Hu, Winnie. “Seeing No Progress, Some Schools Drop Laptops.” The New York Times 4 May 2007 4 May 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/04/education/04laptop.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
AAARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!! So there are a few out there that obviously think putting a laptop in a kid's hand will suddenly (possibly through osmosis) thrust them into the 21st century skill set that we are so crazily looking for kids to have today? There are also those who strongly look at this technology as being solution (on its own) for school improvement. I read this article over and over again and I can't help but point out some obvious problems.
- Teachers in this particular district aren't looking to change. "“After seven years, there was literally no evidence it had any impact on student achievement — none,” said Mark Lawson, the school board president here in Liverpool, one of the first districts in New York State to experiment with putting technology directly into students’ hands. “The teachers were telling us when there’s a one-to-one relationship between the student and the laptop, the box gets in the way. It’s a distraction to the educational process.” A distraction? Are you serious? Ok...I believe that if you put a laptop in front of a kid without knowing how to use it as a tool (I mean the staff not knowing) then you're not going to have any success...it could be a "distraction." What's missing here???? I'm thinking that maybe staff development could a real issue. Maybe having someone coach teachers (like the classrooms of the future model in PA) and work with them to promote the use of the laptops as a tool for change, learning, creative outlet (different forms of assessment maybe???), and eventually scoring better on state tests. I'll come back to the state test point soon...
- The article is citing logistical and technical problems for the 1:1 computing failures. Poor planning really sets a district up for failure. Moving towards 1:1 isn't a quick "let's get some grant money and implement this program" fix type thing. First of all, when you bring a mass quantity of technology into the district, don't you need to have the support system there for fixing problems, training, and maybe maximizing your district network? Planning...you'll need more staff to fix...you'll need more training...you'll need more integration training...you'll need more bandwidth. These laptops will force change...instructional yes...but also logistical. Those who thought that this wouldn't impact other areas...you didn't plan.
- Focus on the high-stakes testing. I know...this is the worst subject to ever bring up. Everything I do is geared towards school improvement. It's the era we live in. NCLB made us look at and standardize everything. I've a data lover so I'm all about gathering performance data on students. Yes...technology can help kids perform better but it's not something that just happens overnight. Change happens but it's a slow process, right? The rate at which our kids come closer to achieving is probably the problem here...NCLB requires us to change and make benchmarks too quick...I diverge. Here's a quote from the article, which truly bothers me:“ Where laptops and Internet use make a difference are in innovation, creativity, autonomy and independent research,” he said. “If the goal is to get kids up to basic standard levels, then maybe laptops are not the tool. But if the goal is to create the George Lucas and Steve Jobs of the future, then laptops are extremely useful.” Hmmm, let me see...aren't those two mentioned (Mr. Lucas and Mr. Jobs) two of the most revered people on the planet? Haven't they affected millions upon millions with their work??? I'm thinking that if my daughter grows up to be like those two...but not achieve in math or traditional writing....then I'd be ok with it!
There are so many other things in that article which truly bother me. The article closes with, “The art of thinking is being lost.” “Because people can type in a word and find a source and think that’s the be all end all.” I teach my graduate students (who are seeking masters and certification in instructional technology) to take a thought like this and transform it in to something positive. What I hear when I hear thoughts such as these...people who have not been adequately given professional development, advice, mentoring, whatever and who are not taking "old" pedagogy and making it new pedagogy. I challenge the author of this article to consider seeking out 1:1 programs that are successful...I'm sure they had their bumps and bruises...the difference is that they probably stuck with it a little longer knowing that it takes time and a little patience.
Steve