approach (Ttanks to Dan Hudkins at the Harker School for the phrase). wher=
e
parents provide whatever. Mac, Windows, or Linux. Laptop, tablet or
netbook. As long as it can do certain basic things, kids can use it. (iPads
our out since they do not do basic things.) Now, I will say that this
approach is criticized in many places AND we only have the pilot under our
belt, but it has worked far better than any of us expected. It just
worked--and with sixth graders.
What are the access benefits?
*Reliability.* At the recent AERA conference in Denver, Chris Dede of
Harvard nailed it when he referred to the bizarre, idiosyncratic networks i=
n
schools. That's just the nature of networks designed for access control to
numerous resources. We just bypassed that--students authenticate to wireles=
s
and access everything through their browsers. Nothing is needed beyond what
any current mobile device comes with.
*Maintenance. *If we own machines, we have to fix them. Not only that, we
are expected to solve all problems, big and small. Yet computers are
remarkably robust these days and our city has numerous places to fix
machines or get them repaired under warranty. We provided loaners for the
pilot, but next year students will have to rent one from us if they show up
with a non-working machine.
*Cloud and Open Source:* We explicitly planned that all work would be done
in the cloud, using resources accessed through a standard browser, such as
Moodle, or open source software. This would not have been feasible two year=
s
ago. The cloud also enhances collaboration in ways that previous technology
didn't.
*Agnosticism: *By making our network and approach agnostic, parents are fre=
e
to purchase whatever they believe is best and we avoid the whole Mac vs. PC
argument.
I sold this model on access benefits because that is concrete--it's easy to
talk about. "When you travel, connectivity just works." People can picture
that.
But access is only part of the reason. I have philosophical reasons for thi=
s
approach, but these aren't as widely discussed.
*Ownership. *When it's the school's computer, we would have it locked down
tighter than a drum to reduce the risk of something "going wrong." Here,
students, with their parents, really own the machine--it's not only for
school work; it's a personal device. It becomes a part of them.
*Responsibility.* Having a plethora of operating systems, languages, and
keyboards blunts the effectiveness of the teacher and tech staff to solve
"tech" problems. Students have to work with each other to solve their
technology problems--they own the devices, which are so much more than a
school tool, so they do.
*Learning.* This is why we hold school, isn't it? The focus moves from the
hardware and software to doing and experimenting.
*Technology* When the school owns the devices and the access, we always are
behind the curve because we do things in steps, not small increments. And w=
e
lock down the systems in the meantime. As a result we are always to the far
right of the hype cycle and not experimenting with the peak or left of the
curve. Students will tend to bring in the
latest usable technology--hardware, software, or communications, and push
our boundaries.
*
*
*Non-uniformity: The world isn't uniform. Pretending the tools are leads to
beliefs such as Macs are needed for art or video, Photoshop is needed for
images, and Microsoft Word is needed for word processing. That is comfort
masquerading as expertise. *
A potential downside is issues related to specialty software, such as for
physics or math. However, restricting a whole program based on a couple of
courses is the tail wagging the dog, but I expect to see more subscription
services that we can use for much of this.
There are other issues and, given that this model is not wide-spread, we ca=
n
expect a few surprises, but I would have expected major issues to surface
during the pilot. Mac vs. PC--I just don't understand it anymore.
--=20
Derrel Fincher
Director of Information and Communication Technology
Graded - The American School of S=E3o Paulo
http://www.graded.br | (55 11) 3747-4800 x160
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Robert Bauer <rbauer@aisgz.org> wrote:
> I'm needing to find the reasoning other schools used when switching from
> PC to Mac when rolling out 1:1. We are in China and most of our peer
> international schools have followed this path. Just wanting to know what
> most influenced a school that moved in this direction.
>
> Not trying to start any debate. Fully aware of cost factors, market
> penetration of platforms, software compatibility [or availability] etc.bu=
t
> would still like to know why a school ultimately decided on a PC to Mac
> shift when rolling out 1:1.
>
> Thanks for any feedback, private or public.
>
> Bob
>
> .......................................................................
> Robert Bauer
> Information Technology Director
> American International School of Guangzhou
> Tel: (8620) 8735-3392 Fax: (8620) 8735-3339
> rbauer@aisgz.org
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> Important Note: All AISG email addresses now end in @aisgz.org. Please ad=
d
> this address to your address list with the new ending. The AISG website i=
s
> also changing to www.aisgz.org.
>
> [ For info on ISED-L see https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D1288=
74]
> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution,
> non-commercial, share-alike license.
> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
>
[ For info on ISED-L see https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874 ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
