2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

To date there has never been a true-experiment to validate the claim that 1:1 laptop programs improve student learning.  In such an absence some have used a quasi-experiment and random sampling within a school ( Dunleavy & Heineke, 2007 ) but could only conclude that boys had a greater increase in science than girls.  In Maine the state attempted a program where every 7th grader in the state received an Apple laptop.  Studies of Maine reported no improvement in math, but statistically significant gains in Language Arts (Weston& Bain 2010).  

http://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/demo/present/index.php/jce/article/view/171/56

posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Let's reflect on what Winston said....

He's noted what most people know, but he's distorting the scope of what it can do.   MIT has made public some of their materials, but they don't give "free" students access to all the "fee" services.  

Khan Academy is currently a collection of good content.  I feel it is not close even close to world class.    Perhaps they have goals to create lessons, objectives, and themes.   When I need to know more about standard deviation, it's a nice video.   But it is not a world class education.  It's a lot of dots, it does not connect the dots.

2 very big distortions, a common practice of Tech pimps.

There have been no studies to show that spending on technology has significantly boosted scores for a school that previously had less technology and lower scores.  I'm reseaching this, so please send me your studies.

Here's new info for refleciton...

To date there has never been a true-experiment to validate the claim that 1:1 laptop programs improve student learning.  In such an absence some have used a quasi-experiment and random sampling within a school ( Dunleavy & Heineke, 2007 ) but could only conclude that boys had a greater increase in science than girls.  In Maine the state attempted a program where every 7th grader in the state received an Apple laptop.  Studies of Maine reported no improvement in math, but statistically significant gains in Language Arts (Weston& Bain 2010).  

http://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/demo/present/index.php/jce/article/view/171/56

posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Special needs kids= Yes.  That's where we need bold new tools.   But for the rest of the population, we don't need to treat kids like lab rats with very expensive toys. 

posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context

http://drupal6.allianceforchildhood.org/fools_gold

Report on technology in classrooms, called "Fools gold"

I'd suggest everyone read this, and that OPB mention this.

posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context

adding calculators is a poor comparison to adding an iPad.  Let's try a better dialog.  How many school services are cut to fund gadgets with little research for success. 

posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context