Editor’s note: This commentary is by Ron Pulcer of Rutland Town.
As the Vermont school district consolidation debate rages on (H.883), I would like to focus for a moment on technology, and how it might relate to rising education costs. Are recent technology mandates for new assessment rules impacting school budgets this year? How sustainably has technology been applied to education since Act 60/68 began?
During the ongoing health care reform debate there have been reports indicating that one of the big drivers of rising health care costs is technology. While technology has led to rising costs, it could also be used to lower costs, if implemented effectively.
Could technology, with its continuous upgrading of software, hardware, networks, spam filters, security patches and ever-more tools be having a similar affect on our education costs? Is technology a “mixed blessing” in education? Are we effectively utilizing technology to advance learning and reduce costs? Or are we merely chasing the latest trends, sales pitches, reform ideas and making the willing IT companies more profitable?
I am not a Luddite by any means. I’ve worked in the information technology field since 1977, mostly as a computer programmer, and with many types of databases. I am very familiar with the constant churn of learning and adapting to new software and hardware, and occasional rehashes or mashups of previous tech ideas, but now with more “cutesy” names. A friend of mine, a retired database admin, joked to me about “The Cloud.” He said, “We used to call it a ‘Data Center’.”
In late January I attended Rutland Town’s Pre-Town Meeting. While the school board members and principal gave their presentations, a continuous looping slideshow played in the background. I happen to think our local school and school board have done a very good job over the years, given the challenges schools face. I realize they were trying to tout their technology program with the slideshow. But as I viewed the photos, I couldn’t help but notice in nearly every photo was a child or two, sometimes with a teacher, either looking at a screen or touching a screen or keyboard. In addition to mentions of “smart boards,” my first impression was that nearly everything in class was done via computer. A week later I asked a neighbor (an educator at another school) who has children at our local school, and he assured me that the computers were not being used “full time.”
At the Pre-Town Meeting, I asked about the new technology and budgeted items. Luckily, the school did a good job getting some grant money and some Chrome Books from Google. So at least for my local school, these budget items seemed reasonable, and I commend their initiative to get external funding or donations for some items. A school board member said that some technology purchases were required due to new assessment rules (standardized testing), whereby students must now take the tests via computers.
I later learned that the new buzzword is “Smarter Balanced Assessments.” Vermont is a member of the SBA Consortium. Check out FAQ question #37 about technology requirements. It’s possible that some districts may already have the bare minimum technology, but whether they have it in sufficient quantity is another question. As a voter, it appears that the more affordable paper, pencil and OCR scanners are no longer sufficient. How much of this technology actually advances learning? How much is intended to make IT companies more profitable? What about other Vermont schools? If schools are required to get new technology, at a minimum for testing purposes, how many were not able to get grant money or corporate donations?
Also, what about budget items for technology upgrades over the years since Act 60/68? Plus, don’t forget the necessary e-cycling costs of older equipment. Has technology become a factor in education cost increases, as with health care technology? If so, to what degree?
It seems that Google with its Chrome Books, and Bill Gates’ involvement with Common Core are a continuation of IT companies viewing schools as a marketplace. Giving away computers could be a loss leader, a path towards future profitability.
Technology is not a big-ticket item like heating, school buses, teacher salaries and health care. But it is an ongoing cost, due to the relentless march of technological progress. Schools now require a “technology coordinator” position. Depending on the school or district, this can be a full-time or part-time position. It would seem that the knowledge and skills required for school tech staff has increased along with technology itself, and possibly also their salaries. When school enrollment drops, it doesn’t necessarily mean that a tech staff position will be eliminated. Tech staff positions are fixed costs spread out across multiple grades or schools. Even as enrollments go down, technology costs might not go down, and they might actually go up.
Back in the early 1990s, I volunteered to mentor weekly at local schools in Lansing, Mich. I worked for a technology services company that helped get computers into classrooms. There seemed to be a race between Microsoft and Apple to get their computers (operating systems) into as many classrooms as they could, because of ongoing OS licensing fees, and students trained to use their proprietary applications. It seems that Google with its Chrome Books, and Bill Gates’ involvement with Common Core are a continuation of IT companies viewing schools as a marketplace. Giving away computers could be a loss leader, a path towards future profitability.
Over the years, it seemed to me that computers in the classroom was more about computer literacy and using apps, more so than learning some very basic concepts in program logic. David Rushkoff, author of “Program or Be Programmed: Ten Commands for a Digital Age,” recommends teaching some programming logic right after children learn the algorithm for doing long division by hand.
Looking back, I had the best of both worlds: I learned mathematics and other subjects in K-12 prior to computers in classrooms. I got my first calculator for 12th grade as a birthday present, since I was going to take trigonometry. I never actually saw a “computer” in K-12. But I did learn BASIC programming on a teletype machine, from which we dialed into a time-sharing computer housed several miles away. In college, a computer was something I used to write programs on, and not something that I used for studying.
Today, I feel fortunate to have the choice to use a computer, or not, for some tasks. I did not grow up being dependent on computer technology in school. Yet I still work in the tech field today. Today’s younger generation is much more tech-savvy than I am, in many regards. But for some tasks, an electrical storm or drained battery could pose a challenge, if you had learned that skill on a computer.
One of the standardized test subjects is mathematics, which was my favorite subject, and occasionally my most challenging subject. There were those times when I got two C’s and an E on quarterly report cards, in the third, sixth and ninth grades respectively. Testing is necessary, which is why my teachers had weekly quizzes and ongoing tests. Every test is a “snapshot,” and that includes standardized tests.
It was a good thing that I was not given a standardized test at certain points in my K-12 years. A couple of quarters after my second C math grade, I took the Michigan standardized test and got in the 99 percentile for mathematics. My teachers were a bit stunned, but when they rechecked the results, they confirmed that I had gotten that score. My E grade in ninth grade algebra mostly had to do with the fact that I had just transferred from a Catholic school to a public school. I had never seen X and Y and the other algebraic symbols before then (I only heard about them). Where did the times sign go for multiplication? What are those parentheses for? As a new student, and being shy, I failed to raise my hand and ask the “stupid question.” But I eventually figured it out, as my report card grades for ninth grade algebra were E, A, A, and A. Back in third grade, my mother helped me out of my “math fog,” by assigning me math problems during the summer, before I could go outside to play. But my parents couldn’t help me out in ninth grade, since they never learned algebra. I was on my own, and I failed to raise my hand (I don’t make that mistake anymore).
The moral of my math story is that a single test score, standardized or not, should not be held in the highest regards, without also looking at the student’s track record. That is what the local schools and teachers are there for. Let them do their job. Don’t micromanage and berate them based on snapshot scores.
Standardized testing may not be the “silver bullet.” Yet we are mandating technology purchases in order to administer future tests. This seems like one factor (of many) that could be driving up our school budgets.
Since this is tax season, allow me to relate one more story. Although I program computers for a living, I do my tax returns by hand; I choose not to use TurboTax. I have been doing my own tax returns for many years, so I know the drill by now. I do the math by hand, and then check it later with a calculator. I do this to help me remember my “multiplication tables,” and practice doing calculations by hand. Who knows, some day your computer might not boot up, or the power goes out. As I’ve gotten older, this approach helps me to maintain my “memory,” and challenge my CPU (brain).
Doing my own taxes every year, the way I do it, is like taking nationwide and statewide standardized tests. Tax returns are part math test and part reading comprehension test (you might need to reread some sections to figure things out).
Back in the 1970s, taxpayers (including my parents) would gripe, just like today, about yet another millage vote for school taxes. If the vote went down, the school board would soon schedule another voting day. There is no Town Meeting Day in Michigan. But the voters could figure out exactly how much their property tax would go up by when they entered the voting booth, without using a computer. Not to mention, back then computers and technology were not even part of school budgets.
Here in Vermont we vote on Town Meeting Day, but we don’t know the exact effect on our tax bill until late summer. The Act 60/68 funding formulas are overly complicated, just like the rest of our tax code. I can sympathize with anyone who doesn’t understand our education financing system. I can also sympathize with anyone who chooses to hand over their tax documents to a hired tax preparer. I remember that awful first quarter in ninth grade algebra! I think we need a more understandable education tax formula, and a review of technology usage and costs in education.
