Continued Opposition To Laptops in Schools 528
theskeptic writes "The WSJ has an article about opposition to programs that provide laptops to 6-8th grade kids. Detractors say that the kids are wasting too much time online browsing dangerous sites, instant messaging friends, and posting to Myspace. Parents are worried that serious learning is being neglected in the quest to 'dazzle up presentations with fancy fonts instead of digging through library books.' Some parents however are 'enthusiastic laptop proponents,' one saying the laptop has helped her twelve-year-old son 'master critical professional skills like how to compile a PowerPoint presentation.'" Gaaah.
Much ado about nothing? (Score:3, Interesting)
It sounds like the vast majority of problems that this program is encountering could be solved by a halfway competent network administrator applying some basic restrictions.
(Hey....I'm a halfway competent network administrator...where do I send my resume? ^_^)
Seriously, though, a combination of Group Policy restrictions, a firewall at the school, and perhaps the use of a content filtering product like WebSense would instantly solve about 99% of the current issues, while causing relatively few problems in return. Sure, there's going to be a few hardcore users that manage to get around the system, but I think that if the student is savvy enough to outwit the Network admin, the school guidance counselor needs to talk to him/her about the various exciting and rewarding opportunities in the field of Information Technology. After all, hacking is an education in itself...a clever sysadmin would post rewards to any student who could game his system and show his work, so the sysadmin could plug the identified security holes.
The orignal lap tops... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Children.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Filmstrips (Score:4, Interesting)
I was in a small private middle/highschool years ago and they decided to do a laptop program. Now I loved it (it meant I got a laptop), but that didn't make them useful. For computer classes, the students used... the school computers (because they couldn't afford to give out the software they used). For most classes you weren't allowed to use them. The classes that really didn't make much use of them. I remember our science class. The laptops were used for typing up lab reports and notes and definition lists. None of them were due in class so while we could type them up and turn them in, there was no need to if you could look busy enough to not annoy the teacher. This was quite a while ago (Pentium MMX 266 was new for laptops, about '98 or so?) so chatting wasn't too big of a problem (ICQ was the big one then). But the kids used them to play games (Solitare, etc because they couldn't play many real games) or just surf the net (good thing they put those network jacks everywhere) and e-mail. I shudder to think what MySpace would have wrought.
As a kid I enjoyed it, because I the kind who used it for school and learning on my own. For 98% of the students there, the laptops were an expensive waste and often a distraction when used. Plus they were heavy.
A good computer lab and a good teacher will do far more for most students than giving them laptops will. Require them to have desktops and home and give THOSE out if little Billy "must" have a computer. Take all that laptop money and make more computer labs. If you are going to spend $1000 on each student to give them a laptop, get a computer for every forth kid in the school that's really nice with great software for $2000. That costs half as much and is probably better for everyone. Spend the rest on a good admin and a couple of very competent computer teachers.
The luddites are right (Score:1, Interesting)
It's simpler, cheaper, and better to do without. We probably get more bang for our buck by devoting that laptop money to hiring more talented teachers.
critical professional skills?? bullshit (Score:4, Interesting)
these parents have no idea what "critical professional skills" are... sure, maybe if your career goal is to be some kind of personal assistant for powerpoint, then yeah, ok... but powerpoint? critical? really?
but damn, you can learn powerpoint on your own, it's not that difficult... and certainly not worth spending the amount on a laptop...
now... if you said learning c++ was a critical professional skill, sure, that makes sense... but why can't the kid do this at home?
don't get me wrong, I like the idea of laptops in class, but only as a fast way to take notes in class, or convenience of keeping all your data and projects in once place (productivity tool)... considering the big distraction they can be, maybe for learning software or programming languages kids should use computer labs or the laptop at home only? But that doesn't even seem to fix everything...
school is about rigid regementation, partly to get the unfocused kids to focus (common theory of the school catering to the slowest)... having a laptop in the classroom presents a huge hole if websites, IM, or even a more interesting personal project is distracting the user...
this may sound lame, but maybe there needs to be some technology added here to force the laptops into a state where only relevent work is happening. something as simple as the teacher being able to see all screens to police the students to be on topic... or better yet, have in classroom computers with a good centralized user account system (i.e. linux with NFS mounted user accounts)...
Maybe the goal should be, a computer in every classroom... and a computer at home for every child...
More expensive I know... but it would help to regement things... Clearly, having a laptop for each child IS important for those children who have limited access to a computer at home. At least this way, the student can learn computer skills on their own...
Another thought. Has anyone done research into whether having distracting things like laptops help kids multitask better and actually focus better? It may actually help students learn to tune out distractions... Again, I bet there's a percentage of students that mentally just can't handle this temptation... I wonder if laptops for kids actually polarize kids, making the ubergeeks brilliant and well prepared, and the distractable kids uber stupid...
This issue is apparently complex.
Mobile computer lab (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, we have sufficient web filtering and other blocks in place, so the kids can't waste time playing games or instant messenging. Yes, there is sufficient security on the computers to prevent the kids from installing a bunch of junk or otherwise modifying the settings of the computers. Yes, the school has 100% wireless coverage to service the mobile lab, but personally-owned computers are not allowed to connect to our network (wired *or* wireless).
Why am I posting this? Several comments responding to this article have stated things like, "That's what the COMPUTER LAB is for". But here's why that doesn't hold: yes, we have a traditional computer lab with a bunch of desktops in it. But we only have ONE traditional lab, and it's constantly overbooked. Many more teachers want to use it for their classes than there are time slots in the day available for them. So we have to turn classes away. As in many schools, space here is at an absolute premium... we don't have any "extra rooms" sitting around just waiting for me to load another twenty desktops into it. So the ONLY way for us to expand our lab facilities was to use the CLASSROOMS as labs... which means notebooks (and a cart). Sure desktops would have been a bit cheaper, but there was no place to PUT them.
I was initially concerned about excessive wear and tear on notebooks and the breakage that might ensue. But I was reassured by a number of my peers at other schools around the country that the mobile labs they've set up get a lot less broken than they anticipated, and furthermore, accidental damage insurance on the notebooks covers us just in case a screen gets broken or something else catastrophic occurs to one of the notebooks.
Shrug.
Re:Too Late (Score:3, Interesting)
I program computers for a living and I didn't even see a computer until I was in my senior year of highschool, where I learned that aways-useful language: APL.
That was followed by a first-year engineering course on FORTRAN, complete with punch cards, which I worked in as an academic of one kind or another for most of the next decade, with a little BASIC thrown in for controlling hardware on Apple ]['s (some of which had 8 k memory, whoo hoo!)
I didn't learn C until the late 80's or C++, which is the language I work exclusively in now, until the mid-90's, by which time I was well into my 30's.
Pretty much 100% of the "computing" skills I learned before 1995 other than debugging techniques are now obsolete. Flow charts? Waterfall design? Quote-quad? Many of the things I've learned since have been marginally useful (most of UML beyond class diagrams and sequence diagrams, all of Java, all of CORBA--these things may be useful in their place, but I have no place for them) I'm currently changing from Perl to Python as my primary scripting language, a transition I expect will take a few years, creating another obsolete skill.
There is one skill that I learned in grade 9 that has been valuable throughout my computing career: typing.
This is the nature of computing technology. Trying to teach kids in lower forms stuff that is state of the art today is just wasting their time, because the vast majority of it will be obsolete tomorrow. A laptop is just an impediment, and awkward and unnecesary tool that will get in the way of much substantive learning.
Quiet resentment then spring the trap.. (Score:2, Interesting)
I have seen this Achilles heel on multiple occasions, but here's one good example. It was my senior year of college (a few years back), and I was assigned a presentation with a snarky little prick still in high school, taking college credits, for a general studies class. He was irritated on my lack of "accessibility", the turn around time it took for emails (he treated them as a variant of IM), and my fondness of doing library research. He expected all of our data to be found on the web, crammed into a power point, and rattled off. I grew tired of his constant bitching, and tasked him with making the power point. Three weeks later he made a stunning power point: animations, colors, and all the bells and whistles. I printed off a copy "just incase", and headed to class. The classroom's PC went down before we started and I smiled when the brick thudded in his pants. He vehemently wanted to switch days, but the teacher told us he would downgrade us for the lack a visual. I smiled and said that wasn't a problem, and started the twenty minute presentation. The kid didn't say much which initially confused me. I asked him after class what the problem was (figuring he was sulking because of the lost presentation). He said he didn't know the material! I laughed, but realized he wasn't kidding. I was shocked to find out the weeks of research I was handing him (and the written paper), which he had to READ to distill the power point, never actually stuck. He went over the material to grind into a power point, but did not comprehend the depth. He smoothly rehearsed the power point slides, but once that crutch was gone he was toast.
Again I say, let them have their technology. Let them paint themselves into a corner. Technology fails and with it the house of cards these kids call an "education". I have versatility on levels they scoff at, and when the lights go out I'll be smiling in the dark next to the switch with my pencil grinning from ear to ear.
Re:Learning comes from experimentation. (Score:3, Interesting)
Fullerton (Score:3, Interesting)
I live in Fullerton, one of the communities discussed in the article. The deal was that they built a new subdivision, with extremely expensive houses in it -- real estate prices have gone nuts here recently, like $700,000 for a four-bedroom house with almost no yard. So they had this new community of very affluent people, and they built a new elementary school for them. (I live up the street in an older subdivision, which is served by an older, preexisting school.) They wanted to make this new school super duper special and innovative, because, after all, rich people deserve to have the best schools, right? So they announced that certain kids (I think it was one grade at that school) were going to be required to have laptops, and the parents would have to pay. If you could demonstrate that you couldn't afford it, they would supposedly buy one for your kid, but that would be pretty hard to demonstrate, given that you bought a $700,000 house within the last year. If you just said you didn't want your kid to participate in the laptop program, the district's solution was that they would transfer your kid to another school.
If the public schools really want to do something super special, there are a lot of other options that would make sense, e.g., resume class size reduction, which was abandoned a few years ago because of the budget crisis in California. Another idea would be to pay more money to lure in math and science teachers who actually have bachelor's degrees in their math or science.
Re:Learning comes from experimentation. (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember a school report I got, I was furious about it at the time and I'm still annoyed by what the teacher wrote -- "books must be opened, not computers turned on". The teacher simply couldn't recognise I was actually learning lots of useful things - genuinely useful things - (and given the fact that I was and still am very lazy) was a GOOD thing. I may not have been learning his irrelevant subject - but I'm glad I ignored that school report because I much prefer my career in computing compared to what he'd rather have me do. My school refused to teach any computer science subjects on the completely crackheaded argument that "computer science was for failed mathematicians." WTF? (The still don't teach any computer science subjects even now).
From personal experience... (Score:5, Interesting)
Last year I taught at a private high school that required all of its students to purchase laptops. At first I thought it sounded like a great idea; how cutting-edge. But before the year was over, I came to see the whole program as a waste of the parents' and the school's money.
The issue isn't really anything from the technical end. IT had WebSense up and running, which blocked anything they deemed inappropriate for anyone connecting to the school's wireless (nevermind the few students who found ways around this). And IT could monitor what each computer logged into the system was up to at any point in time. They kept a record, so if a teacher suspected a student of doing anything unacceptable, but didn't want to make a big deal about it during class, all it took was an email: "What was Johnny doing between 1:15 and 1:30? Oh, playing a game? Thanks." And the next day the kid would get detention. As TripMaster Monkey said, a competent IT staff solved all of the problems from that end.
The issue is why is the program worthwhile? In what way does the education of the students become more successful by requiring their parents to spend xxxx dollars on a laptop for each of their children? And is it worth the hassle to the school's IT people?
Some might argue that it helps develop the students' computer skills. I'm not sure about national statistics, but I can assure you that every one of my students had at least one computer in their home. And trust me; they knew how to use it. Toting a laptop around campus all day didn't make them better users.
I have also heard arguments that each student having a computer affords for excellent instructional opportunities beyond the standard lecture and note-taking approach. Of course this is true, but I would have much rather had a projector in my room (which I did not) so that I could show visual aids from my computer. They are many ways to reach out to students with different learning styles and to make class more exciting that don't require every single child to have a laptop. And many ways that are less expensive.
In addition to the burden on IT of keeping up with the above-mentioned 'security measures', they had to employ one guy who did nothing but repair laptops (or send them off to be replaced) five days a week. That was his entire job. I've seen more laptops in multiple pieces, with broken/missing keys, and with cracked screens than I can count. Children in grade school do not need to be held responsible for keeping a laptop in running order. The average fifteen-year-old can barely be help responsible for walking across the room without tripping over his own feet. High school students rough house, drop things, are clumsy, are forgetful (I would never dream of leaving my computer on a bench for two hours), and just generally are not prepared to take care of these expensive pieces of equipment.
Most importantly, I know of very few teachers who in any way used the laptop capability regularly in their class. Some teachers forbid the students from using their computers during class, probably to reduce unacceptable use. I never had any problems with in-class laptop use because I taught physics and I don't know many people that can keep pace note-taking with that much mathematical notation (and 98% of the students couldn't type fast enough to keep pace in history class, either...so much for the 'saves paper from note-taking' argument), so if a laptop was out while I was teaching, knew someone was up to no good. The only time the computers ever saw the light of day in my room is when I didn't want to start on a new subject for the last five minutes of class, so I would let the kids work on WebAssign homework. As for lab data analysis, the upper-end TI's that all of the students had could do everything I needed, and if they couldn't, it's nothing that couldn't be done at home.
My point is: mandatory laptop programs in grade school have a short list of benefits which is overwhelmed by the subsequent detriments. The (questionable) honing of computer skills and introduction of new (seldom-used) teaching tools does not outweigh the cost to everyone involved and hassle to the IT group.
Do school I.T. admins know nothing? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Much ado about nothing? (Score:3, Interesting)
This way you have top notch staff who is just too busy to do anything the right way.
Re:Children.... (Score:2, Interesting)
The few times I have to sign my name (usually for stores too stupid to know the difference between a debit and a credit card)- I drive my bank crazy because my signature is never entirely the same twice.
The problem is not teachable- it's a packet loss problem between the brain and the fingers in the network known as the nervous system.
Much ado about nothing but trolls? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Much ado about nothing? (Score:3, Interesting)
We're talking 6th to 8th grade teachers here. My mother was an 8th grade math teacher although the school district wanted her to also teach science despite being unqualified. She opted to teach math at 5th grade level instead because she wants to put her knowledge to the best use she can. I have seen a teacher with a TA maybe twice in my life and in those circumstances that person was actually helping the teacher. Taking a kid aside to give them extra assistance with a given math problem for instance while the real teacher taught the rest of the class.
You're right about role models though, that is a really difficult concept for both teachers and parents to battle but when parents care about their kids education the teacher tend to fall in line or move to another district. I'm from Vermont and we have some truly great public schools because not only do the teachers care about their students, the vast majority of the parents are also involved in the education process and re-enforce what the teacher is teaching at home. This is how schooling should be and how most private schools operate. The problem is trying to force the parents to be good parents is impossible, unconstitutional, and just plain not the business of the government so the problems exist in communities which aren't as small as those found in Vermont or Oregon off the top of my head. I've found the two starts have largely the same level of public education and about the same level of success at it.
Our president's grades are of no relevance as they speak nothing of intelligence. An average student in high school can be quite smart just applying themselves elsewhere. For instance when I was in high school not even that long ago I was taking classes at UVM and working as a network contractor for several hotels and one school district. I started early because a network administrator took it upon herself to feed my interest. She taught me all the basics, the rest I learned building public Internet access for hotels.
To sum up what I'm trying to say here, I agree with most everything you've said but from my anecdotal experience the system isn't inherently flawed and I don't share the same cynical view that schools are designed to make me a factory worker. If that were true I wouldn't have started my own business while still in school. I'm not saying you were saying such things only that others on here are saying it and doesn't please me to see the hard work of so many good teachers not getting recognition as they should. It took my mother almost 30 years to start making a decent income so I'm still curious why others seem to think schools of too much money. I suppose you have to do away with all the red tape that has been put in place over the years. Repeal No Child Left Behind but unfunded and get back to firing teachers who obviously aren't doing their jobs which can be done by the principle doing his or her job of survising the teachers. Of course something needs to be done to get more parents involved in their child's education. I don't have the answer for that but I know that it shouldn't be a law nor some government mandate.
Degrees (Score:4, Interesting)
A teacher has to enjoy what they're teaching. A teacher has to be able to communicate not only the facts about what their teaching but their enjoyment of the subject matter. Whether they have a bachelors, masters, or PhD in the subject matter is inconsequential.
Do you need to know calculus to teach arithmetic, algebra, or geometry? Heck, if I had a bachelors degree in mathematics, I'd be bored stuff teaching kids algebra! I wouldn't be using my college education one damn bit!
My father was a high school math teacher for 21 years because he loved teaching math. He has a masters degree, which he got while teaching. He never used the math he learned getting his masters in the classroom. But most of his former students consider him to have been a good math teacher because he communicate his interest in math as well as the facts. He didn't suddenly become a better teacher because he had a masters degree.
You don't have to be a genius to be a high school teacher--it's high school! But you have to be able to interest others in what you're interested in. That's the hard part.
Re:critical professional skills?? bullshit (Score:3, Interesting)
Some schools, maybe. However, I attended a school (after leaving a regimented one) that was all about teaching, exploration, creativity, innovation and community. It was much more effective. There were also very few issues with "problem" students, as the students were inspired by the teachers. As there weren't rigid rules to obey, that also meant fewer students rebelling against the "system." This was despite having a large number of students from disadvantaged and "problem" backgrounds.
The result? Many students who went from the lowest rungs of society to success - without all the connections and money of the private schools.
Re:Much ado about nothing? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Much ado about nothing? (Score:4, Interesting)
Aggressive, rational-dominated, left-brained boys are given short shrift.
They are punished for questioning anything, particularly the purpose of assignments.
They are forced to adopt coping mechanisms that are inappropriate for school.
Boys are troublemakers, girls are not.
The flipside: girls are subservient, obedient "yes men" in the world of schooling. They do everything without question. They don't like to think for themselves, because it posits them as disobedient.
It's practically Freudian, the difference in "looking for approval" between boys and girls.
In the early half of the 20th century, most schoolteachers were female, and lived in a pre-feminist world. They taught to boys and girls, cajoled them both, catered to them individually if need be, and especially tolerated some of the more "wild side" of "boys will be boys" attitude.
Today's female teachers have grown up not only deifying their own equality cum superiority as canon, but also with a wanton disregard for "cutting someone slack" and, more importantly, the individual nature of students. Thus upon entering the classroom, they immediately identify their problems, which *surprise surprise* are always boys.
So, is this the answer then? Boys are just more problematic than girls, by an astounding margin? Or, in fact, are boys being emasculated and marginalized in the classroom? There is a lot of good literature on this, by the way. Check out "Raising Cain", or "Johnny Won't Read" or any other number of scholarly books on the increasing condescension and inflexibility displayed towards the male psyche in America's classroom.
Back to the topic, boring lectures are just the tip of the iceberg. They constitute a perpetual pattern of overinvolvement on the part of the teacher. Education after 13 used to consist of the Socratic method and a whole lot of "personal reading." They expected results, but they did not predetermine them.
Welcome to the 21st century of education. It's going to get worse, too.
Not that simple of a question (Score:3, Interesting)
Once in HS, this might change a bit as you would expect students to be more mature and perhaps be able to deal with the additional distractions a laptop in the class could bring.