One-to-One Computer Initiatives

Born in 1983, I'm kind of in-between Gen X and Gen Y (or the Millennials). Even though most of my colleagues are Gen X and my students are Gen Y, I identify more with Gen Y. I've had a computer for as long as I can remember and have been emailing since elementary school. I do remember actual encyclopedia books existing but I don't think I ever used one. We had a trusty Encarta CD by the time I was doing any kind of research for school.

So, yeah, I consider myself a digital native. And my first reaction is always to be excited about new technology and innovative approaches. But then my pragmatic side takes over as I think about actual applications of it and whether it will yield any better results than the former approach.

I'm very skeptical of online classes and think they only work for a narrow few situations (more on that in a future post). But on the other hand, I can't imagine teaching without a digital projector and some access to computers in my classroom. Currently, my school has public Wi-Fi for students, and students are encouraged to BYOD, but they don't all have one. Most of what they have are smartphones, with screens too small to do many things and too small for me to easily monitor what they are doing. Ideally, every student would have access to a computer (not a tablet) at all times.

And that brings me to a discussion of one-to-one technology initiatives in schools. I was reading "Districts Place High Priority on One-to-One Computing" from Education Week extolling the benefits of One-to-One and glossing over the myriad logistical problems: initial start-up cost, infrastructure costs to power and charge them all, costs to repair and replace damaged items, etc.

The article cites the Natick public school system in Massachusetts. They spent $1.8 million on Macbooks for all of the high school students. There isn't much hard data on the success of the program yet, just a vague comment about more students being on the honor roll and anecdotal evidence from teacher comments.

In fact, a quick Google search turned up no hard evidence. Maybe there is some out there? Leave it in the comments if you know of any.

The Auburn school system in Maine also tried a one-to-one program with kindergarten and the students that were given tablets outscored those without on all aspects of the district's literacy tests.

Awesome. Except no one pointed out the obvious reason for the success (probably because no one who was interviewed actually teaches students): the devices were cool. They were a motivational tool more than a real learning tool. Engagement went up because of the novelty.

So it seems like I'm arguing against these programs. But actually, I would LOVE for all of my students to have a laptop. As a Millennial, I find it more natural to learn that way. I feel like I am often adapting my lessons to fit the lack of computers. So for me, it would work out well. But even more than the hardware and infrastructure costs for these programs, the biggest problem is training teachers to think like Millennials and take full advantage of the resources.

School Environment: Fired Up for Education

My school is, of course, not perfect, but in general, we're doing many things right.

It's an excellent-rated school in a suburb of Columbus, the capital of Ohio. Columbus is a rapidly growing area. There are three large high schools in the district (approx. 2000 students in each). My school is in its fourth year of existence. It is located among cornfields that are rapidly being overtaken by new apartment complexes and cookie-cutter subdivisions. The other high schools are in more established areas.

Our district is generally middle to upper-middle class. Approximately 10% of the students are "economically disadvantaged." We have plenty of involved parents and a generally supportive community.

Yep, I'm lucky.

But what I feel even luckier about is the climate at our school. And this doesn't apply to the entire district. I credit our principal for establishing it for the most part. He got to set the tone from the beginning at a new school and had to meld teachers from other schools to form a new identity. And part of that was hiring the right teachers.

It's certainly not perfect. We don't have all of the supplies we need. We have more access to technology than many schools but it's certainly never enough. And many teachers have a problem with the lack of discipline and punishment.

More importantly, though, many of the teachers here are allowed to, even encouraged to, and excited about trying new things. Teachers want to be innovative. That energy and passion makes a real difference.

I know I mentioned before that I almost quit teaching in the beginning of my career. Part of the reason I was so miserable is that I felt like I was stepping back in time at the school that hired me. I was fresh out of college with all these idealistic visions of how my classroom would be. But many of the teachers at this school were rather set in their ways and stuck to their materials and methods even though there was no indication that they were effective. I felt alone. I didn't know how I could learn to be a better teacher in that environment.

If you are interested in the idea of what makes a good school environment, check out Zapp! In Education: How Empowerment Can Improve the Quality of Instruction, and Student and Teacher Satisfaction. It is a really quick read, and a bit cheesy, but it would be some good food for thought for any principal.

Just as Pink advocates for autonomy, purpose, and mastery, Byham advocates for empowerment in a work environment.It's essentially the same idea, just different terminology. And this book is written specifically for schools.

Why Teaching Can't Attract Top Graduates

Today I'm tackling teacher pay from a teacher's perspective. I know we can and will argue this from so many perspectives. In my mind, it doesn't matter what is "fair" for a teacher's salary. What matters is the amount that will draw the top young talent into teaching instead of medicine, engineering, business, law, etc.

I was one of those top students. And I went into teaching mostly because I didn't really know what my other options were. I had been going to school my whole life and I was good at it, so I could see myself on the other side of it.

So the teaching profession lucked into getting me. (Yes, I know that sounds conceited, but the fact is that I was a top student in high school and college.) But I want to advocate for attracting top talent into teaching. And so in this post, I'm going to compare my experience with my husband's career to illustrate why top students might not choose teaching or might not stick with it.

I chose to compare just the basic financial and work time stuff. There are obviously other benefits and drawbacks to both careers when considering other factors.

(By the way, I highly recommend the article "The High Cost of Low Teacher Salaries." It's a quick read. It starts out comparing our military to our schools: "When we don’t get the results we want in our military endeavors, we don’t blame...the men and women fighting every day in the trenches for little pay and scant recognition." It goes on to advocate for attracting top students to the teaching profession and compares the prestige of the teaching profession in the U.S. with other top countries.)

	Teacher	Business Career
Qualifications	--Salutatorian at a public high school --97th percentile ACT score --Cum Laude from Central Michigan U. --M.Ed. from Ashland University	--Top 20% at a private Catholic high school --97th percentile ACT score --3.0+ GPA from Central Michigan U. --MBA from Ashland University
Salary	$55,000 with very small raises if any (which is very high for a teaching salary compared to other areas of the country)	$72,000 and rising exponentially faster than mine
Hours	183 work days times 9 hours per day equals about 1650 hours per year at school. (I’m not subtracting out my “lunch break” because I only have 20 minutes for lunch and I often work during it.) Plus fairly regular after-school meetings, summer professional development, and evening and weekend planning and grading at home. I estimate that I easily work a total of at least 1700 hours per year.	He works four 8-hour days at the office and one 8-hour “Work from Home” day per week. About 215 work days (but almost 50 of those are Work from Home days) 215 x 8 hours per day = just over 1700 hours per year (just over 1300 actually at work) (He occasionally travels for work but still averages an 8 hour day of doing actual work but some might consider travel inconvenient.)
Vacation and Holidays	10 weeks during the summer, 1 week Spring Break, 2 weeks at Christmas, other various holidays 3 personal days (the only flexible days)	30 days Paid Time Off (includes sick and vacation time) plus holidays
Sick Leave	Cumulative sick days (1.5 per month) but they also double as maternity leave, surgery, bereavement time, etc. If additional time is needed for an illness or injury, it is unpaid.	For regular short-term illness, it comes out of PTO. For any extended medical leave, 5 days PTO then paid leave.
Other Financial Benefits	My health plan is slightly better than his but quickly deteriorating in service and increasing in price.  Fee waivers and partial tuition reimbursement Pension plan paid into by me and employer 403(b) paid into entirely by me (no matching)	Yearly bonus of a few thousand dollars Tuition reimbursement 401(k) contribution matching Paid travel for conferences and meetings
Other Financial Drawbacks	Must pay $200 every five years to renew my teaching license Spend hundreds each year on classroom supplies