Just recently, a short-throw projector used on a SmartBoard died. Replacing the projector would have run us around $1,000. Thanks to a couple amazing mentors of mine (+Lucie deLaBruere and +Craig Lyndes) I've become very wary of simply replacing one device with the same thing. Especially one that costs $1,000. So, Craig and I looked into some alternative options. We found that, for about half the price, we could purchase an HD projector. However, it's projection wouldn't fit onto the SmartBoard the teacher was using. Then, with a little more thought, we decided to see if the teacher would be willing to give up the SmartBoard in exchange for an AirServer license for her PC. (We explained that the iPad would become her SmartBoard and that she can have up to four students projecting their iPads at the same time. She agreed. We'll be making these changes in the next week.
I rarely, if ever, look to technology to revolutionize education. However, when the chance presents itself for that revolutionary change to occur, we need to grab hold. As technology ages and fails, we need to get into the practice of not simply replacing a tool. Instead, we need to use these opportunities as a chance to explore options for making changes to classroom practices.
I believe it's important for schools to really look at what the needs are of each learner and teacher before buying each learner and teacher the same device. Does it really make sense to buy every kid a full-sized laptop or is a Chromebook or netbook the tool for some ages? Should laptops and desktops be Windows, Apple, or Linux? Would it be wiser to purchase kindergarteners a tablet instead of a laptop? Apple or Android? Do you really need a 10" tablet, or is a 7" the better choice? Shoot, would a 4"-5" tablet do the job for a fraction of the cost? Before anyone answers any of these questions they should take a good, hard look at what needs to be accomplished by the individuals who will be using them.
With that said, I'm becoming more aware of the issues that come with "one-offs", so I understand limiting the devices to a set list.
When one company understands they have complete control, they tend to exploit it for everything it is worth. And, education is a sitting duck because we NEED a major reform, and Apple, Pearson, and too many other companies to name see the opportunity to take advantage of us for their financial gain.
In addition to limiting the exploitation, offering students and staff a variety of tech tools forces them to develop the critical thinking and problem-solving skills necessary to be successful. When we give everyone one device, they learn how to control the one device not why certain actions have the effects they do. While, if a student and teacher experience Apple, Android, ChromeOS, Windows, and Linux, they'll be forced (allowed?) to grow comfortable with technology instead of a single device.
Unfortunately, the more each school pours into one device or manufacturer, the more difficult it is for them to get out of the cycle. So, by the time there's a better alternative--which may not be too far off--teachers, administrators, and other stakeholders are going to be so deeply embedded in the Apple culture (or whichever company it is) that it will seem to make more sense to keep giving Apple our money than to actually make the best choice for education.
The iPad and iPad Mini. Why purchase one instead of the other? Is the Mini really the best tool for the job, or is it just getting the job done? Is there much of a difference between the two? Here's my question: How often could an iPod Touch do the job, for a fraction of the price, instead of an iPad or a Mini? But, since the iPod Touch hasn't seen any major changes lately, it's lost the "cool".
Just so this doesn't become a blog blasting Apple, I've noticed the same is true for buying Chromebooks. Right now, education is lining up to buy devices that many people have not fully experienced. With so few people having had experiences with Chromebooks, how did they become the "must-have" of the year? Is it because they can do so much more than a traditional laptop? Sure, if difficulty with printing and not having the ability to install programs is what you're looking for. Is it just because they are less expensive? Buying 10 spoons at a discount when you need a bulldozer isn't a good deal. Is it because they're cool? Well, they're new, from a popular company, and a variation of what's already out. Cool, it is.
So, I think we, as educators and decision-makers, need to start re-evaluating the process and thinking that goes into purchasing technology in our buildings. Because, technology is the key to success in the 21st century (even the past 14 years of it), and purchasing devices, programs, or apps that have limited functions, are what you're comfortable with, or because they're cool shouldn't cut it. We need to purchase technology based on what jobs need to be accomplished, which people are using it, and how many uses it can have.
(As I re-read this post, I see how some will see a bias away from Apple. While this may be true, it's only because of how prominent they have become in education. They seem to be everywhere, but they don't seem to focus on improving products or practices that focus on making implementation into education more efficient or powerful. The reality is that many companies are falling into this pattern, and we, as the guardians of education, need to make sure we're limiting this financial exploitation whenever possible.
Additionally, I fully support purchasing Apple products, Chromebooks, and any other devices that are the best for what the learners and teachers want/need to accomplish.)