Re: Iowqa School to get Laptops

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:21:29 -0000, Rick <none@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 16:52:30 +0000, Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 16:20:35 -0000, Rick <none@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 16:00:22 +0000, Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:42:36 -0000, Rick <none@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:39:30 -0700, Mayor Of R'lyeh wrote:

On Mar 14, 8:08 pm, Snit <use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Mayor Of R'lyeh" <mayor.of.rl...@xxxxxxxxx> stated in post
61fcd1a2-8617-4851-be34-cc5d139e4...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
on 3/14/08 4:52 PM:



On Mar 14, 6:28 pm, Snit <use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Mayor Of R'lyeh" <mayor.of.rl...@xxxxxxxxx> stated in post
0a5c21c0-3a9c-4ce2-
a654-8c9c14397...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
on 3/14/08 3:18 PM:

On Mar 14, 11:56 am, Jim <j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/16665216.html

"Central City Sets Laptop Standards
By: Claire Kellett, Anchor/Reporter

Story Created: Mar 14, 2008

Story Updated: Mar 14, 2008
CENTRAL CITY - Soon students in the Central City School
District won't have to worry about whether or not they'll have
a computer to use. Starting this fall, students there will
have their very own laptops.

Computer time is hard to come by for Central City students.
Finding a free keyboard during class time can be a challenge.

³You have to claim your territory,² says Sophomore Kolin
Schmidt.

Claim a computer before someone else steps in. This fall,
friendly fights over tech time will fade. The district is
making a hefty purchase.

³A total of about 380 computers,² says Superintendent John
Dotson.

Meaning classrooms will be littered with laptops. All students
in fifth through twelfth grades and their teachers will have
their own portable computers for use at school and at home."

More....

More taxpayers dollars wasted on the lasted educational fad
that has zero evidence to support that it does anything to
improve education, you mean.
The taxpayers of Iowqa should demand a recall election of
these fiscally irresponsible fadmongers.

Technology is a ... fad? LOL! That is darn funny...

Unable to comprehend what he read, Snit makes a gaffe by
commenting on something that was not said.

Technology in society is not a fad.

Snit runs to KMart to buy himself a strawman.

Technology in education is not a fad...

Snit will now produce evidence that using computers in education has
done anything objectively measurable to improve it.

in fact, to fail to teach technology would be a *huge* mistake.

When I was I grade school they used to have lessons on how to use
the telephone. Why? Because even then not everyone had them and they
were new to a lot of people. Do they still do that? No. Why? Because
everyone who wants one has a phone of some kind and kids learn to
use them at home practically in their cribs. For much the same
reason teaching computer use in schools is not necessary.

When you have spent a couple of years, full time, in classrooms your
words might be credible. Now they are aren't.

Rick will now produce the objectively measured evidence that shows
giving every grade schooler a laptop improves education. Until you can
your words lack credibility.

When you have spent a couple of years, full time, in classrooms your
words might be credible. Now they are aren't.

Unable to counter my point with actual facts, Rick resorts misdirection.

Unable to counter my point with actual facts, Mayor resorts misdirection.

Asking for evidence of your assertion does not become misdirection
just because you don't have any.




Some students know computers inside and out. Others know only what has
interested them.

You can say the same for every subject.

No duh.

You're the one who tried to make it sound unique to computers.

That is your incorrect inference.

That's my correct deduction that you realized was silly so you're
running away from it.




In my high school they had auto
repair courses. Since some kids know cars inside and out and others
only know what interests them the state should give every kid a new
car by your logic.

... and your full time teaching experience supports this how?

Why do I need any teaching experience to follow the logic you present in
here?

You aren't following the logic. You are on a crusade against the use of
technology in education.

Technology is fine in the appropriate places. Grade school is not one
of those places.



Oh that's right, you don;t have any.

Just like you have no proof to back up your assertions.

Yeah, I do.

Well, Snit..er..Rick...no matter how much you wish they were your
personal convictions and anecdotes are not proof.



I will have to go to the auto lab next to my classroom and talk to the
instructor.

Its nice that you have someone to chat with but that really has nothing
to do with the fact that by following your logic on computers in school
we should give every kid a new car as well.

That is your incorrect inference.

So chatting with the guy in the next room is proof that twechnology in
grade schools is effective? No wonder you think there's so much proof
around. Your standards for it are about as low as they get.

And, if it were economically feasible, maybe every student should have their own car. They could screw it up and
not hurt other students. Or maybe you could put in an up to date computer
based lab, augmented with lab examples (cars). Oh, yeah, that's what they
did next door. National accreditation, too.

And this means what? Some group pushing computers in schools gave a
place that put computers in a school an award. There's a shock.


Oh, that's right, I don't have to.

I'm sure he'll be grateful if you don't.

I'm sure you don't know what you are talking about.

If your actual personality is anything close to your Usenet
personality then its a given that he'll be grateful.



I talk to him several times a week... IN his lab. Your above statement
shows your utter lack of classroom knowledge.

Since my above statement was based on the logic you expressed and had
nothing to do with classroom knowledge your statement is a non-sequitur.

You do not follow the logic. You see it only through your inexperienced
bias.

You made the claim that we need to teach computers in schools because
people use them in real life and not everyone knows them inside and
out. What part of that doesn't apply to cars as well? Or any number of
things? Maybe we should buy every student a full set of kitchen
appliances too. Your expressed reasons for having computers in school
equally applies to them as well.




There are classes on keyboarding because a large number of students
cannot properly touch type. There are classes on word processing,
spreadsheets and databases, because students need to use those in
school and when they get out into the world.

Obviously classes that require computers should have computers in the
classroom. However, outfitting a couple of classrooms is nowhere near
the expense of giving each kid a laptop.

That depends on how many classrooms need computers.

It won't be many. Not many kids sign up for classes like that.

I'll have to tell that to my students. They will be surprised to learn
they aren't there.

I didn't say 'none'. I said 'not many'. If the difference between the
two eludes you ask somebody.

Oh, in case you haven't heard, students basically only get to choose
electives. Required courses are generally assigned.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that a database
administration class is mandatory.


It might just make
more economical sense to provide the computers to the students, and they
carry them from class to class.

I doubt if anything like those numbers are in those classes.

You doubt? -You- doubt? You get to doubt, but demand studies for others?

Its hardly a stretch to see that not many students are interested in
spreadsheets and databases. No matter much you pretend otherwise
you're not the only who is around kids.



Students need to be taught how to properly use search engines to do
school related research.

Kids learn how to use search engines in their cribs.

You show your utter lack of classroom knowledge. As a group, they DO DOT
learn how to use search engines in their cribs. I deal with that every
day.

As a group they do nothing. Learning is an individual endeavor.

Give the boy a cookie. Using technology in class allows us to adapt
lessons for individual students. Some do better with video. Some reading.
Some need a talking head.

There's simply not the resources to cater to each students quirks.


The kids
who do not learn how to use a search engine on their own aren't going to
learn it in a class either. This is because they are incredibly stupid.

You really like showing how much you don't know, don't you. Please
explain to me why, after some instruction and practice, students are more
adept at using search engines than before.

How come every eight year old I know can use Google like a champ? Are
the kids in your school all 'special'?
0....



Students can use the Internet to research needed in history, math and
science.

And they can also use the library that each school has. Or do you
think there's been some update on the fall of Byzantium that isn't in
the history books?

School libraries are not very large, and they certainly cannot compare
with the resources on the Net.

Like Maccies love to say about Mac software availability - You don't
need every possible title do do useful work. All you need is enough.

And what is enough?

For a sixth grade report on butterflies? Not many.

Most school libraries (discounting colleges and
universities) are fairly small. Students compete for resources. Using the
Net, they have access to almost unlimited resources.

No one is expecting a doctoral dissertation out of a grade schooler or
a high school kid. They don't need unlimited resources.





There are students that do very well with CAI lessons.

There are students who do very well with personal tutors too. That
doesn't mean the taxpayers should be obligated to give every kid one.

Note: no response.

Yes? So what?

Your argument hinges on us spending our limited resources to cater to
each students quirks and whims. An individual tutor for each one is
the logical end of that.




While those students are using the computers, teachers can be working
with other students.

While some students are doing almost anything the teacher can work
with other students? Or do you really think that teachers were unable
to give the slow kids extra attention before computers?

"Back in the day", "slow" kids weren't mainstreamed as often as today.

Yes saddling the normal kids with the retards was a huge mistake. But
that's not an issue that can be solved by technology.

It can be helped with technology.

The technology of duct tape.


And I was actually
thinking of the kids that can learn but need a bit of extra help not the
retards.

You are showing your self to be a bigoted and highly uninformed person.

How many IQ points do they gain by using the PC term instead of the
actual one?

You are showing you have absolutely no idea what learning disabilities
are. you might want to consider keeping quiet.

I know that PC terminology is all about making the dupe who buys into
feel good about himself and superior to others instead of actually
doing anything to improve the condition of the afflicted.



CAI allows for more enrichment lessons, and more lesson of varied types.

It allows the teacher to use the computer as a babysitter.

CAI allows for more enrichment lessons, and more lesson of varied types.
You may show studies disputing the statement.

I'm still waiting for your evidence that they do anything to improve
education. That's the assertion in question in this thread. So far the
only evidence presented have been 'feelings'.



Teachers can easily change lesson plans and provide students with
better course handouts.

Yeah teachers spending a couple of hours redesigning their lesson
plans and handouts in a page layout program makes them so much better
than the notes they used to use.

Actually, yes, they are.

Funny how things have gone straight to Hell in education since that
stated then, isn't it?

Note, no response.

You really can't follow anything without a big red arrow pointing the
way can you?
You said that making lesson plans on the computer improved education.
I responded by pointing out that this 'improvement' took place at the
same time education was getting demonstrably worse. This is what is
called a counter to your response. You just weren't quick enough to
tell.

I understand that since you show you have no idea what
it takes to write and revise lesson plans and handouts.

You mean like when I've helped my brother and cousins do theirs?


They are more easily produced and changed. They
are more easily read. They are more easily reproduced.

Because hitting 'Copy' on a Xerox machine is so difficult.

How does hitting copy edit the lesson plans and handouts?

Lacking the ability to notice that my response is about reproducing,
Rick makes an embarrassing gaffe.



I know this
because I've done it. And teachers spend a hell of a lot more time than
a couple of hours creating lesson plans.

And most of that is in the planning part not the typing part.

While that is true, you don't know that first hand. And there is more to
lesson plans and handouts than typing.

You mean like when I've helped my brother and my cousins with theirs?




After using computers in schools for 20 years there's no evidence -
ZERO - that they do anything to improve education.

It seems, by your standards then, there is no evidence anything
improves education.

Actually there's plenty of evidence that back to the basics things
improve education. Phonics smokes Whole Language for example.

So you say. Maybe that's because you want Phonics to smoke Whole
language, so you find those particular studies.

Right after you provide that objectively measured evidence that giving
evert grade schooler a laptop improves education.

First, tell me specifically what they are being used for.

According to articles about several of the programs its largely porn,
illegal downloading and IM'ng test answers to other students.

Then tell me if
they are replacing some form of instructional methodology, augmenting it
or both. Then tell me how many computers are needed to equip the
classrooms as opposed to the number one those laptops are assigned. Tell
me if any maintenance funds will be saved by giving the laptops to the
kids. Tell me what you mean by "improves education". Show me any study
that you cite has universal acceptance.

That they improve education is the assertion in question. You jumped
in on that side. Its up to you to prove it.





Widespread insistence on
using something despite its total lack of efficacy is the hallmark
of a fad.

Go get some experience, then spout off.

Get some actual proof then get back to me.

Go get some experience, then spout off. Go teach school full time for a
few years. Then get back to me.

You just don't want computers used in education. face it.

Unable to provide any actual evidence that giving every grade schooler a
laptop improves education, Rick lashes out like an angry child.

And now you show you have no idea how an angry child acts when it lashes
out.

LOL! Yeah, Rick, you're the only one who has ever been around kids.
Schmuck.


--

Why settle for the lesser evil?
Cthulhu for president 2008.
.