The Sioux Falls School District is spending $150,000 from Uncle Sam on 120 iPads for elementary school kids. Superintendent Pam Homan says there's "no finer alignment" of educational goals and federal funds designated for after-school services than this iPad investment. Michael Woodring of Constant Conservative finds this federally funded expenditure a bit boondoggly:
Technology can be quite helpful&ndashbut these children do not need iPads. If they need to work on homework, pencil and paper are much cheaper, probably more effective, and much less likely to be abused, destroyed, or otherwise devalued for purposes of education [Michael Woodring, "NCLB and iPads in Sioux Falls," Constant Conservative, 2011.06.16].
Mr. Woodring balks at the cost, $1200 each for machines that retail for $500, and worries about the ongoing cost of 3G wireless service that will fall to district taxpayers if the federal assistance runs out. (Perhaps we could save on those service costs by creating a statewide public wireless hotspot?)
But Mr. Woodring's calculations do not address how much we recoup in savings from that $1200 per machine. These iPads are meant for students who don't have Internet at home. Right now, to ensure every student has equal access to homework resources, teachers have to run hard copies. Paper isn't really that much cheaper when it's coming from an office copier burning through lots of toner each month. (Recall: three years ago, the Sioux Falls School District saved 66,000 sheets of paper and $1200 in two months by making its school board meetings all electronic.)
Knowing that every child has home access to the Internet can also improve teacher productivity. The teacher can focus on creating online materials and turn photocopy time into face time with kids. In dollar terms, even at the immorally low valuation we South Dakotans place on teachers' work, if we save a half-hour per week in paper work, multiply that by 100 elementary teachers, 36 weeks, $24 an hour... we translate $44,000 in productivity into other teaching activities. (But we also might spend another $44,000 on a tech expert to maintain the new tablets!)
On the practical hardware side, iPads beat the laptop computers with swivel screens South Dakota invested so heavily in for K-12 education. iPads are lighter, more young-user-friendly, more intuitive, and have much better battery life with fewer moving parts.
Now I'll admit that if we're trying to figure out the "finest alignment" between federal dollars and educational priorities, we should look not just at the costs and benefits of this specific machine, but the costs and benefits of completely different uses of this money. Given $150,000, I might just hire ten more part-time teaching assistants for my after-school programs. Maybe I'd even send those assistants out to provide "house calls" for kids who'd like help with homework at home.
The new elementary iPad program at Sioux Falls is a significant investment and warrants close scrutiny to determine what value the iPads add for students and teachers. At the same time, America is falling behind on education for modern technology-intensive jobs. Maybe getting kids used to productive uses of the newest information technology is one more way to invest in a future-ready workforce.
That's quite a link on CNBC about the Germans' opinion of our education system!
One can only dream (or have nightmares) about what the Chinese would have to say.
Why does the Sioux Falls school district pay more than twice the retail price per unit for these iPads? You'd think they'd get a discount, eh?
Cory,
This program is just another form of corporate welfare. Ready to join the GOP?
[CAH: I'm glad you still have that sense of humor, Steve. I suppose my support for the school lunch program is corporate welfare, too, since schools buy their food from businesses rather than growing their own food in ag class or leaving kids to brown-bag it?]
It does make her look bad considering she was so upset with Dennis Daugaard's cuts. I think there is a reason she didn't use the iPad as one of her reasons for not cutting spending when she met with him.
I would rather hire more teachers than $150,000 in iPads.
[CAH: I'll grant that point. I'll wager that we can always add more educational value by hiring five good educators than by buying 120 cool machines.]
Stan, when you send me good links like that, you never know what connections I'll make. That price makes Michael and me both wonder, but when I talk to tech coordinators, they remind me that the price tag is moer than just sending Joe to Best Buy to pick up a truckload of machines. They're figuring ongoing support, apps to download, etc. I suspect Michael's right that a big chunk here would be the 3G connection so the kids can get online at home. Say you can get a data plan for $20 a month, times 120 machines, times 12 months... that's $28,800. Is that a reasonable guess on the cost of connection?
Cory, always happy to send good links!
As for the $28,800 figure being reasonable or not ... Aw heck, I have trouble enough figuring out my own monthly bill from Knology.
The money would be better spent on teachers or books. A teacher from a school outside this area but in South Dakota said kids who received laptops in the past did not take care of them so the maintenance was high....the same will be with ipads. The teacher said some kids would forget them at home and others would bang them around carelessly. It was a good deal for the repair technicians.