items into consideration, that's an outrageous number.

      --
      People who say "money does not buy happiness" are just people without money trying to make themselves feel better.
  8. ipads, chromebooks: the real lesson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When we learned about computers in school it was not on locked down, corporate monitored, carefully controlled computers. They were OPEN systems, fully and 100% controlled by the student at the keyboard, who were trusted with that responsibility.

    The real lesson these days is how to be a good little slave to your masters. Don't worry about the personal data collection, don't worry about it being locked down, because you aren't trusted and will never be. Someone else will decide what it's acceptable for you to read, what software it's acceptable for you to run, what it's acceptable for you to say. Be a good little consumer now, will you?

    Gets people ready for buying corporate-controlled consumption devices once they get into the real world.

    1. Re:ipads, chromebooks: the real lesson by 0123456 · · Score: 2

      The real lesson these days is how to be a good little slave to your masters.

      Hate to disappoint you, but that's what Prussian schooling has always been about.

    2. Re:ipads, chromebooks: the real lesson by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "When we learned about computers in school it was not on locked down, corporate monitored, carefully controlled computers. "

      Were they conected to the Internet?

      "The real lesson these days is how to be a good little slave to your masters."

      That's been the case since the XVIII century.

    3. Re:ipads, chromebooks: the real lesson by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      They didn't need to be connected to the internet. They were connected to the real world that students lived in, by means of floppy diskettes from home.

    4. Re:ipads, chromebooks: the real lesson by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "They didn't need to be connected to the internet. They were connected to the real world that students lived in, by means of floppy diskettes from home."

      I have to say that despite Tanenbaumb's on bandwidth and stationwagons, your latency working on diskettes makes comparing your times with current ones a question of apples to oranges.

    5. Re:ipads, chromebooks: the real lesson by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Would that be comparing your times with current ones a question of Apples to Macs?

      --
      Time to offend someone
  9. $1500 per ipad!? by Megor1 · · Score: 2

    How the heck are they spending 1 billion for 650k students? That's $1500 per ipad. If the average class size is 26 that's $39,000 per class. There are so many better ways this money could be spent.

    --
    Everyone that disagrees with me is a paid shill
    1. Re:$1500 per ipad!? by Streetlight · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's even that simple. iPads have some kind of life span and will need replacement. When they're new there shouldn't be too much need to replace them but some will get broken screens and other problems associated with age and use. I wonder what the budget is for repair, maintenance and replacement. And as these iPads are in the system longer this cost is sure to increase annually. It may mean that after some number of years (five?) 100% of them will have been replaced. That initial $1 billion will become another $1 billion plus the repair bill. With 650,000 out in the field there will be a lot of repair techs either in a central location or in a shop in each school. All this will cost a bundle well beyond the initial purchase price.

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  10. Excuse me but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Hundreds of students ... found ways to bypass security installations, downloading games and freely surfing the Web."

    "Teachers ... were not properly trained to instruct students with the new technology."

    It sounds to me, like the children didn't *need* to be instructed, as they found some other pretty good uses for them, above and beyond what the teachers could ever hope to instruct them on. Unless by "instruct" they meant, how to curtail children's exploratory curiosity and make them fall in line, then sure.

    But here's a tip for all the dumbfuck parents and teachers out there trying to do that. Don't give your kid something that *can* do those things, because no matter how tight you think you've locked it down, short of crippling the thing entirely, kids will figure it out.

  11. A Plan without a Plan by DERoss · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The iPads were distributed without any planning about accountability. No one knew who would be responsible if an iPad were lost. (Without a parent's approval, the minor student could not be held legally responsible.) No one knew who paid for repairs. No one knew what was to happen to the iPad when the student moved to a different school district. No one even knew how the iPads would be used within the curricula.

    For 8 years, I was an elected school board member in a quite small but high-performing school district. At the closest, we are about 1 mile from the Los Angeles Unified School District. Ours is a rather affluent community. We do not give our students personal electronics. We make PCs available in our high school library, which also serves as a public library where adults can also use PCs.

    1. Re:A Plan without a Plan by Pumpkin+Tuna · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good points. I'm a former classroom teacher whose job now is to help integrate technology into the classroom. We do it slowly, deliberately and with a lot of thinking and planning. We never roll out anything to every kid at once. We study, pilot, review, pilot again if needed and then implement. When I first heard about LA's plan, I was horrified. It was too big, too fast, and not well planned. It was doomed to fail, and at the time, I figured that the fix was in, probably with Pearson. They scare me. Technology in the classroom should be used to create, to collaborate, to innovate. Instead, Pearson and other companies like them want to use it to drill and kill while making a mint off of taxpayer dollars.

  12. Re:FBI? by TWX · · Score: 1

    Education may be run locally, but there are lots of federal programs that help pay for it. The federal government has an interest in seeing its money spent well, and has an interest in anticorruption enforcement that might be hard to achieve at a city or state level.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  13. Think of the (poor) children by g01d4 · · Score: 1

    Was Deasy's ego justification. He actually started well when he pushed teacher accountability, then it went downhill fast. The iPad decision was bad enough; forget the botched roll out and the you-never-get-fired for buying $INDUSTRY_LEADER procurement. Then there was teachers serving breakfast to kids in class and finally the MiSiS debacle that finally forced him out. One of the few times one could agree w/the teacher's union.

    1. Re:Think of the (poor) children by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      How exactly is Apple an industry leader? They dont hold a majority in any of the markets they are in.

    2. Re:Think of the (poor) children by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think they meant the Fashion Industry, not the IT Industry. Their hardware sales far exceeds the revenue from, for instance, Coach handbag sales.

    3. Re:Think of the (poor) children by g01d4 · · Score: 1
      Didn't think I needed to bother with links. Here's one :

      it's clear that the major players in the K-12 market today are Apple, an ascendant Google, and Microsoft, which has only shown hints of its strategy for the market segment.

      Here's another :

      Apple is still the main and dominant player in the [education] market

      The software side was Pearson. LAUSD is now allowing Chromebook purchases.

  14. Investigation a Crapshoot by Kunedog · · Score: 5, Informative

    We may never know what they're investigating, or who, or why, or how it will cause or affect any criminal prosecution. There's certainly no integrity to the process.

    Remember when a school was caught installing malware on students' macbooks that covertly took pictures of the children in their bedrooms, almost certainly producing child porn? And we even had correspondence that showed faculty used this capability for entertainment?

    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...
    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...
    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...

    The feds investigated but simply decided not to file charges against the school for illegal surveillance, hacking, peeping at kids, etc. I guess that would have set a nasty precedent for the NSA activities that were going on, but only discovered a few years later.

    1. Re:Investigation a Crapshoot by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      My guess is they're looking for evidence of corruption in the procurement contracts.

    2. Re:Investigation a Crapshoot by boristdog · · Score: 1

      Yeah, $1500+ per iPad is probably a bit high, even with custom software. This looks like a backroom deal between the Superintendent and Apple/Pearson.

      Remember when Apple used to give discounted products to schools and students?

    3. Re:Investigation a Crapshoot by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Heck, $600 per iPad is high. If you are dictating all the software anyway, why not buy from a Vendor who develops for cheaper hardware? Maybe get a sweetheart deal from MS who is desperate to sell tablets, or go Android where you can buy tablets for $100. It doesn't even need to be Google-licensed hardware - no need for the Play Store if you're running your own software and can just sideload it all or likely get your vendor to do it for you.

  15. Modern Problems by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    It was a great idea but the fundamental issues barring it from being successful were completely ignored. Organized Labor always wants training and work studies to be completed and approved before anything gets rolled out. I've dealt with this working with Airlines and trust me, you don't change work rules or add tools to the environment without Union buy-in. The training issue keeps coming up and to be fair, the support structure and training should have been thought out well before the first tablets were rolled out. Of course the school district paid way to much for the tablets and that's another investigation point. Finally we have the students who if they're like most kids want to play games and do whatever they want with the devices. You can't give a walled garden experience to an 9 year old kid, he's going to figure it out and bypass what you've put in place or get his older sibling or friends to get him access to whatever he wants. Shit all the kid has to do is google it "how do I jailbreak an iPad" and "how do I sideload apps on an iPad" and at that moment all of the useful school district supplied controls disappear. You've now given 10s of thousands of tablets to kids so they can watch youporn all day. Congratulations LA Unified School District.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:Modern Problems by turbidostato · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "It was a great idea"

      Why and how?

      "Organized Labor always wants training and work studies to be completed and approved before anything gets rolled out."

      You prefer your children to be taught by untrained people using untested methods?

      "I've dealt with this working with Airlines and trust me, you don't change work rules or add tools to the environment without Union buy-in. "

      In other words, you don't get to change work rules on heavier-that-air flying machines without buy-in from those that operate said machines into the air? Nonsense, I claim, great nonsense!

      "You've now given 10s of thousands of tablets to kids so they can watch youporn all day. Congratulations LA Unified School District."

      And then again, how and why was this a great idea?

    2. Re:Modern Problems by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      I think putting cutting technology into the hands of students is a great idea. The caveat is that they are mature enough to understand how to take care of it and use it. Kids nowadays are much more advanced than we'd like to think and have access to things both good and bad that I never had when I was growing up. Getting in front of it and leveraging this for educational purposes was a laudable cause.

      How do unions equate to an educated workforce? You can also be an outstanding teacher and not be part of a unionized workplace. I'm not anti-union but where education is concerned these teacher unions don't have our kids best interests at heart.

      With my comparison to airlines I should have been specific. Consider things like Flight Attendant paperwork, taking money for onboard services. None of this has anything to do with safely operating an aircraft but the union won't let you change anything until a rigorous amount of work study programs are completed and negotiations have concluded on any additional workload. If you're paying for the employee to work the flight and you provide them with technology to make their jobs easier and more efficient they'll still want something in return for all these innovations. The same can be said for teachers unions even though individually workloads on their members will decrease.

      It was a great concept by the LAUSD but again, poorly executed and thought out. Think about kids dragging home tons of books everyday, the cost in textbooks isn't going down and this kind of tech allows for more innovation in teaching. Kids can become more engaged and be given the tools to succeed in life by leveraging the right technology, not just for technologies sake. The blame lies then with the board and those at the top responsible for implementing it. It's a billion dollar mistake but that happens everywhere, even in business. The real issue is a billion in education dollars is tougher to recoup.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  16. Nonfungible budgets by radarskiy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But we don't just give them money, we give them money dedicated to specific items. If there is grant money available for computer equipment then you have to write a proposal for computing equipment and you can't spend it on ordinary teachers salaries. If you turn down a grant because it is too specific then you get your budget cut because you obviously have enough already.

  17. Better Teachers... by Etherwalk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We lost most of the great teachers in the United States when we embraced gender equality. It was definitely the right move, but it cost our country untold billions in terms of the price to education.

    Not many decades ago, women could not go into most high-earning-potential fields. Teacher was one of the few fields of instruction open to them, and as a result, a LOT of the smartest women in the country went into teaching. And there are a *lot* of smart women in the country.

    You still have smart women teaching, but not nearly as many.

    1. Re:Better Teachers... by fermion · · Score: 1

      The counterpoint here is that when someone has no choice, then one ends up with a lot of unqualified people because they are it involuntarily. The reason we don't have good teachers because teaching is a trade with skills that are only acquired with experience. For instance, if you are going to be a master plumber, there is education and then two years experience. Programs like Teach For America, on the other hand, put teachers in schools but the vast majority leave the classroom before they have the experience to become a good teacher. The financial incentives also limit the retention of good teachers. Keeping a teacher more than 10 years becomes very expensive, so there is financial pressure to let teachers go in the 5-10 years frame, just when they are becoming master teachers.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  18. FBI investigates John Deasy .. by lippydude · · Score: 1

    Where's the initiative for this investigation emanating from, it wouldn't be One Microsoft Way, by any chance .. link

    1. Re:FBI investigates John Deasy .. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      That's right. It's still a battle between Apple and 'IBM' (Apple zealots persisted for years in referring to any MS-DOS machine as an 'IBM' machine- long after IBM had introduced the PS/2 and made themselves into the same sort of irrelevant proprietary hardware vendor as Apple)

  19. lol by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    This was clearly what was going to happen, from the beginning. I think I got modded troll for suggesting it was a bad idea way back when. lol

    The only place a school should have a computer that students have access to is in the computer lab (or other classes that would require them like typing or whatever) Sure, there should be classes that prepare students for the rudiments of computer use in case they don't have a computer at home. But when it comes to the rudiments of what should be taught in highschool: English, Math, Science... they are nothing more than expensive distractions.

  20. no, racist asshat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, it's a small subset of black people, just the ones that Fox News loves to showcase. Most black people, like most white people, are decent people. There's a small group of black people, like the small group of white people you belong to, who are unmitigated assholes.

    1. Re:no, racist asshat by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Fox News wants to steal the soul of your child. No, I'm serious. They're evil. Yeah. Right.

  21. One more consideration by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    There's an extra couple problems that he didn't state:
    1. There's a lot more students than there are teachers and faculty. Probably around 20:1. Still, consider these two numbers: out of 15k students in the initial release, 'almost 200' bypassed the security(followed sources). That's under 2%. Of course, it'd still spread. That was the first week cracks.
    2. The students have nearly 24/7 physical access to them. That's never a good recipe for continued security.

    Of course, given the incidents of faculty spying on students in places to include their bedrooms using the built-in cameras on computers, I'd SUPPORT disabling functions like that.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  22. Governor Sununu by ISoldat53 · · Score: 1

    Didn't this same type of thing happen with Apple in New Hampshire back in the 80s? The state bought all the schools Apple computers on a no compete bid.

  23. How are these iPads connected? by Streetlight · · Score: 1

    Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't find out how these iPads were connected to the Internet or even if they are connected. Do they use WiFi as well as Wireless telephony or just WiFi? If the latter, though most folks have WiFi at home, some do not. So do the students need to be near a hot spot to get school work done or is Internet connection unnecessary for educational use? If the iPads have Wireless connection then the cost of the contract with telephony carrier is an extra cost and who pays for the use beyond data caps? The articles indicate that the location of the iPads can be monitored by school district but I assume they can be turned off. In any event this seems to be a complete violation of the students' privacy.

    Questions, Questions, Questions....

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  24. Re:FBI? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    The Federal government most definitely has an interest in anti-corruption enforcement. A vested interest. They don't want other operators on what they regard as their turf.

  25. School system is looking for a magic pill by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    These ipads smack of the same mindset that too many people have about losing weight. They don't want to work for it.

    Teaching kids these days is tough. Parents are doing less so schools are expected to do more.

  26. oh hallelujah! by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    then-Superintendent John Deasy had been in communication with vendors Apple and Pearson before the contracts were put to bid

    I read this as: it's now illegal to be a biased mac fanboy. It's about time!

    1. Re:oh hallelujah! by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      How about the guy getting paid under the table to accept these contracts?
      You can't even appear to be biased in positions like that.

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
  27. govt procurement processes by raymorris · · Score: 4, Informative

    Government purchase procedures for purchases over a small amount typically require large amounts of paperwork from vendors, submitted in various stages to ensure transparency and fairness. "Run down to Walmart and get it for one-third the price" isn't an option specified in the procurement process.

    The idea is to make sure they don't just run down to their brother's shop and pay five times the going rate. Unfortunately, it means buying mainly from middleman companies who are in the business of getting government contracts. It can be REAL lucrative to contract for computers - you put in a bid for to top of the line computers at $3500 each, installed. The process takes 18 months before you win the bid. You meet with the government agency and the start planning their migration process. Eventually delivery is scheduled, around six months after you won the bid. At that point you buy some computers that meet the specs you bid two years ago, paying $600 each. Six months after that you collect the $3500 each from the government.

    1. Re:govt procurement processes by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I've worked for both state and federal govt and this is pretty much my experience too. The regulations put in place to prevent corruption inevitably also prevent efficiency. Procurement takes ten time as long, and you end up paying RRP for everything, but at least there's no more corruption

  28. Campaign contributions by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    Some corporate entity must have made some rather significant Federal-level campaign contributions in order to trigger this level of concern....

  29. What kids don't know about technology. by westlake · · Score: 1

    Let's look at the premise:

    Better yet, let's look at your premises and see how many of them are true.

    If you hand a kid a gadget he or she has never seen before, it is likely that he or she will fearlessly and successfully figure out what to do with it in short order without the slightest thought to reading instructions or seeking help. Kids are growing up with all the wonderful devices and applications that stymie their elders.

    Yet these same kids are likely to give little thought to the most efficacious or safest ways to use technology. Part of being young is to ignore warnings and directions. This combination of intuitive ability and lack of examination can lead to less productive and even dangerous use of technology by Digital Natives.

    Here are some examples of what I mean:

    Kids don't know how to search.
    Kids don't know how to evaluate.
    Kids don't know how to stay safe.

    Kids don't know how to search

    The simple process of varying search terms is not common to many young searchers: 10.2% responded that kids 'never' do this, and 71.2% said they 'sometimes' do. Only 2% could boast that their students always know to do this. Narrowing a search is another simple skill utilised far too seldom, with 20% reporting this never happens.

    As to Boolean searching, the gap was the greatest: 56.2% said students never use these methods, which suggests to me a lack of instruction. No one reported that students always know to employ these techniques.

    But here is a bigger problem: 'bouncing'. David Loertscher, PhD, used this very appropriate label to describe...a common practice: moving quickly from one resource to another without closely reading any material. Granted, this type of skimming may be used early in a search to find promising information, but it is not productive if a reader doesn't carefully follow up on that information.

    Kids don't know how to use technology for learning or productivity

    It is not enough for youngsters to be masters of their sophisticated cell phones, social networking sites, and gaming devices. Yet these are the three primary areas where kids concentrate their interest and use. Teachers are assuming too much if they take it for granted that students are experts at using applications that are available at school such as office suites, mind-mapping software, graphics tools, etc. Granted, they are likely to be quick to learn, but they do still need instruction and guidance.

    Kids can use Excel for all kinds of great graphs, timelines, tables and other projects, but only if they are exposed to the software.

    Kids do not know how to be smart and safe online

    Because [content] filters offer a false sense of security, the teaching of safe internet searching and communicating is often given short shrift. After all, the filters are keeping out all the bad stuff, right? Wrong. Here are some problems with this line of thinking: Filters both over- and under-block. Even the 'tightest' filter can sometimes let objectionable material pass through. At the same time, a great deal of valuable information can be blocked. I have within the last year asked students to search for terms such as 'triggerfish' , 'sperm whale', and 'breast cancer', only to be blocked.

    Teachers and administrators often have a false sense of security because the filters are in place. Thus, they do not actively teach students about safe internet use. When these youngsters go home, to the mall, to the public library, etc, they may be babes in the woods due to the lack of instruction about safety.

    What kids know (and don't know) about technology

    1. Re:What kids don't know about technology. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The kids don't have that goal, and they circumvent those limitations by other means.

      Not being able/willing to alter their search pattern is easily overcome by numbers. You have hundreds of kids looking for a way to break the safety of their device. One of them succeeding is enough to multiply the effect because bragging will instantly set in and copying behaviour has always been the staple of the school yard. There is no need to refine your search input if you simply multiply the number of people searching.

      Kids don't WANT to use technology for learning or productivity. They want to use it for having fun. What's your point?

      And finally, being safe and smart online is also not one of their intended goals of them. Again, what's your point?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  30. AYBABTU by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Schools often tell us that they are lack of fund

    Yours obviously was.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  31. Re:Taught by the internet by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

    . . . a carefully-timed momentary disconnection of the ethernet cable during startup to provide uninhibited exposure to all the illicit material our developing minds could lust after. Even at the time I was filled with a sense of awe & pride to witness our secret resistance in action.

    This is a useful skill in the real world. In no fewer than three AD workplaces, I've seen people's accounts get locked (for one reason or another: IT had the wrong end date for the term position, too many failed login attempts, etc). Unplug the cable, log in, then plug the cable back in. Network drives won't work, but anything stored on the hard drive will, Email works, and internet works (even when you need to authenticate on the proxy). Good workaround when waiting for IT to unlock.

  32. I love the iPad....but..... by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    We have iPads at our school, and they do help dyslexic kids learn how to read with apps like Lexia and Learning Ally.

    That said, iPads - like most Apple products, are difficult to manage in a corporate environment. Apple's configuration tools are sparse, and they simply have no native MDM solution.

    Third party solutions like Airwatch are a joke. They count on the end user to keep policies applied to the device under threat of not accessing corporate resources. Unfortunately kids don't care about that stuff and gladly remove the policies.

    Things have gotten a bit better with iOS 8, but the fact remains that these devices were designed for a single end user, not for widespread, managed, multi-user environments.

    We've slowed our adoption of iPads in favor of Chromebooks. They are much better for management and control of the end user experience.

  33. One billion dollars, that's the point. by westlake · · Score: 1

    Kids don't WANT to use technology for learning or productivity. They want to use it for having fun. What's your point?

    The one billion dollars spent on tech meant for educational use. You want to buy all these kids their high-tech toys, fine. But do it of your own pocket, not the taxpayers,

    1. Re:One billion dollars, that's the point. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's not what I want or what I consider good. I merely stated what I would think was the kids' goal. And as far as I can judge, that was their goal. Whether I consider that good or not is moot, and whether the taxpayer agrees is just as negligible.

      My original statement was not about what is good or what SHOULD happen. I was merely observing what DID happen. Given the choice of using something for learning or using it for leisure, guess what, kids are like most adults, they choose the latter.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.