[Guardian] Schools ask parents to stump upfor iPads

[seawolf]

So how do you measure "engagement", "desire to learn" or "critical and creative thinking"? What if a school measured high on "engagement" and "desire to learn" but all the students flunked their GCSE - would that be a success or a failure?

 

Good question. Tell me how you would measure the performance of a nurse, cop, or firefighter? Low rate of patient deaths, number of arrests, number of fires put out? Or is it something more complex than that? Good judgements must be made using both the qualitative and quantitative. When people try to reduce everything to a simple statistic or quantitative measure they lose all ability to make sound judgements. Life is far more complicated than that. Good teachers and parents will know when students are achieving these things based on all of the time they spend with them.

 

You say that based on what data? In the UK we have the highest ever number of students going into higher education. If that doesn't reflect a desire to learn - what does?

 

Correlation does not imply causation. Have you ever considered that perhaps a University degree has just become the new "High School Diploma" or in other words, the job market has become so competitive that students have no choice, but to continue on to University. Not because they want to, but because they have to in order to get a decent job. And it's putting a lot of young people in debt.

 

http://m.slashdot.org/story/182395

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/business/college-degree-required-by-increasing-number-of-companies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

If you want to say they are "lowering standards" when infact the metrics in play show standards are improving, then you need some hard data. Otherwise it's just hot air.

 

The UK education system must be doing great then. Congratulations on your success. I can only speak from my own experiences, observations, and knowledge of the US and Australian education systems.

[seawolf]

You seem to be assuming that by looking at measurable things, those aspects are ignored? Creativity can be graded. Independent learning can be graded. The issue is this - pupils are taught what they need to survive in life. Yes, creativity and love of learning are massively important, but if we don't focus on grades then we end up with another generation of kids who spell everything without any vowels, or think that Moscow is in Spain...

 

We can only justify expenditure with proof that it'll improve the education of our children. We can't justify it by saying "they might like it as it might make them more creative".

 

 

 

I know of a good number of employers who have tried BYOD, seen that it is a complete disaster (and cost them more than just buying stuff themselves), and scrapped it. There is always an opposite to every reaction.

 

I simply cannot see the justification for 1:1 devices yet - they simply don't seem to add to the education of our kids any more than a half dozen more teachers would.

 

Moscow isn't in Spain? Well I'll be a...

[seawolf]

You seem to be assuming that by looking at measurable things, those aspects are ignored? Creativity can be graded. Independent learning can be graded. The issue is this - pupils are taught what they need to survive in life. Yes, creativity and love of learning are massively important, but if we don't focus on grades then we end up with another generation of kids who spell everything without any vowels, or think that Moscow is in Spain...

 

We can only justify expenditure with proof that it'll improve the education of our children. We can't justify it by saying "they might like it as it might make them more creative".

 

 

 

I know of a good number of employers who have tried BYOD, seen that it is a complete disaster (and cost them more than just buying stuff themselves), and scrapped it. There is always an opposite to every reaction.

 

I simply cannot see the justification for 1:1 devices yet - they simply don't seem to add to the education of our kids any more than a half dozen more teachers would.

 

But seriously, if you can only justify expenditure with proof then there are only two things money in education should be spent on - more and better teachers, and the building and maintenance of the school's basic infrastructure. I've seen no definitive proof that computers improve any aspect of learning, other than computer skills. Therefore, the only use computers should have at a school is in a computer class. The students have to hand write the answers to their exams anyway...

[pcstru]

Good question. Tell me how you would measure the performance of a nurse, cop, or firefighter? Low rate of patient deaths, number of arrests, number of fires put out? Or is it something more complex than that? Good judgements must be made using both the qualitative and quantitative. When people try to reduce everything to a simple statistic or quantitative measure they lose all ability to make sound judgements. Life is far more complicated than that. Good teachers and parents will know when students are achieving these things based on all of the time they spend with them.

We are not talking about nurses or fire-fighters and there is plenty of evidence in the past and present that teachers and parents do not know what good teaching and learning looks like. If you can make a "good judgement" then you must have information on which you make that judgement. The question is what is that and how do you measure it. Just saying "it's more complex that that in real life is a cop out". Objective measures that quantify to a standard are essential for a rational, objective approach to improvement in any system. If you don't measure - how do you even know a policy is having an effect - let alone a desirable one?

 

Correlation does not imply causation. Have you ever considered that perhaps a University degree has just become the new "High School Diploma" or in other words, the job market has become so competitive that students have no choice, but to continue on to University. Not because they want to, but because they have to in order to get a decent job. And it's putting a lot of young people in debt.

The fact is you said students leave school so fed up with learning that they want nothing more to do with it. Yet the fact that we have the largest number of students ever going on to university at least goes some way to quantifying that - whatever the motivations of the students. Unable to support your assertions with real data you seem to be resorting to hand waving and word salad. The "oh but it's more complex than simple numbers" reminds me of one of my favourite Simpson's quotes "Lisa, your tears say more than real evidence ever could".

The UK education system must be doing great then. Congratulations on your success. I can only speak from my own experiences, observations, and knowledge of the US and Australian education systems.

 

Experiences, observation and 'knowledge' sure. But seemingly not very much hard data.

 

I'd do agree with some of what you say. We don't (for instance) teach critical thinking skills. That could be rectified by teaching Philosophy as a subject (as they do in France). But you would still be able to measure the effectiveness of that teaching by looking at results - particularly progress (because not all students start at the same level), but in the end outcomes such as CGSE, A-Level attainment etc, show how a school levels over many years of students life at a school. We don't really instil a desire to lifelong learning - but a lot of that comes down to being a skills factory for employers who demand skills that are very short term currency rather than embedding concepts that allow people to learn the appropriate skills the employers will be using at the time.

[seawolf]

We are not talking about nurses or fire-fighters and there is plenty of evidence in the past and present that teachers and parents do not know what good teaching and learning looks like. If you can make a "good judgement" then you must have information on which you make that judgement. The question is what is that and how do you measure it. Just saying "it's more complex that that in real life is a cop out". Objective measures that quantify to a standard are essential for a rational, objective approach to improvement in any system. If you don't measure - how do you even know a policy is having an effect - let alone a desirable one?

 

The fact is you said students leave school so fed up with learning that they want nothing more to do with it. Yet the fact that we have the largest number of students ever going on to university at least goes some way to quantifying that - whatever the motivations of the students. Unable to support your assertions with real data you seem to be resorting to hand waving and word salad. The "oh but it's more complex than simple numbers" reminds me of one of my favourite Simpson's quotes "Lisa, your tears say more than real evidence ever could".

 

 

Experiences, observation and 'knowledge' sure. But seemingly not very much hard data.

 

I'd do agree with some of what you say. We don't (for instance) teach critical thinking skills. That could be rectified by teaching Philosophy as a subject (as they do in France). But you would still be able to measure the effectiveness of that teaching by looking at results - particularly progress (because not all students start at the same level), but in the end outcomes such as CGSE, A-Level attainment etc, show how a school levels over many years of students life at a school. We don't really instil a desire to lifelong learning - but a lot of that comes down to being a skills factory for employers who demand skills that are very short term currency rather than embedding concepts that allow people to learn the appropriate skills the employers will be using at the time.

 

As you were then. You obviously have it all figured out. I'll leave you to it and take my "word salad" with me. Cheers.

[pcstru]

As you were then. You obviously have it all figured out. I'll leave you to it and take my "word salad" with me. Cheers.

 

The key question (which you avoided) was "how do you measure that". You seem to have opinions on how something should be done, but when it comes to measuring it, it all goes a bit vague. That's a shame - but I guess expected. It would be nice if someone with those opinions had thought them through but as is usually the case it is far easier to take pot shots at what you don't like, far more difficult to come up with real, rational ways to improve the situation. More evidence I guess that critical thinking skills are indeed lacking.

[mthomas08]

I did see this exact same review and thought what a lot of people here do.

 

We are also a school doing a netbook scheme, this is now the 3rd year doing it. Parents are pushed in to spending £249 for a cheap netbook which is insured, warranty etc or a more expensive option £359/69 I can't remember the full price. Again this is insured/warranty for 2 years. The cost also covers a few other things.

 

*edit*

 

As covered in my other posts this is by no means an easy thing to support. We went netbooks because they worked with the software we got. Some of this is available of iPads and some only recently. Staff training has not been heavy as a result. Supporting them is also simple.

 

BUT I have to say this has been an immense work load I walked in to and even after 3 months I am still 50/50 if I think its working. We are setting things in motion to improve the netbooks but its no easy task. I have made my opinion clear to the head, we will bend over backwards to make it work and improve it but I still believe desktops are the best way. We are aware when classes are using their netbooks because we end up with 2-5 up here with us with simple problems or damages - straight away that class is now affected in teaching and learning.

Edited July 29, 2013 by mthomas08

[truebluesteve]

The Guardian article isn't exactly news is it? iPads are simply the netbooks/laptops of a few years ago and the same questions apply about does it improve and enhance learning etc - and grades of course !

 

A large secondary school near me decided to go down the iPad Mini for every student route and parents would pay for them. However they would only go ahead with the project if at least 80% of parents agreed to it, and by that I mean agreed to "buy" one. I have just looked at their website and I think the scheme is going ahead although it is a little vague. They have a "10 reasons why iPads will help students" PDF just in case you couldn't think of any yourself!

 

I'm not convinced about the value of these schemes yet and neither have I seen any independent evidence to show their benefits. I'm happy to be proved wrong of course!