As a teacher, I like to work from a point of reference. It helps keep me from getting lost in well meaning, but time consuming diversions from directly and continuously addressing student-centered learning.
BackPack.net offers an optimistic view of how to address a place where social-technological changes and schools meet.
To prepare students for a future of relentless change, schools themselves have to be models of innovative practice. We must be alive to new ideas and approaches to teaching and learning…
This view of the future supports embedding Tablet PCs and ink enabled technologies in Singapore schools.
I wonder:
Why is this view not compelling to U.S. school board members?
Why don’t teachers demand such an electronic infrastructure as exists in Singapore for student-centered learning? It’s not money. On average, local education agencies receive over $6,000 per student. That’s $120,000 for one classroom where a teacher probably receives less than half of that. Plus, the school receives additional funds for a wide array of special programs.
Why don’t teachers at least own their own Tablet PC and use it to complete their daily assignments? It’s not the cost of a Tablet PC. Teachers receive decent salaries. (We all want more money, and many of us have financial commitments beyond our means. But we decide how to use our money and we decide not to buy a Tablet PC to use in our classrooms.) I know one school superintendent who was a partner for years in a computer business, but does not have a Tablet PC in her office and restricts her children’s uses of computers.
Why is more effective and efficient student-centered learning not compelling to local school board members? Is it because superintendents block student-centered learning? As many superintendents have said to me and others informally and off the record, “I have my board. They pretty much do what I want them to do…”
I do wonder … and will continue to work with others who address these questions.
Yet, it seems to me that the Tablet PC and other ink enabled technologies offer a time for public discussion about these kinds of questions, especially while Congress is considering again the No Child Left Behind legislation.
Perhaps it’s time for the Tablet PC community to share our views of technologies in education with letters to editors of local newspapers, local education agency board members, etc.? The message: Yes, the glass of education is half full and we have room and means to add more student-centered learning capacity.
Great link, thanks!Some answers to your questions (as I see them in my myopic way):—Why is this view not compelling—Funding (most likely)Control (student-centered learning is “bad” for some reason)Control (there are “bad” things you can do/see with a computer)Protection/security (see 2nd control issue)“We just got you whiteboards and now you want computers?”——Why don’t teachers demand—We do make demands, heh-heh.Cost. It sounds like a lot of money per classroom, but it really isn’t (that number sounds like a building student:staff ratio counts special ed, paraprofessionals, admin. and secretaries). Don’t forget heat, lights, building maintenance (especially our older schools), and transportation.It’s the start-up costs that scare most school boards away, IMHO.——Why don’t teachers at least—“I have mine!” I’m glad I waited: Tablet PC OS 2005 is great!——It’s not the cost of a—Priorities. Correct: I purchased mine only after I had a PC at home for myself and another one for the family. And it wasn’t until the late 90’s that my district committed to having at least one in every classroom (for attendance, no less).——Perhaps it’s time—Please, please, please, do so! Early and often!—
See what happens when I have prep before lunch? <g>
Good prep! What did your students say about it? You offer great answers. I wonder if these are the answers school board members would also offer? I hope not. How do you see we can get beyond these answers? What should teachers do to make their case for student-centered learning more compelling? For use of advanced technologies more compelling? I agree that who-controls-what appears as a possible primary issue appears. But I’m sure I’m not the only person who sees ways to handle each of these reasons for stopping Tablet PCs from daily use in classrooms. I’m guessing you have more ideas. What do you suggest teachers do to get more Tablet PCs into classrooms in these circumstances?
Sedition… because when we win, it won’t be treason! (“If this be treason, then let us make the most of it.” – Patrick Henry)—I really think that teachers need to buy their own – with their own money or with small grant opportunities. When enough do this, it will be noticed. —We (tablet educators) need to get out and sell at local, regional and national conferences – and not just the tech conferences like NCCE, but also NSTA and NCTM conferences (and any others that you can think of).—We need to publish, publish, publish! I’m ashamed at the paltry offerings that I’ve seen in ISTE publications and I’d sure like to see something in ASCD publications! (I’m writing, I’m writing! Give me a chance! <g>)—Also, companies such a Toshiba, HP, and Microsoft need to publicize their own efforts more (HP and Toshiba are starting to: a good sign).—I very much believe that we are on the bleeding edge (top 0.1% of the top 0.1%) of great changes in U.S. education, I just can’t wait another generation (mine are in school now)