Bad for children. Bad for teachers. Bad for Idaho.
For Immediate Release
.
Contact: Mike Lanza
Cell: 208.861.2064
.
I want to start this by saying I am a dedicated student. I am in the top 5% of my class and spend hours on homework every day. I am a perfectionist and spend a lot of time and energy making sure my work is complete and up to my standards of quality. I have taken three online classes as a way to get ahead, avoid a teacher I disliked, etc. and have struggled in all of them. The work is boring. The assignments are cookie-cutter at best and provoke little deep thought, and although the teachers try, there is no good way to connect with students. I was not motivated to do my work, stayed up late finishing assignments an hour before the deadline, and I never even learned any of my teachers’ names. I came away from every single one of these classes knowing almost nothing of what I was taught. The reason students don’t like the idea of requiring online classes has nothing to do with us not wanting to move forward and “embrace technology.” We don’t like this because the system doesn’t work for everyone. I have had an amazing experience at Boise High sitting at a real desk learning from a teacher who is only ten feet away from me. I have been inspired and motivated by these teachers more than I could ever be in an online class. No teacher who lives miles away and only checks his email once every two days can ever replace my 8th grade English teacher who had us build a model empire and wage war Machiavelli-style. No online textbook can ever replace the fire lab in chemistry. No online discussion board post can replace the discussion my friends and I had about the ethics of social experiments after our psychology class. As hard as they try, no online class will ever be able to make a connection to a student and keep them as motivated to learn as a real, in-the-flesh, living, breathing, passionate, dedicated classroom teacher can. Students shouldn’t be required to take classes in a system that does not work for them.
- Sarah Whelan, High School Student, Boise
The Vote No on Props 1,2,3 campaign is now on TV. Please take a look at our first ad now on the air:
Anne-Marie urges voters to Vote No on Props 1, 2, 3.
Prior to moving to Idaho, I taught in a small town south of San Antonio, Texas. Our school district won an enormous grant from Apple which provided every high school student with a laptop, charger, and specialized backpack in which to carry them.
The program was an utter disaster.
Students mistreated their laptops and came to class with them uncharged. If they remembered to bring their charger, the classroom was crisscrossed with cords, making it difficult to walk around the room. Backpacks were destroyed and laptops were broken, lost, stolen, and pawned. When computers malfunctioned, students were left stranded, unable to access any work they had completed. Some students’ families could not afford internet service at home, so they were unable to complete homework assignments. When computers malfunctioned, there was often little we could do because the staff member responsible for maintaining the laptops was completely overwhelmed and unable to keep up with demand.
But the worst outcome was that students continually accessed inappropriate websites both at home and at school. And it wasn’t only our students. Other family members would use the laptops for their personal use. Pornography was rife. Anyone who thinks a firewall will prevent students from visiting prohibited sites is kidding themselves. I once walked into a classroom with a graphic pornographic image displayed on the wall (using a projector). The teacher was almost in tears. This is not the kind of classroom environment we want for our students.
In my own classroom, as I walked down the aisles to assist students with their work, I knew that students were off-task (usually playing video games), but I couldn’t prevent it because I couldn’t watch everyone’s screen at once.
The entire experience was upsetting and demoralizing. Based on my experience, I completely disagree with the plan to purchase laptops for students. Idaho schools already have more than enough computers available for student use.
- Anne-Marie Bebber, Middle School Teacher, Garden City
Maria Greeley and daughter
Online courses provide a good option for some students, especially when a class requirement or elective cannot be met by the district. However, mandating online courses for all students regardless of their learning style, language proficiency, educational needs and motivation level is irresponsible.
Last summer my husband and I had our two oldest boys take an online class to allow more opportunity in their schedules. It was a tremendous challenge to just keep my boys seated at the computer with all of the distractions our home environment provides. It gave me a much greater appreciation for a classroom and hall passes. I had not anticipated the additional money we would spend beyond the cost of the course. We had to upgrade our computer due to the large amount of material that needed to be downloaded. We paid to add stronger parental controls due to the amount of time they needed to spend on the computer and their propensity to distract themselves with game sites. We found it necessary to hire a tutor for the son where coursework online did not meet his learning style. In the end, we made a difficult decision. After spending their summer doing the online class, both boys withdrew and took their course in the classroom.
There’s a right way to bring technology into the classroom, and there’s a wrong way. The laws authored by Superintendent Luna and approved by the legislature are the wrong way to go. Proposition 3 imposes a one-size-fits-all mandate on our schools that hurts our students and diminishes the quality of education.
- Maria Greeley, Mother of 4 and Treasurer of “Vote NO on Propositions 1,2,3″ campaign committee, Boise