North Carolina School District Has Success With MacBook Air Initiative

[ciociosan]

I'm baffled by the attitude in this thread.
Granted, I come from a country with unions that are way stronger than in the U.S., and where they're not constantly demonized as the root of everything that's bad about public education, but for the love of all that is good and holy, will you listen to yourselves?

The vast majority of teachers chose their profession because they love to teach; they live for the joy of making students understand the world around them and become more independent people. The teacher unions exist to help ensure that they are able to do their jobs, not to protect their supposedly cushioned lives. The teachers are there everyday, and they know what their students need, as opposed to cash-strapped headmasters or city council members. Please don't be so exceedingly cynical! From the way you're talking about teachers, you'd think they were in the same income bracket as Wall Street hedge fund managers.

Also, as some in this thread have commented on, graduation rates and score results don't necessarily tell the whole story. What tests are we talking about? With fewer teachers, there's less precision in evaluating how the students are doing in a qualitative sense. It is quite possible that a lot of those extra 11% pass grades should never have been awarded at all.

And finally, not everything in school is as easily quantifiable as maths tests and second language glossaries. School is also about teaching kids to... wait for it... think different(ly). Computers and iPads are great, but they can't confront you with a different take on a Keats poem, or challenge you to think about people in other countries and cultures. And they most certainly cannot walk around the school yard and notice when one of the kids is being bullied or ignored. I owe my life, quite literally, to the teachers who saw me when I was contemplating suicide at age 10. School is about more than just acing an algebra test. That's why we have teachers, and not just computers.

 

[millia]

Glad that MGSDTeacher posted...

I am really glad that MGSDTeacher posted, so I don't have to go into the (wonderful) detail that she did.

I work with schools, and have one that is doing 1:1. For it to be successful, there must be a change in the culture and the teaching style. I have visited Mooresville (and co-workers have gone to their summer academy) and it an amazing thing. I heard the stories, but until I went there and saw it in action, I would not have believed it. *All* the students were engaged. *All.* It beats anything I have ever seen. After a while, you realize that they really ARE not putting on a show, and that they have changed things around because of how they are teaching. And the teachers have changed their roles; they are not lecturers, they are facilitators. They are as busy, but students get more attention in general.

It is a smaller, city-based school district, and so it has some advantages that a larger district might not. Demographically, it is fairly average. The description I heard (and seeing all the car racing teams there, I believe it) was that it's all the pit crews and support teams. These are not all college-graduate kids. It has the biggest advantage of a superintendent who is unequivocal in his support for this, and for aiding teachers to re-tool their skill sets. They also eased into this slowly, and showed the community how it will work. That makes all the difference in the world.

When I was there, it was white macbooks. Some techie observations:
You really need an AP point per classroom to do this.
You really need Macs to do this. I love Macs, but have no real problems with PCs. But at Mooresville, they had no virus outbreaks, no mass hacking (they do co-opt the wannabes into support for their fellow students) and, believe it or not, they don't push system updates even. No need. I don't think they even had AV software, actually.
They monitor student desktops when they're there- not at home- and at this point, the students are so used to things, they don't really need to get onto them or watch them that often. Shhh! Don't tell them that. For the record, doing this kind of monitoring on PCs is a REAL pain. Only one product that really does it well...
They had KILLER bandwidth. But then, bandwidth comes from a state consortium, not telcos.
They had fewer technology techies (vs. school/instruction techies) than you would expect. No real problems.
They had a cloning setup to allow 100+ at a time, in the summer. Nice.

It's a great place, and they're lucky to have the superintendent and a whole bunch of great teachers.

 

[mentaluproar]

I can't be the only one who found the world books in the background ironic.

 

[Thunderhawks]

I'm baffled by the attitude in this thread.
Granted, I come from a country with unions that are way stronger than in the U.S., and where they're not constantly demonized as the root of everything that's bad about public education, but for the love of all that is good and holy, will you listen to yourselves?

The vast majority of teachers chose their profession because they love to teach; they live for the joy of making students understand the world around them and become more independent people. The teacher unions exist to help ensure that they are able to do their jobs, not to protect their supposedly cushioned lives. The teachers are there everyday, and they know what their students need, as opposed to cash-strapped headmasters or city council members. Please don't be so exceedingly cynical! From the way you're talking about teachers, you'd think they were in the same income bracket as Wall Street hedge fund managers.

Also, as some in this thread have commented on, graduation rates and score results don't necessarily tell the whole story. What tests are we talking about? With fewer teachers, there's less precision in evaluating how the students are doing in a qualitative sense. It is quite possible that a lot of those extra 11% pass grades should never have been awarded at all.

And finally, not everything in school is as easily quantifiable as maths tests and second language glossaries. School is also about teaching kids to... wait for it... think different(ly). Computers and iPads are great, but they can't confront you with a different take on a Keats poem, or challenge you to think about people in other countries and cultures. And they most certainly cannot walk around the school yard and notice when one of the kids is being bullied or ignored. I owe my life, quite literally, to the teachers who saw me when I was contemplating suicide at age 10. School is about more than just acing an algebra test. That's why we have teachers, and not just computers.

Same here, why are people trying to fault one side or the other?

Obviously middle ground is the solution and that's what will shake out.

One thing is also clear: In today's complex world many parents are not pulling their weight! Principals not taught, pacifying their kids with money when they can't give attention etc.

By the time the kids are 18 there is nothing more to give they have had everything.

Instilling core values like working hard isn't easy. That's why the parents want the schools to do that and if they can't, they'll blame the education system.

I could go on and on, but this is not a situation that will be solved by computers or made worse by computers.

 

[Greendave]

I'm ashamed of the comments I read here....

Reading the comments here is like reading a Socialist blog. Complaining that improved education results cannot be justified if teachers are loosing their jobs! Claiming that the use of computers somehow takes focus away from traditional subjects - even though the exam results in those subjects are improving. Claiming parents are to blame - so should we give up trying to improve education standards because we have a scapegoat of bad parenting. Typical negative reaction to any form of change, always seeking to find some small downside to stop improvements.

Go watch the film Idiocracy and then try and justify being a Luddite.

(For those who don't understand what I am talking about, don't worry)

 

[jmgregory1]

If a 12 hour day and not getting summers off, makes you some of the hardest working people out there, then hello, I am the hardest working person out there! Try welding pipes together 80 ft off the ground, at night in 20 to 30 degree weather! Try rushing into a burning building, knowing you might have to give your life for some stranger. Try patrolling an urban area, wondering if at any time if someone you can't see will shoot and kill you.

Try to wrap your mind around a little perspective before you talk please. Teachers have a thankless job and it doesn't pay well (although my friend has been a teacher for all of a year he makes fairly close to what your your mom made after 32 years... and he does get summers off just for the record), but as I said earlier, its not like people should be getting into teaching to make money... its always been a thankless, underpaid job. Your mom did it because she loved the kids and loved educating them. She didn't do it for her $45k a year.

I'm not going to disagree and wasn't making the suggestion that welders or firemen or police, army, trash collectors, etc are not hard working. It's really that teachers are so very often thought of as overpaid and underworked. I can't tell you how many times I heard and still do - "yes, but your mom made $45,000 working for just 9 months of the year". That's crap and tells me that our education system isn't working the way it should because these same "educated" people are talking about things they clearly are not educated on. Yes, my mom taught because she loved teaching - and considering she taught first grade the whole time, it's quite the accomplishment. It's a tough year to teach - with kids going from kindergarten where they're really not learning, to having to teach them the basics of reading, writing and math with some science and art thrown in too.

 

[bennettave]

I think when unions started, they had the support of the people. It was a group of little guys, fighting for their fair share against the man. The problem with the teacher's union, is that the man is us. They're fighting for our tax money.

At my previous job, when we wanted more elite employees, we'd increase the salary that we offered. It sucks when you don't pay teachers much, and yet the best and brightest college students don't go into the field.

If my son was a 4.0 student, academic scholarship, and decided to be a teacher -- what a disappointment...right?

We'd be better off with fewer, more qualified teachers making a lot more money.

I've been in a classroom with 55 kids. Impossible to teach. Laughable to think about trying to run some sort of computer groups.

My current job is teaching high school. I teach in Milwaukee Public, one of the lowest scoring districts in the US. When I was an engineer, I used to think that too many teachers are lazy. EVERYONE thinks they know something about education - You, Steve Jobs....I thought so, too. Come to Milwaukee and start teaching...talk to me after you've done it for a while. I promise you'll change your mind. I don't know anyone who hasn't.

 

[maelstromr]

I'm baffled by the attitude in this thread.
Granted, I come from a country with unions that are way stronger than in the U.S., and where they're not constantly demonized as the root of everything that's bad about public education, but for the love of all that is good and holy, will you listen to yourselves?

The vast majority of teachers chose their profession because they love to teach; they live for the joy of making students understand the world around them and become more independent people. The teacher unions exist to help ensure that they are able to do their jobs, not to protect their supposedly cushioned lives. The teachers are there everyday, and they know what their students need, as opposed to cash-strapped headmasters or city council members. Please don't be so exceedingly cynical! From the way you're talking about teachers, you'd think they were in the same income bracket as Wall Street hedge fund managers.

Also, as some in this thread have commented on, graduation rates and score results don't necessarily tell the whole story. What tests are we talking about? With fewer teachers, there's less precision in evaluating how the students are doing in a qualitative sense. It is quite possible that a lot of those extra 11% pass grades should never have been awarded at all.

And finally, not everything in school is as easily quantifiable as maths tests and second language glossaries. School is also about teaching kids to... wait for it... think different(ly). Computers and iPads are great, but they can't confront you with a different take on a Keats poem, or challenge you to think about people in other countries and cultures. And they most certainly cannot walk around the school yard and notice when one of the kids is being bullied or ignored. I owe my life, quite literally, to the teachers who saw me when I was contemplating suicide at age 10. School is about more than just acing an algebra test. That's why we have teachers, and not just computers.

You're baffled by this thread because you've never spent a single day as a student in an American public high school. These attitudes come from stereotypes (aka generalizations) born out of the ACTUAL EXPERIENCE of most Americans as public school students. I had a couple amazing teachers who I will dearly love forever, and who deserved to be paid 3 times what they were. I also had DOZENS of teachers who were lazy, incompetent, and more than willing to sacrifice the future of every single child in their school to make sure they didn't work another 15 minutes in a work day.

American unions are at the heart of the destruction of public service (and several other industries). They no longer represent a small group of working men striving against unfair corporate tactics, but rather the old guard desperately trying to maintain unjustifiable compensation/work terms. Greece and much of Europe are demonstrating now what the inevitable problem with this is...and while your country's small population, minimal global commitments and near homogenous society/economy allow you to pretend strong unions are rational and efficient, that is simply not the truth in our country or most anywhere else.

 

[ciociosan]

Greece and much of Europe are demonstrating now what the inevitable problem with this is...and while your country's small population, minimal global commitments and near homogenous society/economy allow you to pretend strong unions are rational and efficient, that is simply not the truth in our country or most anywhere else.

We're not Greece, and while there are a lot of reasons for the financial crisis, trade unions are the least of them. As for your other rather off-topic remarks:
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ODA_percent_of_GNI_2009.png
That's my country at the top of the list of foreign aid as per cent of GNI, and the U.S. at less than one fifth of that. If you want to compare invasions of foreign countries, you beat us, hands down. Clap clap. Speaking of which, Sweden has an ethnic Iraqi population of 120 000 people. The U.S. has accepted around half that number of Iraqi refugees. Fantastic way to do "global commitments".
2) "Homogenous" society. Right. 20% of the population in my country are foreign born or have parents who are.

You're arguments are specious. But you're right, I haven't attended an American high school. I guess that means I'm wrong and you're right.

 

[Bubba Satori]

It's hard to argue with success. If it cost that many jobs to to finally getting hundreds of kids learning, it was well worth it, IMHO.

"...finally get hundreds of kids learning..."

How did kids learn before computers?

Computers don't get kids learning.
Excellent teachers enabling a desire to learn gets kids learning.

We are doomed.

 

[Tibbers]

My high school was a one to one school from my sophomore year on. Although the idea seems cool, it honestly didn't work well for my district.

It didn't matter how much training the teachers received, the support students/parents provided, or the software that was located on the MacBooks (we had the cheap plastic ones)... they were simply an expensive distraction.

Fancy technology ≠ A good education

 

[JoeG4]

All of the tools in the world will be of no use unless the teachers & administration know how to use them. Part of the reason why computers have taken so long to really catch on in education is just that.

If a school goes from full "old fashioned" to fully technology, the costs are going to be astronomical. Not only are you talking about equipping every student with a computer (and in a school of 1500 students that's $300,000 a year just for the laptops on lease [at $200 a month]).

What about the software? I'd bet on site licensing for the programs (including learning media) costing almost as much, if not more than the computers. Then there's IT costs (the initial ones will be sky high, and maintenance will likely also be sky high).

So in the end, it may not be a cost-effective approach; The key is STILL in how the technology is used. If the teachers aren't effective in providing a good environment for the students to learn (and the students aren't cooperating), all the tech in the world won't do anything.

 

[maelstromr]

We're not Greece, and while there are a lot of reasons for the financial crisis, trade unions are the least of them. As for your other rather off-topic remarks:
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ODA_percent_of_GNI_2009.png
That's my country at the top of the list of foreign aid as per cent of GNI, and the U.S. at less than one fifth of that. If you want to compare invasions of foreign countries, you beat us, hands down. Clap clap. Speaking of which, Sweden has an ethnic Iraqi population of 120 000 people. The U.S. has accepted around half that number of Iraqi refugees. Fantastic way to do "global commitments".
2) "Homogenous" society. Right. 20% of the population in my country are foreign born or have parents who are.

You're arguments are specious. But you're right, I haven't attended an American high school. I guess that means I'm wrong and you're right.

Though I take issue with your conveniently narrow definition of "global commitments," your (feigned?) ignorance of the fact that pension commitments (driven largely by union and related demands) are a HUGE part of the Greek debt (as well as US and European in general) crisis, and am less than impressed by your "diverse" population of only 80% the same race, creed and heritage, I'm most concerned with the fact that you miss the entire point - probably because you chose to respond to one phrase of a two paragraph argument.

The tone that so disturbs you comes from frustration of the people who have actually experienced the American public educational system as students and parents. We have seen the effect of unions, and many of us know young, gifted, energized teachers driven out of the field to save the job of some overpaid, over pensioned (teaching being basically the only job that gives those any more) baby boomer. We are delighted to see something in this macbook air program that might help chip away at an education gap that is embarrassing and unacceptable, and has been aggravated by teachers' unions for decades.

 

[Luckybobby]

Umm

I thought a lot of schools had this already... Maybe just the 10 schools I went to had this. I don't know maybe.

 

[Tilpots]

"...finally get hundreds of kids learning..."

How did kids learn before computers?

Try reading the article and some of the posts next time. Maybe a teacher could have taught you context? Or maybe a computer?

And brush up on the math skills, too. Before the computers=poor test scores. With computers=good test scores. That help?

 

[Brickwall]

There are several concerns about articles like this that are appearing more and more frequently from different sources and media. This is just one of many planted and handpicked experiments which are designed to convince the masses that if they just turn over education to the profiteers, all education will be fixed.

Rupert Murdoch - Chairman and CEO of NewCorp (including the NYT, the source of the article), education profiteer:
http://gothamschools.org/2011/07/27/when-the-story-is-education-rupert-murdoch-gets-involved/
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-07-31/local/29852520_1_wireless-generation-million-no-bid-contract-potential-contractors
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2011/news/companies/1112/gallery.ceo-responses/5.html

#1 How bad is our education system?

US performance compared by poverty levels: Compared to nations with like poverty levels, US schools outperform any other country in any given level. Overall the US scores are hampered by the fact that the US has an extremely high rate of children in poverty.

#2 Is the improvement in scores correlated to the use of MBA or caused by it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation: It would take real analysis to show if the MBA had any effects.

http://irishliberty.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/ice-cream-vs-drowning.jpg

#3 What was the actual improvement?
http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/distDetails.jsp?Page=2&pLEACode=491&pYear=2010-2011&pDataType=1

Looking at the most current data, if I have the right district, you can see on the two charts showing three year testing data that the MGSD increases are almost perfectly matched by the entire state. Unless the entire state also had MBA, this actually would bolster the case for correlation not causation.

#4 If causation could be proven, does that mean it can be spread to every school in the nation?
http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/distDetails.jsp?Page=13&pLEACode=491&pYear=2010-2011&pDataType=1

Looking at the school profile, how representative is it of our most troubled schools? MGSD has 73% white students and 22% Black and Hispanic. The state has only 53% white students and 39% Black and Hispanic. Looking at greatschools.com it looks like the schools have an average proverty rate of 33% or less. Would this program still "work" in a school or district that has a 96% poverty rate? What about a school with 2% white and 97% Black and Hispanic?

Does race matter?http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1998/spring_education_darling-hammond.aspx

#5 Are their teachers/admins different than the rest of the state? Are they the young, inexperienced go getters as many have claimed in this thread are the best?
http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/distDetails.jsp?Page=4&pLEACode=491&pYear=2010-2011&pDataType=1

MGSD has a higher percentage of teachers with advanced degrees. MGSD teachers are more experienced, especially wide gap in the crucial middle school years!

MGSD has a higher percentage of principals with advanced degrees. MGSD admins are more experienced than the rest of the state.

These are just a few off the top of my head concerns about this article.

 

[Justinf79]

At this point, might as well just keep the kids home with the computers and learn over the internet, like a bunch of college classes are these days.

 

[fitzaer]

It is the purpose of the educational system

to employ an increasing number of teachers and administrators, regardless of abilities. It is the taxpayers' duty to pay for it, regardless of results.
Whether or not students learn, fail, or drop out of the system is not important.
Any method that improves teaching results but results in fewer teachers must be rejected.

 

[wilycoder]

You mean the vague and entirely unsubstantiated insinuation that the school district is lying about the benefits seen from the program?

Yeah, a government has never lied in human history before, so lets trust everything they say without question. As long as it means more sales for Apple, screw it, lets just ignore history!

The completely objective numbers like graduation percentages and student retention?

As opposed to all those 'subjective numbers' out there? you meant to say objective data. lol, clearly we've got a scientist on our hands...

My macbook is better at defending cruddy teachers. Maybe one of the new macbook airs can run your union for you?

Right, as if a person needs to be in a union to call into question

a) the method in which the testing was done
b) independent verification of the data
c) the age old fact that correlation does not equal causation

I am not a teacher, in a union, or a paid shill. The fact that this needs to be pointed out shows how useless this discussion really is.

 

[warschauer]

I haven't had time to read through the whole thread, but the accounting is way off in this article. Read through it and it makes clear that the cost of the laptop program is about $250 per year per student (for hardware, software, and insurance) out of a total budget of more than $7,400 per year per student. It thus raises the cost per year per student by about 3%. Yet it implies that it was necessary to raise class size by 67% (from 18 students per teacher to 30 students per teacher) to pay for it. Doesn't add up.

It seems, instead, that there were broader budgetary problems that caused the huge increase in student-per-teacher ratio and consequent layoff of that many teachers. The laptop program alone would cause an increase from 18 students per teacher to 18.5 or 19 students per teacher.

 

[jayducharme]

It is the purpose of the educational system
to employ an increasing number of teachers and administrators, regardless of abilities. It is the taxpayers' duty to pay for it, regardless of results.

That's not the purpose of the educational system, but that's sort of what's been happening. And don't assume there's an increasing number of teachers; there isn't. But there has been a steadily increasing number of administrators, many of whom are making six figure salaries while the teachers doing the work make low five-figure salaries. State higher education in the U.S. is following a top-heavy business model right now, and it's putting the entire system in peril.

In any business there are slackers. Don't assume that teachers are the culprits in education. Many are overworked to the breaking point, have to struggle with oversized classes and, because administrators aren't teachers, often have serious curricular concerns that are ignored. Many have no choice but to teach under conditions that are not conducive to learning, in a climate that increasingly views the student as a customer (who is always right).

If it weren't for unions fighting to preserve a voice for teachers, the educational system in this country would have crashed and burned long ago, a victim of the Wall Street mentality that currently dominates U.S. culture. It amazes me how much the U.S. education landscape has changed since the 1950s. If it keeps heading in that direction, no amount of technology will save it.

 

[roasted]

What's funny is you naysayers arguing against results. 37 teachers lost their jobs / 100's of kids gained an education. I'll take an educated child every time.

I just don't understand why the MacBook Air was the target system. I mean, I've heard of 1 to 1 initiatives all over the globe, and in most cases, they help, but with the level of expense often times it doesn't make sense, let alone using the MacBook Air.

While I have no doubt technology helps out the educational sector, it's useless without the proper training. I know the "results" say that their graduation rate is higher etc etc... I think it's quite obvious that if Macbook Air's solved this graduation rate mystery, there were far more issues with this district than were realized.

This is just a personal opinion from somebody who has worked in IT within school districts for years.

 

[Jigsawjammer]

Thinking that kids passing two exams makes them smarter makes you stupid. I can't wait to live in a society where everyone is an english major and has basic math skills. Oh America- stop relying on others to do your work such as raising your children and teach them hard work can be rewarding. These children probably have little listening skills and miss out on the finer things in education such as art, music, and science.

But hey- let's listen to George Bush what is best for our country and make two test scores a year as whether or not a child is educated.

Let's hope these kids don't get educated- where in America can they work with just English degrees? Less than 1% of urban children pursue science careers- probably because it's not taught well in most urban areas due to the school needing to pass those tests.

Wait- MacBook Airs for every student will fix it all. Students are educated- they can identify the antonym to "happy"! Schools get passing grades for this great ability!

Stopping being foolish people. These kids aren't really be educated- they are learning how to pass a test. I can't wait for these well educated kids to problem solve a jet engine malfunction that no computer can help them with or even care about it if its not "personalized" to the way they like to work.

 

[BobbyRond]

Interesting. A friend of mine just launched an Tech-Ed product for teachers that was featured on Mashable today. It is a classroom learning tool for students equipped with smartphones or laptops. It's definitely an emerging market.

http://mashable.com/2012/02/14/gosoapbox/

It has potential but still needs some tweaking. Especially the video looks a bit clunky.

 

[Abazigal]

Well, if you layoff bad teachers and keep the good ones, that's addition by subtraction.
I'd rather have 60 kids in a classroom with a good teacher than 30 kids in one classroom with a good teacher and 30 kids in a second classroom with a bad teacher.
Ignoring specific figures, I'd prefer more kids in classrooms with good teachers and fewer in classrooms with bad teachers.

You really have no idea the ludicrousness of the suggestion you are proposing, aren't you?

By the same logic, you would rather fire the slower worker and have the faster worker do the work of 2 people, rather than have 1 faster and 1 slower worker do them?

Put too many kids in the same classroom and eventually, everyone suffers. It is extremely difficult to handle a class of more than 40 pupils. 60 in a class is not teaching, that's lecturing. The teacher will not be able to cater to the needs of every child, nor give them the individualised attention they may need. And ask yourself, how well did you learn in a lecture where the educator just drones on and on regardless of whether you understand the lesson or not, and never has time to field your individual questions?

Not to mention how overloaded the poor teacher will be having to deal with twice as many pupils (meaning more work to grade, parents to conference with, possible house visits, pupils to tutor/talk to after school or during break times, manage the naughty ones etc).

At first glance, I feel the school is doing the right thing (introducing ICT, which I feel is crucial to prepare the children for an increasingly wired world). However, they are going about it in the wrong manner (firing teachers), who would really be the lynchpin to carrying out this 1-to-1 computing properly. But I can't blame them, because in the end, the problem goes back to the govt with their "brilliant" idea of cutting back on funding.

Well, you want to reduce the resources invested in educating your future generation, you will get exactly what you paid for.