Teachers Resist High-tech Push In Idaho Schools 311
First time accepted submitter Jack W writes "This morning's NY Times highlights the issue of learning in our public schools and the proper role of technology. The Idaho governor and his state school superintendent are advocating a legislative bill for a massive infusion of computers and on-line technology in schools and is meeting resistance from state teachers, particularly the part of the bill that requires high school students to take online courses for two of their 47 graduation credits. Superintendent Luna is quoted as saying, the computer 'becomes the textbook for every class, the research device, the advanced math calculator, the word processor and the portal to a world of information.' The article notes that the governor had received campaign contributions from technology companies and that Apple and Intel had played a part in drafting the bill."
Re:And the same questions as always. (Score:3, Interesting)
1 and 2, the taxpayer, no doubt. Because we pay 50 dollars a box to set them up (which central IT can do ourselves, but don't because then we don't get the warranty benefits, don't worry we're fixing that.) and then pay for "extended accidental protection", to the tune of another 110 per box. The hardware vendor makes out great, the taxpayer gets screwed.
3. in the school system I work for, about 3 days, because they refuse to properly staff support.
4. Upgrades only come after we have spent the cost of a new machine supporting the old ones, so about every 8 to 10 years or so, again this is based on the school system for which I work. Schools get told to upgrade, blow the money on other unnecessary things, then cry to us when their 8 year old machine isn't fast enough to even load our minimal image to it. We have some schools sitting on P3 machines because the principals wasted all the tech money for the last 12 years on other crap, and then have the nerve to DEMAND that central IT "get them something"
teachers' unions (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm a dues-paying, card-carrying member of a teachers' union (at a community college), but I can't help feeling that this is the kind of thing that teachers' unions in the US have brought upon themselves.
What should happen is that K-12 teachers should be professionals, and they should be treated just like other professionals, such as doctors and engineers. When is the last time you heard an engineer claiming that although his bridge fell down, he shouldn't be held accountable? When's the last time you heard a premed saying that it was unreasonable to expect him to do well on the MCAT, because African-Americans do worse on it, on the average, than whites and Asians, thereby proving that the test is racist? Or a doctor whining that it was unreasonable to expect him to use MRI scanners, because he hasn't had the training?
What left the K-12 teaching profession vulnerable to political interference was its history of failing to hold itself to high professional standards. That opened the door to NCLB and a general tendency of politicians to try to tinker with things that ought to lie within teachers' own sphere of professional competence and discretion.
What the politicians in Idaho are doing is stupid, but that kind of incompetent tinkering is the natural result of K-12 teachers' unwillingness to act like professionals.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:That's the big problem. (Score:3, Interesting)
At least some students will be able to access Wikipedia or some other resources they're actually interested in about the subject.
It's pretty bad when your kids can on average learn more from surfing the Internet than going to school. It's pretty bad that IBM can build a computer (Watson) that could ace just about any test that are given to students these days. Schools have become a joke where underpaid and under-qualified teachers have become the norm training under-interested pupils how to pass the latest battery of tests the local/state/federal government shovels forth. It's pretty bad when people consider and are sometimes somewhat successfully re-introducing creationism in the class room, that just goes to show the level of education us parents have had and we as parents are complaining that it has only gone downhill.
The fact that kids graduate high school with any type of faith in God/creation or any sort of religious interest intact is bad. The fact that Jesus-camps and similar faith-based decisions are resurgent among 16-18 year olds is worse. That means they haven't learned to think critically or to think for themselves.