I grew up and went to high school in a rural school district in North Idaho where my parents are still teachers. As mentioned in many of the post above, the resistance to this move is not some anti-tech paranoia. There are serious concerns like plans to lay off large swaths of teachers, and use the savings to pay for the computers.
I most seriously object to the notion that the superintendent of schools is going to "fix" education with this move when many of the state's districts are in shambles. State and local support for schools is so dismal that my home district has gone to a 4 day school week to cut costs, and that's been going on for 7 years, one of the first in the country. Students all the way down to first graders sit through class from 8:00 to 4:00 every day to meet state requirements for hours, then spend 3 day weekends melting away what they learned. Every year the school board whittles away at the foundations, most recently furloughing salaries for two days during the Thanksgiving holiday. Every two years when the school has to levy the community for additional funds, the scenario gets even more bizarre and terrifying. The most recent levy had things like paper and dry erase markers on the chopping block as well as all extracurricular activities which were lumped in with things like "art" and "band." Is issuing every student a laptop going to solve these problems? By the time students make use of them, everyone will be outside in the rain doing algebra with sticks in the mud.
These issues seem to always take a tone of vilifying teachers for being antiquated and unprepared, when I really think they are true saints, working with the best that they have. I hope Idaho takes a little closer look at the reality on the ground and thinks of a better strategy than paying a company in another state to tube-feed content while slashing budgets.
