Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Age or Ability Specific Forums Elementary School Technology use in school systems

Our school district won $15-20 million from the Race to the Top Initiative and was going to use part of the funds to purchase MacBook Airs for every student. Without getting into the details, the school board needed approval from the County Commissioners and the CC rejected it. We have a neighboring school district that has been providing computers to all of their kids for several years now and there is a lot of envy.

My understanding is that the neighboring school uses the computers at home to work on IXL plus they do some internet search projects and I believe have access to some sort of online calendar and email system. It seems our school district has similar plans as there has been no mention of software or how they will use the computers.

Do others believe that too much is being spent on the technology without really thinking about if it is needed or how it will be used? I can understand there may be kids in the district that do not have access to computers at all and I can understand the need for them to get computer skills, but most kids in our schools nearby have access to computers so it seems that software or various programs would be more important than buying kids computers.

I am really just interested to see opinions around this as it seems the overwhelming majority of folks think we absolutely need to buy the computers but I still am not certain.

I would add that the neighboring school district has been having quite a bit of success since they purchased the computers so perhaps they are doing more than I could find out about or maybe having a school-purchased computer helps more than I imagine possible.

Yes. This is a topic with a lot of legs and one is being discussed on Linkedin teacher technology forums. I've been writing about the topic for open source.

A lot of school systems are rushing out to spend the money from Race to the Top without an overall plan, goal, or objective except to give the kids digital technology (usually laptops or tablets). LA school district spent tons of money on iPads but then ran out of money for 1/2 or more school districts and didn't factor in the problem with the lack of bandwidth into the equation. Then, there are issues with theft, bullying, the digital divide at home, etc. which they didn't entirely factor either.

A lot of school systems are just rushing out to get the latest copyright systems with Apple, Microsoft, or Google. For some, they feel that the latest copyrighted software/hardware will keep their school districts higher in the rankings and, overall, improve student performance. Personally, I think a lot of school systems are getting deals with various corporations and that's another factor as well whether a school system has Dell laptops or not.

With my own ds8, we are homeschooling and we place strict limits on Internet access; we no longer have tvs so that's not a factor. Do I notice a difference without so much screen time as most kids have? Well, yes, absolutely.

Digital technology isn't going to go aware. We live in a digital world. Our kids will need how to use digital skills - if only to communicate with others through words, sound, or visuals. Still, they're also going to need to learn limits, self-control, and how to navigate the advantages/disadvantages with it too. The latter seems to be an afterthought for most school districts.

I think if you're looking for technology to replace textbooks, you're thinking too narrowly. Technology can augment and supplement textbooks, and do many other things that textbooks can't.

And this leads to why so many technology projects fail (and not just in education)... because you first have to think about what you want to accomplish with it, how you intend to use it, and how you're going to support it. Those non-tech decisions then inform the technology choices... hardware, software, management, etc. Buying technology for technology's sake is fine for the home consumer, but at the scale of a school district, it's an opportunity for gross waste and mismanagement.

I agree that there are many things the school systems could possibly do but locally it seems the only thing they are concerned with is to buy every child a MacBook. I have seen no discussion of what they will then do with the MacBook which is my concern.

It was the same with the smart boards, every classroom had to have one but I do not believe they have added much to the instruction as the focus seems to have been on getting the smartboard more than how they would use them.

I was interested to see if this was isolated or more widespread. As I mentioned initially, a neighboring school district has provided a computer to every child and I think envy is driving the purchases.

Here is a recent similar discussion thread about ipads in schools: http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/BB/ubbthreads.php/topics/165722/1.html

Techology (as in devices) can be used wellbut usually aren't. $15 to $20 •- is a lot to spend I things that have a fairly short life span. But if they are determined to do that then a fairly large chunk of the money needs to be used to provide insurance, repairs and a helpdesk. And there should be no sending of work to students outside certain hours - I would like to say school hours but an hour before or after may be acceptable.

In a world where you can by a decent used laptop on eBay for $100 or less, I would think it's a huge waste of money. Most families these days, even those who are truly low income, do have a computer and internet access. And if they do not, then why not have a budget to help those truly in need to get hands on a low cost computer / laptop instead of buying very expensive technology for everyone?

Our school district also secured a big slice of the Race to the Top funds three or four years ago and might have gotten more in subsequent years (not sure). I would consider our district to be in the top half as far as incorporating technological tools even prior to the Race to the Top initiative. However, one of the problems that I have seen stems from the differences among schools within the same district. While the district is reasonably strong overall, there are wide disparities among the many schools in our very large district. For example, DS/DD are in a relatively new school, which was state of the art when it opened over a decade ago, but would probably be outdated in comparision to new schools opening today. I am not trying to stir up a debate, but at least in our district, the schools with high proportion of professional parents and above-average family income have students who substantially out-perform the school with a high propootion of poor working-class and welfare parents. I even recall a conversation with one of the teachers, who pointed out that our school had recommended retention of about 5% of the K students that year, but most of those students would have been just fine at these other low-peforming schools. The sad part is that it is not a question of these low-performing schools receiving less than an objective share of the overall tax dollars, but rather all the intangible benefits provided by better educated parents and students from secured middle-class homes. There is also the benefits provided by teachers who win grants/partnerships from corporations and foundations. For example, one of the magnet programs to which DS/DD have applied has a corporate grant/partnership that provides a tablet and sofware to each student.

Anyhow, our district has plans to fully implement one child one device within the next few years. However, the administration always likes to try different things on smaller scales to gauge the best way to proceed system-wide (over 100,000 students). There are always special pilot programs occuring at different schools. For example, even something like MAP testing took a couple of years to implement system-wide. There are also infrastructure issues. The district wants to ensure every schools have updated and sufficient Wi-fi acessibility to support all those devices. Personally, I think the goal of one child one device is very exciting because it will just be one more tool to enhance learning. Two of the goals are to enable more customized (differentiated) learning for different ability students and to have all students begin a second language starting in K rather than in 6th grade. By the way, I believe that buying software will be less of an issue with the trend toward web-based software. That's one of the huge differences I noted with my android versus my pc laptop.

This is an awesome discussion. We have the opposite issue in our school district. They actually cut out technology department. We now have to share a technology support person between two schools, and they are not readily available when needed.

We also are in a STEM school where there is a push to use technology, but the school doesn't seem to be familiar with how to use it. I now volunteer two days a week to maintain "scootpad" for three classrooms. I know this is a big step down from iPads. Our school isn't going to buy each kid an iPad. But, I became interested in promoting scootpad because it is lined with the core, and I have two sons with mild dysgraphia issues who detest writing out homework and it was a fight every evening. These children now have an option to do common core lined practice online, or their written work. My kids grades all went up with scootpad. But. And here is what's sad... The teachers believe and are probably correct in their assessment of what program is popular changes yearly. They have so little time to teach and implement everything that the kids need to learn, so they don't want to dedicate their time to learning a new program that lets the kids use technology to complete their work. And that's why I started volunteering. Because I was using the program over the summer break, and didn't mind setting it up for my kids classrooms.

I don't know how much this contributes to the conversation, except that a friend of mine is writing her thesis on blooms taxidermy and the hold up of implementing technology in to the classroom with the failure not being inability to learn, or even access to the technology, but teachers who for whatever reason can't learn to use it themselves.

Oh, and yes, it definitely hurts impoverished children when technology is a focus IMO. I don't understand why since it's readily available but it hurts my heart as I can see the gap widen in the classroom. I volunteer with k-2 and I have wondered if it hurts my heart how it must feel to the teachers to witness the same.