Ubiquitous internet access has transformed the way humans
think and interact in unprecedented ways. As a global population, we are
becoming a part of a worldwide cybernetic
intelligence as the digital technology industry catalyzes the fastest leap
in planetary evolution ever witnessed
by humanity. In effect, we all now live inside a giant virtual library, in which almost any bit of information may be
accessed by almost anyone, almost anytime, providing a potential for human
learning never experienced before.
So what’s wrong with KPR’s pervasive WiFi plan? Isn’t wireless computer access already
saturating our environment? Shouldn’t our schools be among the places where
such access is easiest to come by?
As is the case with most KPR plans, this one leaves much to
be desired when it comes to both dollars
and sense.
KPR’s budgets show that the province of Ontario
provides about half a million
dollars per year for classroom technology. In the past four years, KPR has
spent about $7 million on this line
item, including a whopping $2.2 million
for the purchase and installation of commercial-grade Meru routers, which go
for more $1000 each, up to twenty of which might be in a single
school.
KPR also bought class
sets of “netbook” computers
complete with carts to move them
from room to room. Installing a point-source,
low-power, household-style router on
each cart would have cost $100 a
shot – and done the same job sending
signals to the netbooks as do the pervasive, high-power routers currently hidden behind ceiling tiles at every
KPR school.
This judicious system of turning WiFi signals on only at the time and place of immediate use would have cost a total
of $20,000 if every KPR school had two
of them – the same price paid by the
board for setting up a single school with high-power
routers! Indeed, the annual $80,000 maintenance cost of the Meru routers is far higher than the total purchase cost of point-source routers
would have been.
Yes, you read that right. KPR could have spent $20,000
making point-source WiFi available in every school. Instead they spent $2 million to flood schools with WiFi
radiation from top to bottom, all day long, all year long, need it or not.
Let’s compare the availability of WiFi with hot water in your home. For decades
every household had a large hot water tank, a reservoir of heated water at the
ready. Eventually somebody figured out it would be ten times more energy-efficient
if we just heated the water up when and where we needed it with a tankless, “on-demand” heater – now the
first choice of economically-minded homeowners and builders.
While this same “on demand” principle is being used to save
energy and money in industrial design across the board, KPR trustees and
administrators continues to operate with out-of-date
thinking even as they tell us (and themselves) that they’re leaping ahead
into the future.
The total technology plan KPR is currently pursuing is
expected to cost $13 million, though
the board has been especially shy about revealing the details. It doesn’t take
a genius to see that KPR can’t actually
afford the plan. Indeed, KPR’s long-term
debt has been ballooning since Rusty Hick was hired as Director – from $67 million in 2009 to $73
million in 2010 to a whopping $93
million last year – with technology expenses playing a significant part.
Abraham: making magic with $$$ |
In April 2010, Clarington trustee Cathy Abraham showed the poor judgment for which KPR trustees are
rapidly becoming known in participating in a publicly available interview with
Robert Martellacci, the head of a private digital technology company. The
interview, available here, demonstrates how closely KPR is linked to the
behind-the-scenes push to stimulate the
corporate economy by shipping as much public money as possible into it.
In the podcast, Abraham made her now-famous admission that trustees would have to “make
some magic happen during the budget process” to facilitate the massive technology
expenditures.
Abraham stated in no uncertain terms that one of the primary
motivations for installing pervasive wireless systems is to “allow students to use the technology they
already have.” Martellacci responded by mentioning that Research in Motion was planning to double their Blackberry sales to the
educational market. Abraham remarked how wonderful it would be if students
could simply bring their laptops to school and look up websites during lessons – an opinion strongly suggesting
that she has never actually tried to manage
a classroom herself. She expressed her confidence that “this is the way of teaching for the future,” and concluded the
interview by claiming that in pushing WiFi, trustees are really just responding to students who want to use
their hand-held devices in the
classroom.
Although Abraham claimed in the interview that KPR’s brave
leap into the world of WiFi was independent of Queen’s Park,
Premier McGuinty’s comments just a few months later suggest otherwise. McGuinty
managed to anger parents by suggesting that cell phones be allowed in classrooms, as reported by the Toronto Star. A poll on the Star’s website the day after
McGuinty’s remarks revealed that 93%
of respondents thought it a bad idea
– for all the obvious reasons. “There’s
nothing positive about cell phones or any distractions in the classroom environment,” observed
one citizen. A parent working in the technology field wrote that “these devices disconnect us from the
spontaneity of human existence.”
A more recent poll, taken by the Ontario Student Trustees’ Association
less than a year after Abraham’s comments, showed that 72% of students in fact didn’t
think cell phones should be part of the classroom environment, as reported here.
Kawartha Safe Technology
Initiative members believe that the “hidden
agenda” behind pervasive WiFi is simply to let school boards off the hook
of providing computers at all, eventually obliging all parents to buy their kids laptops and iPhones to take
to school. Not only does such a plan exacerbate
the differences between upper-class
and lower-class children (which
public schools were designed to minimize),
but also creates new security issues
as kids with expensive new devices become targets of theft and violence. Last
month, Toronto
police chief Bill Blair discussed the problem of cellphone theft at schools, as
reported in the Star.
Making matters worse, it’s obvious that pervasive WiFi and
hand-held devices will present an impossible
management problem for teachers. KSTI rightly argues that this scenario
would create “limitless opportunities
for cyberbullying, misuse of cell phone cameras, and viewing of pornography.”
A CBC documentary on the negative psychological
effects of such activities was aired this past winter, hosted by Canadian
theatre, literary and media icon Ann-Marie
MacDonald. You can watch it here.
Cooke: WiFi is more important than PCVS |
Abraham’s fellow Clarington-area trustee and
techno-cheerleader Steven Cooke in a frightfully amateurish campaign video posted to YouTube during the last election managed to
demonstrate exactly why he shouldn’t have
been elected. Luckily for him (and painfully for us), only one other person besides he and Abraham sought the positions, and
only one-third of the electorate showed up to vote (as discussed in the post "Why Peterborough Gets Shafted by KPR").
Cooke, barely able to enunciate his own
“teleprompter” speech, claims that digital technology is “one of the key elements to improving student engagement and success.” He
boasts about the $13 million plan, expressing the naive belief that because
of its technology investment, KPR will soon be producing the best students and
teachers in Ontario.
Cooke, who was later removed from the
Board for failing to file his campaign
finances (but unfortunately was reinstated), appears, like Abraham, to have
zero experience in the classroom.
As a post-secondary teacher myself, I noticed more and more students
bringing laptops to class after WiFi was installed on my campus. I also noticed
that the more students used laptops, the
worse their grades got, and the more difficult
it became to engender productive
classroom discussion.
So I tried an experiment. I banned all electronic devices from my classroom. Contradicting
Cooke’s groundless claims, struggling
students who had been particularly
dependent on laptops instantly improved
their grades and level of engagement. Last year I wrote the
electronic device ban right into the syllabus. The result? We had the best educational outcomes and most energetic classroom discussions in
the six years I’ve been teaching the course.
I’m talking about
literature here – one of the areas for which one might think instant classroom
access to the internet would be most beneficial. I can only imagine how KPR’s Phys. Ed. teachers feel about being
given laptops and WiFi instead of sports
equipment – not to mention those teaching woodshop, dance, visual arts, music, drama, French, or any other
subject in which accessing information
is a low priority compared with actually
practicing the tasks at hand while interacting
with fellow students or hands-on tools.
Can you imagine what our schools would be like if KPR’s Board of
Trustees were staffed by accomplished,
retired teachers instead of untrained corporate
cheerleaders going on online
spending sprees with public money, convinced of their own pedagogical genius?
No comments:
Post a Comment