One of the most thought-provoking sessions for me was the presentation by Mid-Pacific Institute Technology Coordinator and ETEC Doctoral Student Mark Hines. This session was titled: mLearning: Making Learning Personal and the Long View of Educational Transformation ( http://tcc.badgestack.net/sessions/keynote-mark-hines/ ).
What I thought was particularly ambitious was the MPI plan to introduce iPad tablet devices to each of the approximately 1600 students at the school. This is an idea that was obviously well planned and incorporates professional development opportunities as well as curricular development.
I had two reservations about this proposal:
The first reservation concerns the advisability of the single platform environment. In a recent F/OSS class session we had the opportunity to speak with Albany Senior High School Deputy Principal Mark Osborne. (http://www.cio.com.au/article/333686/nz_school_ditches_microsoft_goes_totally_open_source/ ) in his discussion with us, Mr. Osborne described how their school broke away from the model practiced by other New Zealand schools and embraces an open multiple platform environment. At Albany senior high school, they wanted an environment where any student or staff member was able to seamlessly access information and participate no matter what hardware platform they were using. Even though I am a very committed long-term user of Apple products, I am somewhat uncomfortable in an educational setting where only one platform seems to be supported. Additionally, there is some evidence that multiplatform environments are inherently more stable and resistant to malware.
My other reservation comes from my experiences in purchasing and introducing hardware and software solutions in a large high school setting as well as in a smaller elementary school. One of the difficulties with mass purchasing/mass introduction is that all of the devices will be approaching the and of their productive lifecycle at approximately the same time. I've found in my practice that there are advantages to sequential stepwise introduction. When hardware is acquired and introduced over a 3 or 4 year cycle, it allows the institution to create a manageable long-term plan for upgrade and replacement.
Having stated these reservations, I can only applaud Mr. Hines' vision and initiative. The exemplar he is providing at Mid-Pacific Institute can serve as a model for change in other institutions in Hawaii; both private and public.
What I thought was particularly ambitious was the MPI plan to introduce iPad tablet devices to each of the approximately 1600 students at the school. This is an idea that was obviously well planned and incorporates professional development opportunities as well as curricular development.
I had two reservations about this proposal:
The first reservation concerns the advisability of the single platform environment. In a recent F/OSS class session we had the opportunity to speak with Albany Senior High School Deputy Principal Mark Osborne. (http://www.cio.com.au/article/333686/nz_school_ditches_microsoft_goes_totally_open_source/ ) in his discussion with us, Mr. Osborne described how their school broke away from the model practiced by other New Zealand schools and embraces an open multiple platform environment. At Albany senior high school, they wanted an environment where any student or staff member was able to seamlessly access information and participate no matter what hardware platform they were using. Even though I am a very committed long-term user of Apple products, I am somewhat uncomfortable in an educational setting where only one platform seems to be supported. Additionally, there is some evidence that multiplatform environments are inherently more stable and resistant to malware.
My other reservation comes from my experiences in purchasing and introducing hardware and software solutions in a large high school setting as well as in a smaller elementary school. One of the difficulties with mass purchasing/mass introduction is that all of the devices will be approaching the and of their productive lifecycle at approximately the same time. I've found in my practice that there are advantages to sequential stepwise introduction. When hardware is acquired and introduced over a 3 or 4 year cycle, it allows the institution to create a manageable long-term plan for upgrade and replacement.
Having stated these reservations, I can only applaud Mr. Hines' vision and initiative. The exemplar he is providing at Mid-Pacific Institute can serve as a model for change in other institutions in Hawaii; both private and public.
No comments:
Post a Comment