Parents to confront School governors over iPads

[jbailey]

I have spent considerable time discussing and researching various options with SMT for similar schemes at this school. I am not convinced either way at present on any of these 1:1 schemes but the discussions are good as we (and SMT etc) had to look at a whole range of costs, infrastructure issues, management headaches, possible benefits, Governor and parent opinion etc etc.

 

Re creating division amongst students, One of the key points of any schemes we have looked at is what percentage of parents have to take up a scheme for it to be viable and what is required for the school to support those parents that cannot afford it or simply do not want it. Creating a divide between students who have and have not is nothing new, when I went to school I had hand me down uniforms and I didn't go on the school trips. My parents happened to be poor and couldn't afford the fees. In a BYOD\1:1 situation, I would be the poor sod turning up to school with the beat up old hand me down device

 

The whole tablets as consumptive devices thing I find interesting, What we do have here is a loan bank of ipads in use for nearly two years now and I would say I'm not sold on this idea of tablets or especially the Ipad as a consumption device only - things have moved on a lot with apps and services for content creation, but in general I don't even think web access is JUST "consumption".

 

Do I consume a video on configuring a server on you tube for example? I'm not sure I do, I read\watch it and ask questions on the comments section and apply what I have learn from it - well hopefully! How is that different than reading a text book on sums with a teacher to ask questions to and then doing some sums, can you tell I'm not teaching staff yet I don't call that "consuming maths content" I call that a maths lesson?

 

My current opinion is that I don't see tablets as a replacement to our desktop pc and mac machines, but they are a flexible IT tool and I can certainly see how having a standardised, personal 1:1 device per student for use as a IT supported diary, jotter, calculator, voice recorder, camera, textbook, homework, communication and research tool - in my opinion, would be a great benefit.

 

However, this not necessarily something parents should pay for. I wouldn't want to stump up £20 quid a month for my 2 kids currently, we are skint! like I say I am still on the fence with 1:1. The cost in both cash and man hours is huge and I am not sure if its achievable in an "average school" like ours without additional funding from somewhere - Yeah right.

 

currently I would prefer our school looks at a better BYOD\WIFI access policy (something I am doing currently) to enable students\staff who already own devices to have more use from them in school as a way of getting some real feedback on personal device benefits.

 

Good thread, lots of food for thought for me - thank you for your time

 

My 2 cents.

[maark]

I think there could be advantages in 1 to 1 scheme - have seen them work well in harrogate school but they are already working at a high level with good standards of discipline, attainment and quite an affluent catchment area. Not so sure it would work so well in other colleges. It requires a big culture shift from teaching staff - need to be able to keep students on task without limiting them in the ways we do at the moment by locking down games, monitoring via impero etc.

Cost is a big factor - harrogate had to go to 200MB internet and upgrade switches to 10GB backbone as well as huge number of access points.

Also you would need to give staff an ipad each so they can get the best out of them and they would probably still require a laptop or desktop in the room as most don't like to use them to create content on. Staff would need the higher capacity ipads and they would need replacing every 3 years at least as apple would not allow them to run latest ios after that probably. Add on to this sims emerge, foldr to access existing resources, apple TVs etc.

I think that we need to give students access to the internet on demand as that is the way the world works now - we all use google, you tube when we want to know how to do something but it is finding the best solution and managing the transition that is difficult.

[Gibson335]

The crux of it, I feel, is whether these devices are instead of or in addition to the existing provision. We know here that our staff would wish to retain our main ICT Rooms, that areas such as Design and Music would need to because of their software demands, and that they still like the idea of retaining the smaller clusters dotted around. And let's not forget the staff laptops, which very few would be willing to give up in exchange for a pad (a pad as well would be nice, though, eh?). So if their wishes are heeded, then any other provision of devices would largely be in addition to. So then you have to ask where the funding comes from - even if it's only shared with parents. Then there's the potential knock-on effect on staffing - are the current support numbers enough? Oh, and of course, if you happen not to have a site-wide wireless facility, there's that hefty expense to take into consideration as well. Different schools have different priorities, so none of this is a one-size-fits-all, and your starting point when it comes to facilities and finances is very much a leading factor.

[tmcd35]

The crux of it, I feel, is whether these devices are instead of or in addition to the existing provision.

 

This is the discussion I'm currently having with the DH. I can't easilly envisage a would where a solution would be "instead of". Which in turn leads to the questions - "how do the devices augment the existing ICT?", and "how do the deviced effect existing ICT" - like you say more/less dedicated computer suites, managed wireless, etc.

 

But before you even go there, there's the murkey issue of end user expectations. If they are expecting content creation devices and you give them content consumption devices then project is doomed to failure. This is why I shy a way from the one device fits all scenario.

 

But however well meaning, other solutions can't have the same impact as 1:1 devices. I don't think in a 1:1 scenario a teacher should necerssarilly be planning lessons around the devices themselves. The devices shouls almost become invisible, and just be there ready and waiting as the needs arise.

 

The costs of providing both a more diverse range of content creation devices and 1:1 consumption devices is very prohibative, probably even with parental support. I think it's at this point BYOD starts to look attractive.

[Ephelyon]

In either event, I'd far rather we had BYOD tablets than BYOD smartphones.

[Garacesh]

BYOD, connect to a public wi-fi, straight through into a VDI Sorted.

[Gibson335]

I think it's at this point BYOD starts to look attractive.

 

And well-managed BYOD brings with it its own inherent set of problems. Which is no reason not to do it, but it can be a legal minefield. We have limited BYOD (Internet access only) and are likely to expand that, but at the same time trying to manage the potential for increased support demands. I happen to think that of all the current technological delights we have to select from, BYOD will be the one we veer towards most in the next few years. It sort of feels as if a move to a mixed fleet of devices, such as desktops, laptops, tablets and pads, is almost inevitable, and also expected of us. But it's easy to say, and not so easy to afford, not when you still have to continue a cycle of replacement.

[Ephelyon]

We could set kids' tablets up for that anyway. They can download Microsoft Remote Desktop, connect to our Guest network and they'd literally just need the IP of our beefy RDP host to get in and get on with things.

[tmcd35]

I happen to think that of all the current technological delights we have to select from, BYOD will be the one we veer towards most in the next few years. It sort of feels as if a move to a mixed fleet of devices, such as desktops, laptops, tablets and pads, is almost inevitable, and also expected of us. But it's easy to say, and not so easy to afford, not when you still have to continue a cycle of replacement.

 

Exactly this. Which is why I'm actively slowing the conversation down here and asking - how do we currently use ICT? How do we want/expect to ICT? What impact will any changes have on existing ICT?

[mthomas08]

http://www.upton-by-chester.cheshire.sch.uk/Websites/upton/files/Content/3605391/FAQ_about_iPads_at_Upton.pdf

 

Straight away I was able to spot something:

 

Students who don't take part may have to share, so straight away you have students who may not have the tool required to do the lesson. If sharing with another student (we all know its not always the best) and does that mean the student is sharing with another students device? Having a current netbook scheme here I can say with real experience this is not the best solution and doesn't solve teaching and learning which these devices are supposed to be enhancing. There has been an incident when a device was borrowed and a students device did get damaged, there was a little tiff between the Parents and the School.

 

We currently here provide loans to Students who's Parents do not sign up.

 

As for the talk about "Apple" it doesn't matter if you want to call it iOS, most people who like Apple tend to go for iPads and forget about rivals. Malware on Androids, strange I have yet to see a single one. Fact is you are paying a lot of money for an Internet Access device with APPs regardless of cost that's what you are buying. I am looking at tablet's for next time around and the hudl seems like a nice cheap option to get Parents to purchase. All the reviews say the exact same thing that I do, that value for money is spot on.

 

For £150 you get internet access, APPs and protection (for a little bit more a case too). So for half the cost of an iPad you get everything that your going to need. This is not an argument about all the extra features like Windows 7 Pro vs Windows 7 Starter, this is about using a device to access the internet/apps and use anywhere.

And again it goes back to the "Expecting parents to pay a lot of money" for a device that you can get a lot cheaper. People jump on the Apple band wagon because we all have experience in working with people that don't consider the real picture but instead "I like apple, lets get ipad its omg amazing". We all know the type.

 

The Scheme we are running is being improved all the time and in the 1st year of netbooks the school didn't choose something that simply looked pretty, the school went for "Productivity". Sorry for the grump but I can understand if you was doing a managed service to seriously consider Apple devices but then if your a Vanilla system there are alternatives. And a lot of schools are simply NOT looking elsewhere or even bothering to check for cheaper alternatives. I my self have had to evaluate 5 different tablets for the next new year 7s.

 

Also found this part a sham: Why iPads?

An extensive comparison of various devices was undertaken and the iPad proved to be the most competitive in a number of key areas:

• 10 hour battery life

• Lightweight and portable

• Extensive range of cheap/free Apps, developed specifically for educational use on the iPad

• Familiar and desirable

• Intuitive to use, as there is only one input method

• Range of inbuilt sensors and two cameras

• Competitively priced

• Apple's closed ecosystem, means that only certified Apps can be installed, giving some degree of confidence in the Apps to which students have access. The Apps will not contain viruses and can be restricted by age group.

 

Sorry to say but most tablets offer the above.

Edited January 17, 2014 by mthomas08

[synaesthesia]

• Apple's closed ecosystem, means that only certified Apps can be installed, giving some degree of confidence in the Apps to which students have access. The Apps will not contain viruses and can be restricted by age group.

 

 

This is why people fail.

[ozydave]

I would like to see the exam results of schools that have 1 to 1 iPads or other device pre and post there implementation.

Has the cost in the back end wireless, switches and cost of devices brought about a big annual rise in results

[Ephelyon]

Let's bear in mind that such a move is likely to have happened within, say, the past three years. That may or may not be long enough for the impact on learning outcomes to become visible in terms of results.

 

In particular I would assume you're referring to institutions with true whole-school 1:1; this is far less common than a phased introduction across year groups. In the case of the school I mentioned earlier, 1:1 has been rolled out in the bottom year group and is expected to reach Year 8 this coming September. Accordingly, there may not be any impact shown for another few years as we no longer measure levels of progress at the end of Key Stage 3 through examination.

 

However, many schools do keep their own records perfectly well and I'd be asking for those - who knows, if all you want is an anonymised summary over time you may well be able to FoI it (just a guess). The statutory expectation is that pupils should make three levels of progress from Key Stages 2 to 4, so in the case of an early-adopter school that went for this a couple of years ago you could ask for data showing the anticipated acceleration in levels of progress over the course of Key Stage 3 for a particular cohort, along with how this affected band setting at the start of their Key Stage 4.

Edited January 18, 2014 by Ephelyon

[ozydave]

I would posit that a well motivated, well trained, respected by SLT group of teachers, good management of school, good governance would produce a far better set of results than any intro of *shiny* kit.

 

There are many schools that are top in the country in terms of results that don't have shiny. They are are doing something right. Poorly run schools, have a higher turn over of staff. How unsettling is that for students.

[free780]

Ive found trying to get android playing nice with proxies and authentication is a right pain.

[tmcd35]

Should the success of failure of these devices be linked entirely to academic results? Can they not bring other value, enriching the learning experience, that's not so easilly measured by three levels progress, EBacc, or other flavour-of-the-month league table?

[Ephelyon]

Quite possibly, but the perennial difficulty there is: how do you measure it then?

[tmcd35]

I suppose the question becomes - why measure? What do we need to measure - if anything? I'm sure something can be done to log individual device access to show they are being used in lessons. Maybe it's a question for HoD's to be monitoring lesson plans and SLT's in lesson observations?

[Ephelyon]

I agree that having to "measure" every little thing lies at the heart of a lot of what's wrong with society in general (when it's done improperly anyway), not just this picture. The sad fact, however, is that the alternative is a whole load of white elephants - and haven't we seen enough of those?

 

The idea of measuring the impact an innovation has had - particularly when large sums of money are involved - is to make sure we're not just throwing time/money/shinies at a problem and hoping it will go away. We've seen plenty of that in all sectors, so we bring in accountability to try and avoid it, as well as to inform future planning. But unfortunately, accountability relies on being able to measure the success or failure of something. "Did the £7K we spent on 32 tablets actually make any difference or may we just as well not have bothered?" After all, if it does have a positive impact, you might want to buy another set next year, whereas if it doesn't that's £7K you can spend on something else.

 

So you have to be able to measure... something, in... some way. It's when the criteria and/or the process for doing so are messed up (often because the accountability for X rests with someone who doesn't really understand X) that we see these other problems we're all so familiar with...

Edited January 20, 2014 by Ephelyon

[tmcd35]

While I don't necerssarily completely disagree, I wonder if rather than being a question of measuring results, is it more a case of questioning value? What value is the device bringing to the classroom? Is the value improved results in some metric or another? Or does the value lie somewhere else? The ability to produce/display powerpoint presentations in any lesson? Improved Internet access? More dynamic facilities to write up work?

 

Does results=value (or vice-versa)?

 

I wonder if there is a danger of not buying into technical possibilities on the basis of not being able to quantify a perceved outcome? Looking for something that isn't there? Rather than asking, what I think is a more important question, what value does it bring to the teaching and learning experience? Sure you might get the same resuts cheaper out of a copy of Encyclopdia Brittanica, but...

[Garacesh]

Realistically we have to be able to quantify the choices we make, don't we? Especially when there's $thousands on the line. Think about it, if you called a meeting with your respective heads and said to them "I want to spend £12,000 (or some other arbitrary figure) to buy augmented reality glasses for each student." Just think about that for a moment. What's the first thing your headmaster/headmistress would say? "Okay.. Why?"

 

Given how much money tech costs on this scale, of course it needs to be justified via some kind of end-result. I'm in agreement that we don't quite know what that end-result is. Unfortunately, whilst schools funding revolves around how many kids it has, and how many kids it has is loosely proportionate to exam results, that's the figure most people will compare it against. But it's rather difficult to be able to provide a direct correlation between tablets in classrooms and exam results, whereas it might be easier, for example, to compare an IT suite vs not having an IT suite.

 

We need technology in classrooms. But is this a case of "Technology will actually help" or is it "We need to do something. This is something. We need to do this."

[localzuk]

The issue is one of accountability and value for money. Is spending thousands on devices a better use of money in a school than hiring more teachers?

[Ephelyon]

Absolutely, @tmcd35, which brings us on to a common stumbling block. I'd agree that "value" is indeed the proper thing to measure here. The problem then is: how?

 

I think the reason we so commonly "default" to exam results is that they're one of the easiest metrics to use. Regular, everyone does them, measurement criteria well-established, league tables every year etc. They're also cold hard numbers so you don't need to be a pedagogical expert to evaluate them (i.e. parents can see some evidence of how good a school is). What else could we use to actually measure the added value to the T&L experience? It's very often because people don't know - and the teaching unions like you to believe it's impossible anyway - that we just default back to exam results again.

 

Also, @Garacesh, I know I'm nitpicking but I'd point out it's not so much the number of kids as the number of kids in groups, i.e. class sizes, that tends to have an impact on exam results, with smaller class sizes tending towards better results.

[tmcd35]

The issue is one of accountability and value for money. Is spending thousands on devices a better use of money in a school than hiring more teachers?

 

Surely the first priority for any school is to employ enough teachers to meet their curriculum needs. Will employing additional teachers beyond your curriculum needs be more beneficial to a school? Are you thinking smaller class sizes? How meny additional teachers will be needed to make to bring classes sizes down to a level that has a quantifiable impact? Is that staffing ratio a good use of school funds? Or are we looking at TA's? or Support staff?

 

No doubt, the size of the project probably does require an SLT view on the impact of staffing, but I wonder if a number of schools would be looking at other parts of the budget - cost of printing, text book purchases, etc?

 

I'm not overally convinced the question revolves entirely around staffing, if anything I think it's a seperate issue although not entirely unrelated. This is probably where schools like the one in the OP get in to trouble with parent "donations".

[Garacesh]

Also, Garacesh, I know I'm nitpicking but I'd point out it's not so much the number of kids as the number of kids in groups, i.e. class sizes, that tends to have an impact on exam results, with smaller class sizes tending towards better results.

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough - I meant kids joining the school is loosely proportionate to its exam results. School does bad? Not as many kids get sent there. School does good? More people join this year.