Hey folks it is 2012.
Might want to get used to it.
Huntsville schools are switching some over to laptops…
All students in grades 4 through 12 will get the laptops, so students won’t have to carry heavy loads of books.
Oh the humanity.
Why?
The digital plan also cuts the cost of replacing lost or damaged paper books.
[...]
School officials said going digital will cost a little over $3-million the first year.
That’s compared to the $5-million that Wardynski said it costs for paper books each year. The school system will also have programs installed on the computers to keep kids from going to sites they shouldn’t.
What if my dumb kid breaks stuff…
“As far as the expenses, what would happen if the computer is lost or stolen or damaged?” Pline asked.
Wardynski said the computers will save money in the long run and they have a plan in place for such emergencies.
“If a computer is damaged, just like last time, we have a user fee,” Wardynski said. “That’ll probably be about $30 per student, child. That builds an insurance pool for the district where we can replace computers that are broken.”
This is the future…
Here is a real question that I do not know the answer to: What about kids without internet at home?
Filed under: Uncategorized
“Here is a real question that I do not know the answer to: What about kids without internet at home?”
Good question.
Answer-they are tough out of luck.
Guess what population is less likely to have the internet at home?
Everything is race with you… everything.
Here ya go.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/09/comcasts-launches-999-internet-for-low-income-families/
10 bucks a month seems like it’s within reach of most any family.
You raised the issue Dale Jackson. Everything isn’t about race with me but when the shoe fits…the majority of the African American/Hispanic population are on Free and Reduced Lunch because their parents qualify as low income. That’s a FACT. If they can’t afford lunch, how are they going to afford Internet?
“10 bucks a month seems like it’s within reach of most any family.”
Says the person who doesn’t want the government to mandate you have to purchase health insurance or the DMV making health care decisions for them.
Is it OK for the government to mandate people pay for Internet services?
The government also mandates that the parents send their kids to school with clothes on. Clothes cost money, What are the poor folk to do? If you choose to Have a kid then you must accept responsibillity for raising it. If you don’t wish such responsibillity thrust apon you, then don’t have kids. The health care bill has the only condition as one having a pulse. You don’t choose to opt in like car insurance or any of the other rediculous comparisons.
This isn’t a plot to destroy the black race. As a matter of fact I think poor black housholds’ kids will benefit greatly by growing up computer literate, when they otherwise wouldn’t have. Without this program they would probably grow up devoid of the skills that would make them competitive in the job market or to successfully go to college.
I’m not real wild about the program myself, but I’ll reserve judgment until we see how it works, and if it really saves money.
BTW if someone cant afford 10 bucks for internet, then go to one of the multitude of free wifi hotspots in town. Might not be convieniant, but it’s doable. All it takes is a parent that cares enough.
The government can’t mandate you send your child to school, but if you chose to send your child to school the rules of a civilized society apply.
Nor can the government mandate parental involvement.
It is impossible for poor students to benefit from a computer if they don’t have Internet access at home.
BTW, it takes money to go to one of the free Hotspots in town. All it takes is a car and gasoline.
The government does mandate that you send your kids to school. If you choose to have them. It’s a law, look it up.
Kids can do work on a computer offline, they can learn a multitude of programs (excel, word, etc….) and they can do their homework if they have downloaded it at school. You write a blog, you can’t possibly be that stupid about computers.
People have been walking for years. I (gasp) walked to school before I could drive (miles). And before you ask, the answer is break out the raincoat. (then I suppose you’ll say “raincoats cost money, and they can’t walk to the thrift store because it’s raining… blah blah blah”
I’m sensing a theme with you. Is there anything that poor people can do for themselves? According to you they’re helpless. I refuse to accept that.
“Is there anything that poor people can do for themselves? According to you they’re helpless. I refuse to accept that.”
I guess it depends on what your definition of “poor people doing for themselves IS”. One things for sure, poor people can’t help themselves to Internet service, if they do they will prosecuted to the full extent of the law. As well they should. be.
I’m sensing a them with you, if you are poor blame yourselves because it’s your own damn fault you’re poor.
Well let’s go down the list. According to you the poor can not:
-scrounge up 10 bucks a month for their kid’s education
-drive anywhere that takes gas and a car
-walk somewhere
-use a computer unless it’s online
-help having kids
That’s just today. If this is how you really see poor people then you do them a great insult.
Dale is so right about you, “what your definition of doing for themselves is” Really? The Bill Clinton? It was lame when he tried it, and you’re not nearly as cool. Don’t be an idiot, you know what I mean.
And for the record, my theme is, if you make crappy decisions your whole life, you will have a crappy life. You reap what you sow and all that. Bad things happen to good people sometimes but for the most part your life turns out according to how you live.
“And for the record, my theme is, if you make crappy decisions your whole life, you will have a crappy life. You reap what you sow and all that. Bad things happen to good people sometimes but for the most part your life turns out according to how you live.”
Spoken like a true pro lifer, and someone who resorts to name calling and personal attacks when the substance of their arguments fail.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Minorities are hurt worse in this recession, so no, the poor can’t scrounge up 10 bucks a month for their kid’s education, or drive anywhere that takes a gas and a car, or use a computer unless it’s online, and thanks to you and your anti choice buddies who are against birth birth control they can’t help having kids.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/21/news/economy/wealth-gap-race/index.htm?iid=HP_LN
What part of that is a personal attack?
Makes some sense, please.
Poor people suffer more from bad economic times? No kidding.
As for your insane pro-life rant, condoms are cheap. Start telling the poor how to use them.
Redeye once again deploys the “Huh?… What?… I don’t understand” defense.
If you make em use a computer you HAVE to give them free 4g service. The cost to the providers is almost trivial, so get the HCS to bid out a 4g assess contract for the entire system.
You can home skool your kids, they cant make you send them to skool if you choose to provide an alternate education.
If you can download the homework and e-books you don’t need anything of the sort.
“so get the HCS to bid out a 4g assess contract for the entire system.
This on top of the $6 million dollar contract for the computers going to a private company. Where is the money coming from? We the tax payers, that’s where.
The cost of the computer will be more than offset by the reduction in costs of buying books every year. Electronic info tech is not the future it is the right now.
Redeye hates Wardynski because he replace a black Superintendent. Period. All her complaining about the ills of the school system is predicated on that. The laptops are just the latest, in order for her to make the point she has to imply the laptops are bad or impossible for the poor to use.
Dale, I don’t hate Wardynski because he replaced a black Superintendent, I don’t hate anyone. All of my complaining about the ills of the school system is predicated on my desire ALL children have equal access to a quality education. It will hurt poor children if laptops replace textbooks and they are impossible to use. If I don’t point that out who will?
It’s not 6 million. Where did you come up with that figure?
By the time you factor in the cost of providing Internet access, repairs and lost/stolen computers I’m not sure the cost of the computer will be more than offset by the reduction in cost of buying books every year.
PS not to mention the technology upgrades.
HCS enrollment peaked in about 1980 at 34,000 kids. Now, enrollment is about 24,000 but the population of the city has increased significantly and tax rates have stayed the same. They have plenty of money, they just have not been spending it wisely. Adopting a computer based info system could be a great advantage to providing a better education.
The technology is only going to get cheaper. The textbook replacement was costing 5 million a year.
Free internet for the poor is not going to be an issue because they aren’t going to provide it.
“Adopting a computer based info system could be a great advantage to providing a better education.”
Key words, could be, we don’t have money to gamble. It’s not like the $6 million + is a one time expenditure, not to mention the problem of the students who don’t have access to the Internet.
Again, it is not 6 million (where did you get that?). Textbooks cost 5 million a year.
Finally, e-books can be read offline just like the textbooks they have now.
Where does it say in the article that an internet connection will be needed at any time? Many textbooks are now available in ebook form and are available offline once loaded on the laptop. As long as there is a wireless network connection at the school, you can download the textbook to the laptop, the student can print or email their assignments to the teacher. If you need an internet connection, I believe most libraries have free wi-fi, many restaurants have free wi-fi.
But for it being more cost effective, from what I have read, it works out to about $400 per student, ebook versions are usually cheaper and can be easily be reused. Also there probably be an option for students to provide their own laptop if they have one better than what the school is offering. Laptops for viewing ebook versions of textbooks don’t have to be cutting edge. Low cost netbooks or tablets are workable options. Acrobat, Kindle, Nook, Office all run great on older equipment.
I am not saying it’s a good idea or not but I am assuming that they did their due diligence and researched this and even checking out school systems that have already made the switch before making this decision.
Just because it doesn’t “say it” in the article doesn’t mean an Internet connection will not be needed at any time, and why not buy ebooks, net books or tablets instead of spending buy $6 million dollars worth of lap top computers?
I’m sure many restaurants will just love people coming in just to use their wi-fi and take up space from paying customers. Of course people are going to have to get the restaurant first. And the library isn’t open 24/7, nights, or on holidays.
Where do you get $6 million, the article states just over $3 million to switch over. And it’s is possible that tablets, netbooks or ebooks are being or have been considered. We don’t know what has been done. Usually (from a corporate viewpoint) multiple options have to be researched and costs have to be checked out before one can be picked,
As for the internet connection, I assume all local schools either already have or will have wireless internet connections for students to use while at school. Having used electronic textbooks myself, once the book is download to your computer, you can use it irregardless of being connected to the internet. Biggest reason for a student to have access to the internet away from school is for research for a assignment, but if that student doesn’t have internet access before this implemented, then they have the same problem. The switch from paper to digital textbooks don’t change that. All that is changing is the form of their textbook. Bigger problem would be students that don’t have a home or their home don’t have electricity.
As long as the textbook is available to the student whenever they need it, nothing has really changed except for the format of the textbook. Why would they need internet access away from school if they don’t have internet access away from school now?
“As long as the textbook is available to the student whenever they need it, nothing has really changed except for the format of the textbook. Why would they need internet access away from school if they don’t have internet access away from school now?”
This is why according to Wardynski;
“Our plan will be, perhaps next summer, we start doing virtual instruction in the summer. So, a child can sign up, we’d have a teacher on our end and they’d have a virtual class session. It could be about some enrichment activity, or they could do the same thing on a Sunday afternoon. Maybe there’s a virtual study session. I’m a little bit stuck, I can join in with my classmates, my teacher at a certain time and place on the Internet,” said Wardynski. “We’re really looking to move beyond brick and mortar. School buildings don’t define education. Teachers, curriculum, student engagement, that defines education.”
That was not in the article that Dale posted and I did not research that much further. But even with what he said, how does that change the status quo. Before this change, if the school was to offer classes in the summer, students would have to attended classes at the school and have to pay registration fees (which would probably rule out most lower income students). As for virtual study sessions, they are just another tool for students to seek help. Most teachers offer their students contact information in case they need help. Students probably do already connect with their follow classmates via telephone, email, facebook, and twitter so once again, not much really changing from the current status quo. But by going to online classes, those classes can be stored for future uses. Students can go online and review classes when needed, teachers can make those classes available to their students for additional study aids.
So instead of shooting down somebody trying to make some CHANGES (didn’t Obama call for change) that could be for the better, how about logically looking at it and then looking at any potential negatives and seeing if they are truly negative and if they are, looking at potential solutions to them. For example, Huntsville could look at instituting a city-wide wireless internet access or unlimited access to the free wi-fi at Big Springs Park for all students. Maybe free or reduced bus fare to the library.
Looking at the pros and cons, the only students that this is a step backwards is those who don’t have electricity. For those students who lack an internet connection at home, at worst it’s a push, but it provides them with a computer that they can learn on and learn about so it provides them new experiences. For the rest it provides them with new tools provided by the school that might augment what they already have available to them. Ultimately, this provides the students of Huntsville with new opportunities and advantages and that is something that we should not be withholding from our students.
So instead of shooting down somebody trying to make some CHANGES (didn’t Obama call for change) that could be for the better, how about logically looking at it and then looking at any potential negatives and seeing if they are truly negative and if they are, looking at potential solutions to them.
I don’t have a problem with change as long as the change doesn’t negatively impact children/students. But in any event the time to look logically look at things and explore the pros and cons is BEFORE the school board votes to in act the Change. Parental/tax payer’s need to be informed and involved in any decisions, and not just the affluent parents/ tax payers.
It’s impossible to involve students with new tools when they didn’t have old tools.
What the hell, this doesn’t negatively effect anyone.
Quit making stuff up.
Again with the 6 million dollars? You are a willfully ignorant fool.
The Universal Service Fund that was used to wire all the schools for broadband, can now use the billions they take in to expand wireless access for the poor in much the same manner that free cellular phone service is provided. See, everybody wins and no new taxes.
According to the Huntsville Times program will cost $3.2 million the first year, and the district “hopes” to “ween down” to $2.5 annually for the proposed 6 year contract. Making the total cost for the program $15.7 million.
“Mark Jamison, an education, technology and implementation manager for Pearson Education, an education services company, said a seven-person team will live and work in Huntsville for two years to assist teachers in the transition process.”
I’m not sure if the Universal Service Fund can provide Internet Services to low income people, but if it can, that might be a solution.
Typo, should read, According to the Huntsville Times the program will cost $3.2 million the first year, and the district “hopes” to “ween down” to $2.5 annually for the proposed 6 year contract. Making the total cost for the program $15.7 million.
Yes and anyone with a brain should read that they spend 5 million a year on textbooks.
That is 15.7 vs. 30 million…
Honest question Redeye, Can you tell me which is bigger 15.7 or 30?
Your arguments are two-fold…
1. It will cost too much… Which i just blew up
2. Poor people and stuff…. We can’t hold back the whole world because there are poor people. Accommodations will be made for them.
Do you have anything of value to add?
I want to know why it’s OK for you to ask what happens to students who don’t have access to the Internet, which is the topic of this thread, but when I ask what happens to students who don’t have access to the Internet I’m a Wardynski hating racist? What’s up with that?
What is up with that? I know you are an unrepentant racist.
-let’s change from text books to e-books and lapops.
-oh I see what you’re doing, it’s all a plot to keep poor kids from learning cause they can’t get internet access.
-It’s cheap, and they don’t really have to have it. Even without it they’ll be better off that with the older textbook.
-How much will that cost the taxpayers? I know for certain it will cost a bazillion dollars and we don’t have that kind of money.
-Actually it’s cheaper than paper books.
-You’re lying, I know it will be too expensive and poor kids still won’t get internet acess so they can check their facebook status.
-Fine go ahead and keep your old textbooks,
-Ah Ha, I knew it, You’d just love that wouldn’t you? Keeping computers out of the hands of the poor and ensuring that they’ll stay poor for generations to come. Depriving them of the skills they need to become competitive. You guys are a bunch of hateful racists….
-Facepalm…..
Project much?
That is a pretty fair breakdown of your argument. Where do you disagree?
I would rather 15+Million of my tax dollars be spent on teacher and curriculum development than providing lap tops and Internet connection to students. That’s where I disagree.
Right now, they spend $5 million each year on textbooks, $30 million over 6 years.
The switch to laptops will reduce that $30 million to between $15.7 to $19.2 million (assuming they can’t reduce costs).
Meaning with the switch over to laptops, there will be between $10.8 million to $14.3 million freed up to spend on things like curriculum development and teacher development and whatever else they need to spend it on that they would not have if they stuck with the current system.
The 15 million they are spending on this ill conceived plan came from cuts to Special Education, curriculum and teacher development budget. Remember?
No, it came from spending on textbooks.
Where does it say that? I reread the article that dale posted, not there, looked up other articles, not there. Tell me where to go to see that information.
Look here
http://www.geekpalaver.com/
Here
http://abouthcs.wordpress.com/
Here
http://search.al.com/huntsville+city+schools+cuts+layoffs+2011
Here
http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=crmas&p=Huntsville+City+Schools+budget+cuts+layoffs
Interesting articles, but none of them addressed how the laptop spending came from anything but textbook spending. Two were about personnel cuts last year. Other two were blogs against the superintendent. But none were about Textbook or Laptop spending.
You are acting like this is a spending increase when it is a spending reduction. If they decided today not to go forward with the switch to laptops, they would then have to spend about $5 million on textbooks were as with the plan to switch to Laptops, they only have to spend $3.2 million this year. They had to make cuts last year because of a budget deficit. The switch to laptops help them avoid making more cuts this year because it is a change that saves the school system money.
With the switch to laptops
They will save about 1.8 million this year.
They will save about 0.8 million next year.
They will save about 2.5 million in years 3 to 6 of the contract.
They will SAVE about 11.6 million total over the 6 years that can go to other areas.
They will save at the expense of the taxpayers and the children they are supposed to serve. But that’s OK? Are we trying to operate a school system on the cheap, or are we trying to educate children who are the hope of the republic?
Last Year they had to . They had a 20 million dollar deficit. Nut that was last year. The laptop switch will save the money versus textbooks. That frees up cash to spend in areas that may have been cut in previous years or they can save it to use versus having to cut some more.
So now the computers will save money? Do you even understand what you are saying?
A complete virtual schools system where all the (big) kids learn at home. We spend $9000 per kid now or about $220million.
How much is support and facilities? Half?
Paying for an aircard for every kid would be cheep.
The difference between distance learning and brick and mortar learning is generally a billion miles apart. The gap is closing, we aren’t there yet.
Plus getting some of these kids away from parents like Redeye is good for society.
If brick and mortar learning is so bad, why did are we(tax payers) spend millions building a new Lee High School? Why are we (taxpayers) building new schools in south Huntsville?
If a virtual school system is the goal that’s not going to work..parents will be at work and their children will be home on the Internet…unsupervised.
That all Internet education is never happening.
[...] it or not there are some people that believe that because some kids don’t have Internet, the Huntsville City Schools should not move to providing laptops for kids and cheaper e-books… Hey folks it is [...]
I most certainly believe that because some kids don’t have Internet, the Huntsville City Schools should not spend tax dollars to provide laptops for kids and cheaper e-books. Just because it’s cheap doesn’t mean it’s the right (pun intended) thing to do. You get what you pay for.