>From ltw@cayuga.cs.vt.edu Thu Mar 6 20:23:32 1997 Received: from cayuga.cs.vt.edu by vtopus.cs.vt.edu (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/03Jan97-0813AM) id AA08002; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:23:30 -0500 Received: by cayuga.cs.vt.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/08Aug95-0935AM) id AA04933; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:23:29 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:23:29 -0500 From: Layne Watson Message-Id: <9703070123.AA04933@cayuga.cs.vt.edu> To: ei@vtopus.cs.vt.edu Subject: from the other side... You Can Fire the Teachers, But You Still Need the Technicians ------------------------------------------------------------- I've been thinking for a few months now that 1997 is very likely to see the first high-profile, tempest-causing note of sanity sounded against the cooption of primary and secondary education by the costs, the time drain, and the general irrelevance of computerized technology. Before long *Isomeone* is going to step forward and jar society with an unexpected word of common sense. We're at least a step closer to that happening with the announcement of what looks to be a dramatic conference at Penn State University in September. It's called "Education and Technology: Asking the Right Questions," and will include such featured speakers as Neil Postman, Ivan Illich, and Langdon Winner. Not your usual, sheep-minded, "isn't technology cool" education crowd. For more information, call 814-863-5110 or write to ConferenceInfo@cde.psu.edu. Meanwhile, the few educators in the trenches with their eyes open find themselves appalled by the scale of the folly, if only in economic terms, quite apart from the educational issues. Lowell Monke, who teaches computer technology in the Des Moines public schools, and who also participates in the district's technology planning efforts, writes: I just talked to the head of the technicians in the district and his take is even more bleak than mine. We currently have about 2000 computers in the district and 5 technicians. He claims that businesses generally maintain a ratio of computers to techs well under 100 to 1. That means we are at least 15 short right now. The number of computers will double in the district in the next 5 years according to current plans. That means we *should* go from 5 to 40 tech positions to adequately support our computer operations. We also now only have 3, not 4, tech staff development people. That number is woefully inadequate now so one would suspect that within 5 years we will need at least a total of 10 staff development people working just on tech stuff. Keep in mind that none of these include the 10 people being proposed [for] curriculum tech support. It also doesn't include any personnel needed in the high or middle schools -- that part is scheduled for action next year. So add another 5 support people there, minimum. That's 65-70 tech staff needed within the next 5 years to adequately support the computers we are installing in the district at a time when there is no money available to add classroom personnel. And of course with that many new hires in one department we can expect an additional 2 administrators minimum to supervise them. For a view from the student side, here's a comment from Jay Snyder, responding to NF #33: I'm a high school student in a public school in suburban Maryland, and I truly agree with your views that the school systems aren't attacking the issue of computers in schools the correct way. Immediately when you started talking about the unexpected support costs involved, I began thinking about my computer & information processing class. I would estimate that there are at least ten printers in the room, and it's a miracle if more than one of them is functioning on any given day. One printer wasn't even designed to work with these computers (why the school purchased it is beyond me), and the rest have all been overworked or mistreated to the point of inoperability. And the teacher's response to questions about the situation is always "I'm waiting for the repairman." For a while, the repairman was a regular fixture in my classroom, but now, either the money's run out, or they've given up, because nothing gets fixed. And next door, there's a brand new computer lab of Pentiums with laser printers, but it isn't being used until next semester because it would be "too hard to teach the new software".... Meanwhile, it *still* remains true that no one has bothered to explain why these crippling expenses and support requirements are necessary to the education of the student. If you know of such an explanation, please let me in on the secret. [from the current issue of NetFuture]