Slashdot Mirror
LA Schools Seeking Refund Over Botched iPad Plan
SternisheFan sends news that Los Angeles Unified School District is asking Apple for a refund of the district's effort to equip students with iPads. The project was budgeted at around $1.3 billion to equip its 650,000 students, though only about 120,000 iPads have been purchased so far. After the program went bad, the FBI launched an investigation into their procurement practices. The iPads weren't standalone education devices — they were supposed to work in conjunction with another device carrying curriculum from a company named Pearson. But the district now says the combined tech didn't meet their needs, and they want their money back. Lawyers for the local Board of Education are looking into litigation options. They've also notified Apple and Pearson they won't pay for any new products or services.
The iPads weren't standalone education devices â" they were supposed to work in conjunction with another device carrying curriculum from a company named Pearson. But the district now says the combined tech didn't meet their needs, and they want their money back.
So... They didn't test the iPad / content combo to establish usability / feasibility / usefulness prior to dropping all this cash?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
My kid's STEM school used Dell Chromebooks. They are very useful for doing what is needed, creating reports, researching information, submitting homework, and occasional collaborative activities. They are not a mainstay of the educational day, but a tool used at the appropriate time.
I can't digg up the original contract to check; but some of the stories state that they are going to Apple because the deal was to purchase 'iPad+software', as a packaged product, from Apple. By all accounts Pearson was the significant weak link (not a shock, that's pretty typical for them), while Apple's stuff suffered only from the fairly pitiful state of iOS management; but the school district didn't structure the deal as 'Contract #1, buy ipads, Contract #2, buy textbook apps'; it was a package, and their claim is that half the package was rotten and the other half is of little use to them without the underdelivered component.
Given that Apple is reputed to be a brutal and efficient taskmaster of its suppliers, I'd imagine that either the school district will fail, or Apple will gouge it out of Pearson; but to the best of my understanding there is logic behind complaining to Apple, given the terms under which the devices were purchased.
Which is why when a vendor asks us to enable integration for their stuff - and Pearson is one of 'em with their myFooLab emporium, I always tell 'em three things.
1) I don't work for $vendor - so no, I don't "have to" or "need to" do anything for them
2) We only accept requests from faculty or departments who have decided to adopt the resource, not from the sales person or vendor tech support folks. Again, see #1
3) The product must not be in beta or "brand new last week", and I must see it work on their system, our course management vendor's system (used for demos), or get good reports from other LMS Admins at other schools
Have had several unhappy vendors/sales folks, but have had minimal issues about promised features not working, existing, etc.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos