The New York Times is running a series of articles on the use of technology in K-12 education called Grading the Digital School. Thus far:
- Sept. 4: In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores
- Sept. 4: What Will School Look Like in 10 Years?
- Oct. 8: Inflating the Software Report Card
It’s an issue that’s relevant to Northfield because the Northfield School Board is holding a special election on November 8 to renew both the operating levy and the capital projects levy for ten years.
Instructional technology (software, hardware, networking infrastructure, etc.) is paid for primarily with funds from the capital projects levy.
A year ago at the Oct. 11, 2010 School Board meeting, there was a Technology Plan update:
Director of Human Resources and Technology Matt Hillmann presented a status report on the 2007-2011 District technology plan, shared some examples of success/challenges/opportunities with District technology, and previewed the process for developing the 2011-15 District technology plan.
The link to the PDF of 2007-2011 District technology plan on the Technology Policies page is
broken fixed. And But there’s no information there about a 2011-15 District technology plan, process or otherwise.
From what little I know thus far, I’m inclined to support the capital projects levy for maintenance of the District’s facilities.
But I’m not sure I like including instructional technology in that mix, especially without knowing the District’s instructional technology philosophy, how much is spent on it, what impact it’s had over the years, etc. All the capital projects levy page says is:
This funding would allow the school district to replace the instructional materials and technology necessary to maintain and support quality learning in each building.
I’d like to know more than that.