Laptops and Schools in TX

As coincidence would have it, a few hours after posting about "technology in the classroom" I find a reference to this article in my email inbox. So now we go from my philosophy directly to practical application. Let's see what we can learn.

Irving's Lorenzo de Zavala Middle School and Lively Elementary are rich in technology, equipped with wireless Internet and laptops for students.

But their students also are among the state's neediest, with many poor and learning English as a second language.

Both were recently flagged for poor test scores.

But the technology gods should overcome those hurdles and fix that, right?

Two years later, the extent of academic gains is unclear – though students widely report being more excited about school because of the technology.

"We already know it has an impact on student engagement," said Anita Givens, the Texas Education Agency's senior director for educational technology. "But over time, we'd also like to see an impact on student achievement scores."

What's the point of being excited about school if you're not learning what you're supposed to?

See, I hear this argument made all the time. "If it weren't for football/wrestling/drama/shop/whatever, this kid wouldn't even come to school." But if they're failing every class but football/wrestling/drama/shop/whatever, what good are we doing? We truly need to determine what the mission of a school is, and I don't just mean that b.s. mission statement that we haggle over every couple of years, the one that talks about safe environments and creating lifelong learners and all that unmeasurable fluff. If the school exists to keep kids off the street, then the argument above holds water. If we're supposed to teach them something, then it does not. Seems pretty simple to me.

The study compared math and reading scores of sixth-graders at 22 schools in the Texas Technology Immersion Project with those from 22 schools without the technology. "In fact, students in immersed schools had slightly lower scores than comparison students," the study noted.

Interesting. Needs more study.

"Overall, it's not just how often you use the technology – it's how well you use it," said Kelly Shapley, director of the Texas Center for Educational Research, which conducted the study.

"We did see some significant effects on student technology proficiency and school satisfaction. But it didn't translate into academic achievement in the first year."

Regarding the first sentence--duh. Technology is a tool, nothing more. Regarding the second--let's continue this study and see if there's any improvement. I hope you taught the teachers, and well, how to use these tools, or you'll get no improvement at all.

Students and teachers expressed concern about how distracting they can be during class.

"I play policeman more often than not when my kids are online," a teacher in the survey wrote. "I'm not able to help students because I'm always shutting down instant messaging and e-mail sites."

This doesn't surprise me at all. It might also be a part of why there hasn't been test score improvement; they've made it easier for the students not to pay attention!

And from the mouths of babes we get:

One student suggested using the money spent on laptops on "textbooks and better teachers to raise student's GPAs."

He (or she) said it, not me!

There's plenty more in the article. It's fairly balanced in coverage between pro and con, although to me the cons outweigh the pros. You're free to make your own call, and post your comments on the topic here at Right On The Left Coast.