Idaho is ga-ga for computers and online learning. State Superintendent Tom Luna has made online learning the centerpiece of his “reform” agenda. Tom Luna has close ties to the for-profit online industry.
Teachers welcome computers and technology in the classroom, but Luna takes it to an extreme. He views technology as a cost-saving device, so he is (paradoxically) investing heavily in hardware and software, on the assumption that in time there will be need for fewer teachers. Teachers are an old-fashioned, expensive, near obsolete technology. Teachers need health care and pensions; computers don’t. Teachers are ornery and they often have thoughts that don’t coincide with the state’s agenda; computers don’t.
A veteran teacher decided that enough is enough. She did something she never dreamed she would do. She wrote an opinion piece for the local Idaho newspaper. She disagreed with the order to devote 49% of instruction in world history to computer time. Education is not simply imbibing facts:
Successful students must learn certain values such as patience, hard work, self-discipline, honesty, respect for others, etc. Teachers instill those values, not computers. Teachers serve as positive role models and successful learning requires positive human interaction. In training we were informed by a district official that “with the incorporation of this program you will not even have to interact with your students.” For those who do not understand how such an approach to teaching can damage a student’s education, there is no reason to explain further. You will never understand.
She realizes that the changes now being imposed from the top come from people who know little about students or teaching or education:
I now see individuals taking over decision-making positions in education who have no classroom experience, implementing programs that have made the classroom critically vulnerable to their destructive impact and counterintuitive to education. There is too much noise regarding the state of education that is distracting and destroying the true nature of education, which should center on the student. Students learn best when they have caring and reputable teachers. And we have them in the Coeur d’Alene School District. However, this is changing and if left unopposed will destroy our quality of education leaving our students, our community and our state to pay for these mistakes.
This teacher put her own job at risk by speaking out. With hundreds, nay, thousands of voices like hers, the public will begin to understand what is being done to their children and to our nation’s schools.
Diane
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Our school had a computer lab for math for a number of years. Students spent half their time on a computer, enabling the school to squeeze even more “productivity” out of the math teachers. The uniform judgement was that the “math lab” was a complete failure and it was ignominiously discontinued.
Here’s a general question: why do the citizens of our localities and states put so much faith in administrators who have proven themselves to be feckless and incompetent? How many new “cures” to our education challenges have to be adopted and discarded before people start waking up and saying “hey, you guys were wrong the last ten times, maybe we should think before adopting the next ‘cure'”? Why don’t we just work diligently on those practicies to which everyone agrees?
Absence of teachers – real human beings – is essential for decision making elites in order to achieve their main goals. De-professionalizing education, dismemberment of unions – which have been protecting the middle class from poverty and the poor from hunger. Diminishing democracy by handing decision making from the public to ‘for profit’ corporations that run outside the public sphere and in total secrecy – as unaccountable tyrannies. But first and foremost turning students from young age to an obedient crowed. Children who sits in front a computer whose output is well inspected to avoid undesirable ideas from surfacing.
In 1995 in ‘Class Warfare’ professor Noam Chomsky explained the current goals of the education system: “There are huge efforts that do go into making people…..”as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human being to be.” A lot of the educational system is designed for that, if you think about it, it’s designed for obedience and passivity. From childhood, a lot of it is designed to prevent people from being independent and creative. If you’re independent-minded in school, you’re probably going to get into trouble very early on. That’s not the trait that’s being preferred or cultivated.”
Putting students of all ages in front of a controlled environment, censored and manipulated by crony politicians and unaccountable corporation is the definition of ‘obedience and passivity’. It ensures a new generation of people who do not question authority nor have the creativity to see a wide spectrum of thoughts and points of view.
Democracy is simply dangerous since it takes the absolute power form the few to the population, as Professor Chomsky pointed out :”you can’t even talk about democracy until you have democratic control of industry, commerce, banking, everything.” How would the “educational” industrial complex survive under those conditions? How would top earners be able to extract more wealth from the public without facing backlash?
But of course the Obamas are not going to put their daughters in front of dumb computers nor Emanuel of Chicago or Gates regarding their children for they are aware how destructive that can be for developing mind and soul of a child. In the same book Professor Chomsky noted:” But the education for elites can’t quite do that (teach for obedience). It has to allow creativity and independence. Otherwise they won’t be able to do their job of making money” (Class Warfare, 1995, pp. 19-23, 27-31).
Yep & double yep. To use Haiti as an example (I directly worked w/refugees in Florida, & the American public has heard only a fraction of their story…): just as in other countries (&, folks, believe it’s happening here!), the Haitian plan had worked well for its 1%–keep the 99% out of school; even if country people are somewhat literate, it is in a different language than print & broadcast media–newspapers had historically been French, as were news broadcasts, a language not understood by the 99%, who speak Haitian creole. An analogy: the current educational strategy in the U.S.–99% of its children are in public schools where teaching has become constant test preps for dumb-down tests.
And where no real, meaningful education is occurring.
Leaving no opportunity to teach/exercise critical thinking/analysis=
citizens who will not possess the capability to question authority.
Right where they want us!
Anyone who thinks computers are a cost-saving measure for education knows little about computers and less about kids.
Presumably Idaho, forward-thinking state that it is, has already wired its schools with high speed internet and plenty of electrical power and outlets to put 35 computers in a classroom. And, of course, air conditioning to keep the computers healthy (not a priority when there are only kids suffering), particularly given all the heat they dump into the room.
If they’re doing laptops, then they’re completely prepared to replace $100+ batteries every year on average… and they’ll still need the amps and some sort of charging stations to rotate the kids through new computers every two hours.
They will also budget for IT professionals who will fix the hardware and software when it breaks due to accident or malice, and who will keep the computer networks up and running.
Instead of “snow-days”, kids will lean eagerly towards the radio to hear if their school is having a “no-data” day, forced to close because the internet is down, sorry… unless there’s that staff of crack IT people, just like the ones that most private offices have, roughly one ‘fixer’ for every 40 users or so.
And that’s not counting the illusion that every public school child, left unsupervised, will be choosing to stay on task given a data machine.
Online learning does have some serious potential – to make learning *more* individualized and to leverage teachers in the class sizes we have now. It lets us offer classes to kids, especially self-starters, that would otherwise be hard to offer.
If you’re thinking that you can sit 40 random kids down in a room for 50 minutes and have them all progressing appropriately with only a minute of teacher (or attendant) time per student… well. I invite you to try it. We’ll pick the kids and we’ll judge you on your test scores. And we don’t give extra credit for the kid who used his 50 minutes to hack around the access controls instead of watching math videos. 🙂
I’m so tired of these sub-par online packages and software programs like Plato (which my principal purchased so kids can earn “credit recovery.” Good lessons with technology are teacher-created, and not purchased, but developed organically. Whenever I hear of some excellent work, it’s because the teacher developed the unit on her own, or collaboratively.
My students have produced resumes for philosopher-king candidates, brokered post-World War I treaties and created peace plans for the Middle East using cost-free online social networking programs and googledocs. I developed these projects for free, using software available for everyone.
Experienced, skilled teachers know how to develop rich units, projects, and assessments that are meaningful and challenging, and can’t be reduced to multiple choice questions. I’m afraid to say that much of the corporate-produced learning materials to which I’ve been exposed are lousy, and I’m happy to say that my own work, not to mention that of my colleagues, is obviously far superior.
I suspect most teachers feel the same. What is troubling is that in the NYC Department of Education, principals are forced to spend money on useless, overpriced technology and other products which haven’t been customized to suit the schools’ needs. For example, our school receives Title 1 funds. (money for schools which service poor students). You’d think: “Great, we can spend that money on tutoring…” But, no. That money is earmarked for specific corporate spending — in other words, schools must spend that money on vendors like Kaplan, which produces banal test-prep booklets that are uninspiring, to say the least.
[…] Read the rest of the post from Diane Ravitch HERE. […]
Computers and technology most certainly have a place in the classroom. They are vital to the learning environment and in many cases are important to being successful in a future job. However, the idea that spending 49% of class time using computers will somehow magically make students learn more and be successful is ridiculous. In my experience the students who are successful using computers were the same students who were successful in the classroom without the computers. This really fails to address the percentage of students who arrive at school with little or no technology experience and with no computer or technology at home. Are we just going to leave these students behind? Are the computers and technology magically going to teach critical thinking skills or collaboration with their fellow students? Are teachers now going to be responsible for fixing computers problems/issues during instructional time? The goal of reform needs to be to have successful classroom teachers who use technology educate, teach and model how technology and computers in the classroom can help facilitate learning. A reform goal of mandating computer usage is simply not the answer.
First, let me say the teacher is a “he” not a “she,” he has one of those names that can go either way.
As a teacher in Idaho I asked my 8th graders if they would like a computer from the state. 100% yes. I told them the state was going to spend $300 a piece on the computer. Agreement went down to about 30% because they know you couldn’t get a good computer at that price.
I asked them if they thought students would take care of the laptop. 89% NO “Most of us can’t keep track of our cell phones”, cell phones are their heart and souls.”
I asked them if taking on-line classes would be a good idea. Some, who were interested in learning said, I would rather have a teacher. Others said it would make it easier to cheat.
8th graders being the most honest individuals told me the real value in having their own computer was the ability to look up porn.
So thank you Mr. (BA degree in Weights and Measures) Luna for destroying education in Idaho, unless the parents, community and teachers vote No on Props 1.2 & 3 in November.