# Computers are killing our schools **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 28, 2005, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651 "2005-07-28T21:12:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ashes\_Ashes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@Ashes\_Ashes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashes_Ashes)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/21 "2005-07-31T06:46:58Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > It doesn’t matter who is at fault here; you’re placing a potentially huge financial burden on people. This is public education; they HAVE to have access to it. What’re you going to do if they simply don’t have the money? Dear lord, give me strength. First off, a fairly decent home computer can be purchased for around three hundred dollars (Dell is doing that right now) if they want to avoid taking on a school computer. This is very doable for nearly every family. I’m not guessing here, because they’re already doing this. Remember my district? 16 thou a year for a family of four? We’re among the five poorest districts in California. Yet, in our last technology survey, fully a third of all homes with school age children have at least one computer with internet access (which is provided free if you use the district/county ISP). Another nearly twenty percent stated they are planning a purchase in the next year, which will be around december this year given the survey went out third quarter. Nearly all families responded that they plan to have computers in the home within the next five years. IIRC, only something like 3% of families had no plans to purchase a computer. And remember, this is _before_ we’ve started the big push which will send any lollygaggers to the Computer Hut toot sweet. But if they do take a school computer and they break it they’ll have to pay for it, in all but the most extreme cases of poverty. This is _simply how it is done_, for decades now, everybody knows this and we’ll make doubly sure they know it come time, you bet your bippy. Students rack up debts all the time. They don’t turn in their football gear, they lose their books, they break the simulator baby, they dent the driver’s ed car, they get caught gluing shut all the doors on campus. Arrangements are made to make it as easy as possible when the district insurance policies shouldn’t/won’t cover the cost. Don’t forget insurance, in certain circumstances they can be covered by not just homeowner’s, and renter’s, but there’s even student insurance to be had for a pittance (which even then the district can waive for those who qualify). Don’t you think we’d cover our asses? Ultimately, computers will be trashed but the same thing happens to books and everything else that goes with having them. > [@RickJay](#): > > It would be, frankly, a Godawful nightmare. IT management is a science unto itself, and school boards struggle with it just to keep the principals and teachers running. No, it’s not going to be easy. But it’s being done already in Washington districts, thanks to Bill Gates, never mind various MicroSoftless districts around the country. When the government wises up even more than they already have, there’ll be funds for the whole shebang. As it stands the Feds and the state govs are already funding these programs and we’ve been guaranteed increased funds. The government of Calif at the very least is pushing technology like a mother. > [@RickJay](#): > > Sorry, but there just aren’t a whole lot of textbooks in this cite, and the one there is is a pretty hefty looking book. You Don’t Know What You’re Talking About. There are enough textbooks on that site to provide all the texts needed for every class in every school in a district. The weight of the books is part of the problem of having them. Year before last we had fun weighing everything one of my students with a fairly average classload, carried on a daily basis. She weighed just over a hundred pounds, admittedly petite, but her book bag weighed 70 some pounds. She coped like an increasing number of students do-- she had a wheeled suitcase-like book_trunk_, essentially, to cart them all home and schlep around a partial load during the day. Whenever possible she stowed them in sympathetic teacher’s classrooms (and that leads to more lost books, to boot). The texts are large because we’re cramming more and more down kids’ throats and none of those texts will get smaller in future. > [@RickJay](#): > > Virtually all schools use paperbacks. Didn’t you study Shakespeare? Surely you weren’t using a hardcover copy of “Henry IV, Part One”? No, not here-- we do _not_ use paperbacks. They are wasteful because they don’t last. Around here, no district would do so unless they had special circumstances and/or were in dire financial straits. We use hardback for the books that will be assigned for more than a year, which is virtually all of them. The same was true back when I was in school and it still is now. The first paperback books of any kind I encountered in college. For shorter works we either use a hardback anthology or the teacher runs up a bunch of copies over and over again at great expense. Your experience differs from mine. That doesn’t mean I am incorrect. > [@RickJay](#): > > Whoa, there. > In your earlier post you figured on three clerks PER SCHOOL. All your calculations were done by school, and that’s how you came out with a grand total of about three and a half million for a school of 2200 students. > Are you now saying that part of the calculations were for an entire school board? Why did you add it to the textbook cost for just one school? Check again. I figured three clerks for one school, the high school. All my calculations have _always_ been for just the high school. Ask someone who \*actually knows \* about high schools in California and unless they’re a flaming idiot they will be able to tell you that high schools are the most expensive campus in a district by far. They are the black holes of district budgets. We fought hard to get those clerks and they are hailed as one of the most cost-efficient hirings we’ve done in years. > [@RickJay](#): > > And now suddenly it’s back to a school again. Does this position exist at the school or the district level? The _hell_? There’s no such thing as a school level or district level around here or anywhere else in a district. We all work in schools or the admin offices, etc. So we’re all district employees. Another case where you seem to either not understand even the most basic ways a Calif. school works or you’ve mis-read what I wrote somewhere. > [@RickJay](#): > > You can then back off and say “the heck with it, we need computer technology in the schools” but **the entire point of this thread is the cost efficiency of mass computerization of classrooms.** Computer provision cannot be examined in absence of an examination of the COST. No, I’m not backing off, I’m re-iterating one of my main points, desperately trying to make clear that computer technology at school, and ultimately in the home, is inevitable. I’m not ignoring the point of the OP, I’m hitting it head-on by saying not only isn’t technology the problem, but it won’t help to remove it, and should not be done. Examine the costs all you want, but they’re not going away no matter how hard you wish. The cost, high or low, is therefore rendered unavoidable. To not have technology in our schools puts American students in the position of being the first world’s educational cavemen. We’re too close for comfort to that already. You have your opinions, based on what, I don’t know. I’ve got my opinions, based upon all that damned education I’ve paid for (and have continued to pay for in pursuit of mandated continuing education and a masters in education) and much experience in education. On top of that I have actual facts to back me up. I give you a cite for a publisher of a book my school is currently using and you refuse to believe it because it doesn’t jibe with your experience as a student, in a different country, _how_ many years ago? Long enough to think texts still cost 20 or 30 bucks. You’re convinced that I’m a liar when I’m not being a fool. Have at it-- it’s obvious you’re determined not to believe me and nothing I write or show you is going to change that. I’m done beating my head against this wall. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/22 "2005-07-31T21:20:08Z")
> [@drachillix](#): > > I would have put this in GD but I was unable to find any cites to back it other than my own opinion…maybe a GD will blossom > > I believe that computers are killing our school systems. > > Before anyone has a panic attack… > > Our school systems are in crippling budget shortfalls nationwide, many are laying off teachers and cutting programs like arts and music even shutting down libraries. > > Our schools can barely afford textbooks and affordable lunches for the students, yet many have carts full of laptop PC’s linked by wireless networks, buildings setup with high speed networks and the appropriate routers, switches and hubs to provide these services to hundreds of end users. These types of installations often run $100+ an hour for specialized labor to install and tens of thousands in hardware and materials. > > In addition many of these items require additional staff to maintain and > troubleshoot, monitor for inappropriate use, and upgrade as needed. > > Because the world of computers is dynamic and fast changing it creates additional needs to keep staff and teachers trained on the newer hardware and software packages as purchasing those items of hardware and software as they become obsolete and of limited use. > > All of us dopers are PC users and most of us understand the issues presented above, many even more intimately than myself. > > In the world of business, computers significantly accellerate many procedures that cost money, if they can be done faster they can be done more inexpensively, often creating a significant return on investment. The world of present day retail and manufacturing all show this. My job alone 30 years ago would have been performed by a team of 10-12 clerks. Thanks to relational database, sorting and crossreferencing six million pieces of product across 7500 different product type is easy for one person. Do computers allow teacher to teach more material more quickly? Are they able to handle more students more effectively? Administratively many tasks are much quicker and more accurate for teachers to handle via computer like gradebooks, or writing assignments and tests via word processor instead of typing or being dependent on premade materials. Some forms of testing are more easily handled by computer but once again the skills to use that computer must be taught first. > > My suggestion. Kill classroom PC distribution programs, every kid does not need a PC on their desk and it really dosen’t fix anything. A shared computer lab is far more cost effective and for pre-4 is probably overkill. Once kids start hitting 5th-6th grades a mandatory basic PC class could be taught to catch kids that have not already learned at home and from there on out they would only be used in classes that called for it and additional PC issues would be taught in electives that relate to them on the junior high and HS levels. Skill specific classes later on in school have immense potential in use of computers but if its a matter of $50-$60K a year in hardware to outfit a classroom with laptops and wireless networking or providing additional teacher would the reduction in class size be more effective in better teaching our children than the addition of computers? Theyh also said this of: Comic books Rock n Roll TV Disco/Rap Video games ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/23 "2005-07-31T22:38:21Z")
I disagree with the OP. PC’s can and will take the place of art and music, so those classes are the waste of resources, if students really have the inclination to learn on a real instrument or paint on real canvas then their parents will find a way to make it so. Many ‘normal’ students are able to learn in a non-stimulating situation, and a teacher teaching over a computer can teach many of these ‘normals’. Some students, such as those with true AD/hD may require a real live teacher, who also is stimulating. I believe if we make the shift to those students who can learn via computer learn by computer, those who need actual (and stimulating) teachers get actual stimulating teachers and we can the rest of the teachers we will have a better educated public and teaches will get paid better. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/24 "2005-07-31T23:12:43Z")
When I went to school, none of my textbooks were hard cover. My brother is going to school now and none of his books are hardcover. Granted, I’m in Australia but I find it highly dubious that hardcover is the norm in high schools. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/25 "2005-07-31T23:18:00Z")
> [@ouryL](#): > > Theyh also said this of: > Comic books > Rock n Roll > TV > Disco/Rap > Video games That schools are wasting money & resources on those things? 😕 Did you even read the OP you quoted? ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/26 "2005-08-01T04:28:46Z")
I did, in fact, lug a hardcover of **Henry the IV: Part One**. Most all of our books were a wierd special sort of extra-sturdy hardcover with dense musty cloth covering (nearly always a shade of brown) that looked like the regular cover had just been pasted on. Unlike other hardcovers, these books were about the size of a regular paperback. I remember thinking my copy of **The Great Gatsby** was cool because it had cover art that went all the way around just like a “regular book”. Most of them probably dated back to when my parents went to the same school. Only one or so new books could be purchased a year, so teaches had to rotate among what they had in storage. The only time we had softcover books was when the teacher wanted to teach something that they didn’t already have in storage and would outright buy them from her salary or tell us to buy on our own. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/27 "2005-08-01T06:27:20Z")
> [@](#): > > Check again. I figured three clerks for one school, the high school. All my calculations have _always_ been for just the high school. Ask someone who \*actually knows \* about high schools in California and unless they’re a flaming idiot they will be able to tell you that high schools are the most expensive campus in a district by far. They are the black holes of district budgets. We fought hard to get those clerks and they are hailed as one of the most cost-efficient hirings we’ve done in years. Allow me to be quite blunt: 1. I don’t believe it. 2. Even if it is true, it’s unique to your district or school, and apparently isn’t even true of all high schools in the state of California. My best friend’s wife is a teacher in Los Gatos, so I called her out of curiosity; she laughed like a hyena when I asked if high school in her district employ a team of “Textbook clerks.” Again, though, this $3.5 million per high school figure should be very easy to verify, since budget numbers are a matter of public record; what school district is this? > [@](#): > > The hell? There’s no such thing as a school level or district level around here or anywhere else in a district. We all work in schools or the admin offices, etc. So we’re all district employees. Another case where you seem to either not understand even the most basic ways a Calif. school works or you’ve mis-read what I wrote somewhere. You wrote: > [@](#): > > So, **our district does employ three full time clerks** : Mrs Patino, the head clerk, Ms Araujo, and Mrs Cazares. These are your words. You’ll pardon me if that sure looks like these individuals are employed by the DISTRICT level, not the school. > [@](#): > > To not have technology in our schools puts American students in the position of being the first world’s educational cavemen. Nobody is suggesting students should not have access to computers. What’s at issue is whether the computer should be the center of their educations, which is what I’m seeing more and more of, and which is being pretty strongly suggested in this thread: see kanicbird’s post. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/28 "2005-08-01T06:29:54Z")
> [@even sven](#): > > I did, in fact, lug a hardcover of **Henry the IV: Part One**. Most all of our books were a wierd special sort of extra-sturdy hardcover with dense musty cloth covering (nearly always a shade of brown) that looked like the regular cover had just been pasted on. Unlike other hardcovers, these books were about the size of a regular paperback. I had some of those too. My copy of “Othello” was like that. They smelled horrible and dated back like 15-25 years. ---
**Author:** ![Ashes\_Ashes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@Ashes\_Ashes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashes_Ashes)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/29 "2005-08-01T11:05:02Z")
**Kanicbird** , your post reminded me of one of my favorite things to ponder. How to move from a traditional school, bristling with technology or not, to a home-based education. I typed away like mad, pretty much writing a book, when I was about a minute away from pressing submit. That is, of course, when I lost my connection and it all disappeared. I know, you’re supposed to type long stuff you care about in Word, but this never happens to me. I guess my days of good luck with the internet gods are over. I’ve got to get to bed pretty soon, so I’ll try one more time with a condensed version. > [@kanicbird](#): > > I disagree with the OP. PC’s can and will take the place of art and music, so those classes are the waste of resources, if students really have the inclination to learn on a real instrument or paint on real canvas then their parents will find a way to make it so. > > Many ‘normal’ students are able to learn in a non-stimulating situation, and a teacher teaching over a computer can teach many of these ‘normals’. Some students, such as those with true AD/hD may require a real live teacher, who also is stimulating. I believe if we make the shift to those students who can learn via computer learn by computer, those who need actual (and stimulating) teachers get actual stimulating teachers and we can the rest of the teachers we will have a better educated public and teaches will get paid better. Whenever the topic of homeschooling via computers comes up, interaction with others becomes a subject of concern. Not that people need to be around others purely socially, so much as supervision of the learning process and certain parts of education that we can’t do without. Interacting with others is sometimes not just the best way to learn, it’s the only way to learn certain lessons. That means students would have to be on campus part time. Either periodically spending all day or part of nearly every day. It’ll give teachers a chance to be sure everything is being understood and actually getting done, too. Web cams might be a help, though it becomes about the numbers. A teacher might be able to teach a thousand students at once, but they can’t guide a web cam activity lesson or discussion for all one thousand at the same time. We’d have to have a good number of teachers on hand for those and for grading essays and such as well. A few of my students have taken online courses. They had to meet certain criteria and so they tend to be pretty sharp cookies with real drive. They still had a tough time, despite real life teacher mentors. They struggled with concepts, became frustrated, veered off in the wrong directions, all sorts of things. There’s going to have to be a lot of fine tuning before it’ll be accesable to all regular ed students. Which leads me to some stumbling blocks. Special education and english as a second language learners are guaranteed certain rights, like being mainstreamed into the general population as much as they are able. They also are those who benefit most from being in regular ed classes and are most at risk for failure as well. There would have to be a huge change in how special ed students were taught, and most would perceive it as a giant step back, even criminal. From my position inside the system, I don’t see how somebody won’t lose big time. Interestingly, at first I thought ADD and/or HD students might benefit from being in a quiet home environment. Then I remembered how much one on one time they need and how it’s next to impossible to guarantee a quiet home with the kids all in residence. Also, while regular ed students are more likely to tolerate less stimulating straight lecture type teaching, it’s not the best way for anyone to have to learn, it’s just what’s most efficient. The good news is there will certainly be better, more engaging programs in future. Then we’ve got things like wood, metal, and auto shop, the Related Occupations Program, agriculture, etc. The need for mechanics or welders might diminish but they won’t be eliminated any time soon. As a nation we may never decide to become completely dependant on other countries for our food and other items, so ag mechanics classes will almost certainly always be with us. The good news is some of the classes could be taught on line, mainly the business type courses. After that, there’s physical education to deal with. It’s not just the matter of a healthy body leading to a healthy mind. Our need for physical activity is going to be more important as we become more sedentary due to increased computer use, it’s sort of ironic. That makes me wonder about sports programs. Are we willing, culturally, to eliminate these programs? Some areas of the country are rabid about their highschool sports after all. Supervision becomes an issue. Who’s going to be watching the kids and making sure they do the work and don’t burn the house down? A parents’ _ability_ to help their child is a concern, as well as their _desire_ to ensure their child does the work as proscribed. I don’t always have an easy time getting my all my students on task during the entire lesson and I was fully educated to be able to do so, on top of a good bit of experience. Parents who home school now often state that getting their kids to do as they should is one of the most difficult parts of teaching them. It can become uncomfortable for all when parents are teachers. Make no mistake; parents will have to become more involved in the education process than they are now. That may involve having to go to school to learn to help their kids learn. A point to consider is that often, school is where abuse and neglect are first noticed. Teachers who see a child on a daily basis can pick up on changes that might go unnoticed or be dismissed if they saw the child only periodically. With children staying home, in isolation that an abuser would certainly take advantage of, we might have to open those homes, so to speak. It might become neccessary to allow the government in, in order to see that education is taking place properly and children are not abused, etc. Abuse and neglect happens too often now, I can only guess the numbers would increase without some sort of measures being taken. Lastly, I have to disagree with you on eliminating the fine arts in our schools. There’s a problem right off with letting parents foot the bill for lessons because we guarantee a free education. Now, some people would say we should simply eliminate the arts because they’re unimportant and not a valuable part of education. That’s a very dangerous position to hold. I’ll try to explain-- you don’t learn only to paint or play the flute. In art class I learned math, science, reading and writing, history, and so on. I learned about art in my other classes too, math taught me about fractals which I used in producing art. So you see all subjects are inter-related and the more they are the better for the student. It’s also important to note that studies have found that involvement in the arts reduces the likelyhood of a child dropping out, doing drugs, getting pregnant and much more. They’ve also found that students involved in the arts average 20 points higher on the SATs. Still, we’ve all heard that budgets are being cut and programs eliminated to focus on other subjects and we aren’t in such bad shape really. The problem is we _are_ in bad shape; the arts have been marginalized further and further over a long period of time, so that we didn’t notice the loss. Just because we fail to recognize the loss, doesn’t mean it hasn’t occurred. It is imperative that the arts be kept in our schools. They’re not just fun, they’re an important key to learning in all subjects. Can you believe that’s the short version? Yikes. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/30 "2005-08-01T12:00:05Z")
Apologies if I’ve overlooked some previous posts here, but speaking from first-hand experience at the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD–2nd largest in the U.S.). In Cananda, people seem to be more reasonable, and perhaps computer use in public schools can be very effective. But I see computers used litterally as door-stops now–yes, that’s what I said. They’ve bought these expensive machines, and now all they do is keep a door open. A rock could do the same thing. It’s very easy to convince the edu-bureaucrats about the need for “technology” in the classroom, and they’ll shell out or earmark millions for computers, but in the class room, little results. Many teachers still are not comfortable with using computers for their own use, let alone teaching their students how to use them. And despite repeated efforts to train teachers, the majority still aovid them. Granted, newer teachers are more likely to be computer friendly–but it doesn’t help that on Nov. 8th there’s a ballot initiative on the California ballot to make tenure for teachers even more difficult. This will discourage good potential teachers, espeically those with computer skillls. When the edu-bureaucrats hear the word “technology” their normally dulled-over eyes light up. So they shell out the money for whatever the “educational proprietors” are advancing. They have little knowledge of what acutally happens in the classroom, or what it takes to make “technology” useful pedagogicallly. Recently, at a school where I worked, every secretary was provided with a flat screen expensive model computer. These are people, who are very good workers, but who mostly just write memos, etc. They don’t need such high-end model machines, and their desks are big enough for regular computer monitors. But some salsesperson convinced them that they needed to “upgrade,” and there went the money. I think well-supported computer labs with large numbers of machines is the answer. As of now, edu-bureaucrats are the problem. They buy any sales pitch regarding computing, and allocate funds towards computers without thinking out the whole process. It’s not computers themselves that are the problem, it’s the people in charge, who really don’t know how to effectively use them in the educational envirnoment. ---
**Author:** ![BwanaBob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bwanabob/32/2985_2.png) [@BwanaBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BwanaBob)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/31 "2005-08-01T13:06:25Z")
Every textbook was hard-covered in my day (70s). My step-daughter graduated from high school last year - for her 6 years at her school, the lion’s share of books were hard-covered - she always complained about the weight. And they weren’t cheap - she lost a couple over the years and none of them were under $60 to replace. ---
**Author:** ![Ashes\_Ashes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@Ashes\_Ashes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashes_Ashes)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/32 "2005-08-01T13:09:57Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Allow me to be quite blunt: > > 1. I don’t believe it. > > 2. Even if it is true, it’s unique to your district or school, and apparently isn’t even true of all high schools in the state of California. My best friend’s wife is a teacher in Los Gatos, so I called her out of curiosity; she laughed like a hyena when I asked if high school in her district employ a team of “Textbook clerks.” > [@Me](#): > > You’re convinced that I’m a liar when I’m not being a fool. Have at it-- it’s obvious you’re determined not to believe me and nothing I write or show you is going to change that. I’m done beating my head against this wall. Sound familiar? Ow! This wall is hard, but here I go again. This is the last time, because I’m starting to bruise. Look, you’ve already said, so many times, in so many ways that you don’t believe me. I’ve already said you should go right ahead. Yet you pop in again to say the same thing. What’s sad is you’re also ignoring that a lot of what I’ve said has been supported by others. Are they all liars as well? If so, what is their motive? I never said that my school was like all others because that would be folly. There are posters right here in this thread that said their experience was not the same as mine. What I’ve been saying this whole time is that I know my school and others across the country are similar. But inevitably there will be schools where things are very different. But I can’t testify to what I have not experienced. Your your friend’s wife has never heard of text book clerks? I feel sad for her, but if you’d read my post you’ll see where I stated we worked hard to get those clerks. That means that we didn’t always have them and that they were difficult to get because they were unusual for our district. You might also read where we learned that they have proven cost effective, much to the nay-sayers’ chagrin. And does your best friend’s wife know you’re likening her to a hyena? Niiiiice. > [@RickJay](#): > > Again, though, this $3.5 million per high school figure should be very easy to verify, since budget numbers are a matter of public record; what school district is this? Oh sure, and while I’m at it, I think I’ll post my home phone number and all my credit card info. On a\* public message board\*. Perhaps I should also unlock my front door after sharing my home address? Do the search for these numbers on a comparable district you can find yourself, since it’s so easy. I well remember the big turd you laid on an unimpeachable cite I provided. You’re not going to believe anything I give you, so why should I bother? Just remember my district does a good job funding it’s textbook program. Other districts do not, much to everyone’s shame. Also stop to consider that the amount I toted was a _start up cost_. We don’t and won’t spend that much every year because we already have books. But how am I supposed to calculate two completely dissimilar programs if they’re already in progress? At what point do I jump in and start adding? It’s got to be from the start up on both or it won’t work. > [@Me](#): > > So, our district does employ three full time clerks: Mrs Patino, the head clerk, Ms Araujo, and Mrs Cazares. Then you post this, in a stunning display of ignorance on the subject: > [@RickJay](#): > > And now suddenly it’s back to a school again. Does this position exist at the school or the district level? I try to clear things up for you with this post: > [@Me](#): > > The hell? There’s no such thing as a school level or district level around here or anywhere else in a district. We all work in schools or the admin offices, etc. So we’re all district employees. Another case where you seem to either not understand even the most basic ways a Calif. school works or you’ve mis-read what I wrote somewhere. And then you proceed to show that you ain’t never gonna understand with this gem: > [@RickJay](#): > > These are your words. You’ll pardon me if that sure looks like these individuals are employed by the DISTRICT level, not the school. ``` In my first post I said they worked for the district. In my *second* post I said they worked for the district. And you're arguing against me by saying you think I said they work for the school? Mommy! ``` At what point did I state they were exclusively employed at the school, bypassing the district? That’s right! I never did, did I? And that is because it would be an utter impossibility. So impossible that not only would I never say it, it wouldn’t even occur to me to say it. Look at the terms you’re using: ‘employed by the district level’ If one knows anything about schools, _that phrase makes no sense_. They’re just random words that just fell together, for all the meaning they have to an educator. You not only don’t understand the system, you don’t understand enough to know when you don’t understand. So once more folks, let me explain-- Every school employee is employed by the district. There is no position that exists at the school level that does not exist at the district level. Shit flows _downhill_, it doesn’t flow \*up the hill \* and it doesn’t _get to the bottom_ unless it _came from the top_. I can’t use any smaller words. > [@RickJay](#): > > Nobody is suggesting students should not have access to computers. What’s at issue is whether the computer should be the center of their educations, which is what I’m seeing more and more of, and which is being pretty strongly suggested in this thread: see kanicbird’s post. This is so vague or oddly structured I can’t be certain what you’re saying. At first, you seem to concede there’s a need to get computers to the kids because they should have access to them. Then you say something fuzzy about computers being the center of their education without a discernable opinion as to whether this is good or not, but I’m guessing the latter. You say you’re seeing more of this focus on computers in education. Then there’s something about you and a bunch of other posters in this thread suggesting they’ve also seen more focus on computers happening or that they think that we should do as posited in kanicbird’s post-- which is to make computers the center of education, just at home. I’m guessing the latter on this last bit as well. So what does your last paragraph _mean_? Because all this time I’ve been saying we need computers in the classroom and at home, optimally. You’ve been saying that we shouldn’t because books are better, computers are too expensive and hard to set up and maintain. I tried to show you that books are expensive as well. I also have stated that regardless of cost, computers will have to be used more and more with a fade on traditional textbook ed because this is how the real world will go as well, and our students need to be able to function in that world. That last paragraph of yours seems to suggest that you not only agree with me, but that you are going even further and also believe we should become so centered on computer education that it will be done strictly on-line, from home. You appear to have gone from opposing my views, to adopting my views and then becoming an even stronger advocate than I. You’ve turned around and then you lapped me! Once again, but with \*absolute conviction \* this time, I’m done beating my head against this wall. I signed up to beat my head against a totally different wall and it’s not only unfair to change walls on me, I happen to like this new wall. It’s the wall I’ve been talking glowingly of needing the whole time. Good night Irene. ---
**Author:** ![Ashes\_Ashes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@Ashes\_Ashes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashes_Ashes)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/33 "2005-08-01T13:30:25Z")
**guizot** , a lot of what you said sounds awfully familiar. Sad isn’t it? What we need is a really big, well-organized push, but we’re stuck with a patchwork of different machines that don’t always play well together and sometimes they don’t play at all, because they’re all acquired in different ways and times by people with very different ideas. I’m proud to say my district is a little further ahead on getting teachers to all use computers (and not as doorstops, eek!), but we’re only ahead by a smidge. It’s hard for teachers to switch when they’re only getting pieces of what they need at a time. My school’s biggest mistake was deciding to move computers into certain classrooms by having the monitors mounted under glass desk tops. The theory was you could use the desk as a desk when you weren’t using it as a computer. Did they actually ask the people who were going to use them? Ha! It is to laugh. It took us teachers about five seconds to see there’d be a glare problem on the glass and about two minutes to conclude the desks weren’t built for normal humans, they were so uncomfortable. The happy news is that they’re good computers and desks so we can still use them, but we grumble a lot. It’s just another result of what you said-- people on the top level making decisions about stuff they’re unfamiliar with. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/34 "2005-08-01T14:07:30Z")
Hmmm. Graduated from HS in 1980 here and while my texts were hardcover (as are my daughter’s in the same HS today), all-ALL-of my English and lit books were paperback, from Shakespeare to Albee and beyond. IMS, we had the option of purchasing said paperbacks for a nominal fee of about $5. If we purchased the book, we could do what we liked with them-including writing in the margins and of course, doodling. If we didn’t purchase, we were charged for defacing. Most bought the books. IN college, we had a wonderful service called USED books–and they were quite cheap, but also hardcover. My elementary school district does not ahve a designated Text Clerk. No doubt it falls under someone’s job description. The HS does, but with 3000 students, it has to! ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651/35 "2005-08-01T14:31:51Z")
> [@Ashes](#): > > In my first post I said they worked for the district. In my _second_ post I said they worked for the district. And you’re arguing against me by saying you think I said they work for the school? Mommy! > > At what point did I state they were exclusively employed at the school, bypassing the district? That’s right! I never did, did I? Actually, you’re claimed it twice. You quite specifically stated it here: > [@](#): > > Check again. **I figured three clerks for one school, the high school. All my calculations have always been for just the high school**. And indeed, your financial calculations cited three clerks _for a single high school_, not the whole district, which presumably includes more than one school: > [@](#): > > 2200 = number of students + extra (notice I’m not factoring our current growth of 200 per year) > 5 x 3= periods where a student will need a text over three years > 3 x 3= reading books over three years (a bonus: not counting these books are lost at a higher rate) > > (2200 x 15) + (2200 x 9) > > So we’ll need 33,000 texts and 19,800 reading books > > 33,000 x 80 for texts = 2,640,000 > > 19,800 x 20 for reading books = 396,000 > > But don’t stop there folks! **We have to have three full time clerks to keep the books in good repair and stored properly and so on.** Then there are the times when we hire extra clerks at the beginning, middle and end of the year. Add to that the extra clerks we’ll have to hire when we receive these new books and have to get them ready to be given out. > > 3 full time clerks = 35,000 x 3 = 105,000 x 3 years = 315,000 > 3 extra temp clerks = 15,000 x 3 = 45,000 x 3 years = 135,000 > > Grand total = 3,486,000 Which is it? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/computers-are-killing-our-schools/314651.md?page=1)