Dear President Bush: About Your Technology Proposals ...

"The [Bush] proposals seem to streamline the process for schools to receive money and broaden the scope of technology and services that schools may acquire with federal money. I'm always leery, however, of the ability of the federal government to implement proposals in a timely manner." Included: Other Tech Team members' reactions to Bush's education plan.

Ed World's Tech Team The Education World Tech Team includes 40 dedicated and knowledgeable educational-technology professionals who have volunteered to contribute to occasional articles that draw on their varied expertise and experience. Stay tuned in the months ahead as members of the Tech Team share their thoughts on a wide variety of topics. The following Tech Team members contributed to this article: * Kim Burns, Cesar Chavez Academy, Detroit, Mich. * Madeleine Decker, Washington Intermediate School, Pekin, Ill. * Patrick Greene, Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Meyers, Fla. * Fred Holmes, Osceola Public Schools, Osceola, Neb. * Mary Kreul, Richards Elementary School, Whitefish Bay, Wis. * Stew Pruslin, J. T. Hood School, North Reading, Mass. * Jennifer Wagner, Crossroads Christian School, Corona, Calif.

The The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) and the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN) recently released Preparing the Classroom for the 21st Century, an official response to the Bush administration's education plan, No Child Left Behind.

At Education World, we asked our experts what they thought of Enhancing Education Through Technology, the technology section of the Bush plan. Here are the Education World Tech Team's responses to each of the proposals.

Proposal 1: Consolidated technology grant programs and E-rate funds will be allocated by formula to states and school districts to ensure that more technology funds reach the classroom. Funds will be targeted to high-need schools, including rural schools and schools serving high percentages of low-income students.

"You can throw all the technology funding in the world at a school, but if the teachers don't use technology, the money is wasted. Instead of sending more technology dollars to schools, why not give more dollars to the teachers who actually use technology? The money would be put to better use and would provide an incentive for other teachers."

"The year is 2001, and many of our kids still can't read. If a computer will help kids read, then by all means, get those computers. But don't forget that a school's number one resource is its teachers. When schools have qualified teachers, good communication among staff and parents, adequate supplies, and safe campuses, then -- and only then -- should we begin to fund technology. Technology should never be funded at the expense of more pressing needs."

Proposal 2: Burdensome paperwork requirements will be eliminated by sending E-rate funds to schools by a formula instead of the current application process. Flexibility will be increased by allowing funds to be used for purposes that include software purchases and development, wiring and technology infrastructure, and teacher training in the use of technology.

Education World's Tech Team has had an opportunity to react to President Bush's technology education proposals. Now it's your turn! Go to a special Education World message board to join the discussion.

"The elimination of the E-rate application process is a major strength of this proposal. As a teacher who recently had to file that application, I found the process tedious, time-consuming, and difficult to carry out. The myriad restrictions on vendors and areas of qualification make it difficult for schools to receive needed funds. One potential weakness in the formula proposal, however, would be that schools that are borderline for funding could have their funding delayed."

"The formula proposal sounds great in theory, but how will it be implemented? Our district was recently offered the opportunity to buy software. To secure the technology, two separate rubrics -- each several pages in length -- had to be completed. With the strong emphasis on improving district scores, most teachers have other priorities."

"How will the use of federal dollars be monitored?"

"Allowing software purchases would provide valuable benefits for my school."

"Buying software will not encourage teachers to use technology. Seeing how software can be used will encourage them!"

"In my state, there's an initiative to put technology -- in the form of laptops or desktops -- into the hands of teachers. If our program could be run in conjunction with a federally funded teacher-training program, the growth in the use of technology would be tremendous."

"What can't be underestimated is the importance of teachers who know how to use technology effectively. I still hear teachers say they have no idea what to do with the computers in their classrooms."

Proposal 3: In support of Children's Internet Protection Act of 2000, funds may be used to purchase filters to protect children from obscene and adult material on the Internet.

"The most important filter in a child's life should be his or her own conscience. The child that needs a filter probably already knows how to get around a filter."

"Filters encourage complacency; the belief that software can solve all access problems. In reality, teacher-training programs, student instruction, firewalls, and other procedures need to be put in place."

"There has been some information lately that filtering companies have not kept up with the increased sophistication of the Internet. This has resulted in both under-blocking and over-blocking of Web sites. Either can cause problems as teachers prepare lessons and students use the Web to complete curriculum projects."

"We have had instances where an Internet filter would have been a useful tool in the classroom -- if we had had the funds to purchase one."

Proposal 4: States will be encouraged to set performance goals to measure how federal technology funds are being used to improve student achievement.

"How will this be implemented? I'm a strong advocate of technology as a tool to improve academic achievement, and I'm very comfortable using technology; still, it has taken me several years to plan and implement activities that both improve academic achievement and prepare students to have a positive impact on a technological society."

"Is there going to be a national performance test? If so, what will you test? In our state, we pride ourselves on -- and are very protective of -- local control of schools. We elect a school board to carry out the community's wishes and to work together with the administration and teaching staff for the benefit of students. We believe that school board members who know the community are the best qualified to know what is beneficial for our students. We resist state control because we know that all our schools and all our children have different needs and a single state or federal program cannot meet those individual needs -- no matter how much money or how many mandates you throw at them. Yes, something needs to be done for the education and safety of our students, but local school boards are the best ones to do it."

"How do you propose to measure these goals? How can schools isolate technology as the reason for increased achievement when it is used as one of many tools to enhance learning? How can states set achievable goals before their schools achieve equity in technology access, teacher training, and funding? How can the use of technology be assessed using the ever-popular bubble-answer multiple-choice tests?"

"The establishment of state performance goals is a concern to me because of the lack of uniformity of those goals from state to state. As much as I don't like to see the federal government interfere with the educational process, the lack of uniformity among individual state goals sets up a situation in which students may be unprepared for educational experiences in other places. It also brings up the possibility of unnecessary competition between states and negative interference by the federal government."

Proposal 5: Matching federal grants will be provided through the Community Development Block Grant Program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development in order to establish Community Technology Channels in high poverty areas.

"Since the inner city is where many of the grants are being focused, the establishment of technology centers could be extremely beneficial both to the school and the community."

"Providing technology to high-need schools and technology centers to high-poverty communities would be an important investment in the future of students who otherwise wouldn't have access to technology."

AND IN CONCLUSION ...

"The proposals seem to streamline the process for schools to receive money and broaden the scope of technology and services that schools may acquire with federal money. I'm always leery, however, of the ability of the federal government to implement proposals in a timely manner."

"In a general sense, the technology plan looks good -- assuming everything works out as intended."

"The biggest concern I have about this proposal is that it won't be implemented."

"Statements in this plan could come straight out of Jonathan Kozol's Savage Inequalities. Poor schools score poorly and rich schools score much higher -- duh! This is another Republican initiative to punish poor kids and give rich kids even more than they have given them already. We fund children differently, but we test them the same way. Am I missing something? My suggestions? Drop ideas for standardized testing (see Alfie Kohn's The Case against Standardized Testing) and adopt an electronic portfolio assessment that allows each student to demonstrate the intelligence(s) and learning style(s) that are most conducive to his or her best work and mastery of his or her state's standards, without cultural bias. Encourage teachers to demonstrate proficiency in a finite number of technical tools and expect them to write lesson plans that incorporate those skills. Then place computers in their classrooms. Build school and district administrative systems that require teachers to use technology to do their jobs. Accomplish all this through pay structures that reward the use of technology and discourage its non-use."

For additional information about Jonathan Kozol and Alfie Kohn, see Ordinary Resurrections': An Education World e-Interview With Jonathan Kozol and Carrots or Sticks? Alfie Kohn on Rewards and Punishment.

 

Article by Linda Starr
Education World®
Copyright © 2001 Education World

Â