Secretary's Column
By Dr. Rick Melmer
Department of Education

Livid over laptops

No matter how long a person is involved in leadership, you continue to be surprised from time to time. Over the years, I have had a few moments where I thought an issue was a “no-brainer,” “slam dunk,” “can of corn” (pick your metaphor) and then discovered that my assessment was wrong.

I can still recall the battle that we had in Watertown when we proposed a weighted grade system for Advanced Placement courses. That debate occurred in 2001, and I am just starting to heal from the experience! If you are a leader, you can probably relate to that feeling of surprise when an idea that seemed pure as the driven South Dakota snow was judged by others to be full of problems and obstacles.

Over the past several years, I have found the debate over the movement to a 1:1 laptop environment for our high school students as one of those issues that seems so right, but others paint it as being so wrong. How can you argue against putting 21st century tools in the hands of our high school students? To be fair, some of the debate has been over how the money has been used to pay for the initiative. However, I can’t help believe that if the project was about providing medicine for needy children, there would be no debate about how we arrived at the financial resources to accomplish the task.

Clearly, many adults still struggle with the idea of giving students a computer for use in the schools. The rationale for this debate escapes me. There are a number of inconsistencies in the argument, but below are just a few.

• Each year the schools across this state spend millions (yes – millions) on textbooks for students. How many times have the districts been asked about guarantees that test scores will rise or that there will be some tangible benefit for this expenditure? Even though there is virtually no expectation of return on a textbook expenditure, we seem to think that technology purchases are worthy of that expectation. The next time new pads are purchased for the football team, let’s ask the coach how many more wins will result from the purchase (forget I said that – football coaches are already under enough pressure to win!).

• Speaking of results, we fully expect to see many positive benefits from this initiative. We are already hearing that students are better researchers, problem solvers, writers and communicators. However, if you are not invested in the idea, then you want more data. Improved test scores seem to be the litmus test that most opponents identify as the real proof of the success or failure of the laptop initiative. However, if you think of technology in a business setting, do the computers in an office improve the bottom line or do they make it easier for a business to be successful? Providing our students with technology gives each of them the opportunity to be successful in a world saturated with technology.

• No one argues that technology is important. We applaud schools and districts for providing technology for their students. We “ooh” and “aah” over labs and technology rich environments in a school. However, if we attempt to give each student a computer, it is considered excessive and unnecessary.

• One final head scratcher: How are our poorest students supposed to compete in today’s world? How can we expect them to even have a chance to be successful if they have little or no exposure to technology? Our current environment gives students limited exposure to technology during the school day, but outside of the day, we estimate that 20 to 30 percent of our students have no access to technology for academic purposes.

Over the past three months, I have had a chance to visit two schools that were considered to be top-flight schools. One was in the country of Singapore, and the other was a high school in Austin, Texas. You can probably guess how they attacked the issue of technology – with 1:1 access for all students. This concept is no longer a novelty but rather a necessary step to help our students to prepare for a technology rich world. Let’s quit debating the inevitable and support an initiative that a rural state needs to be competitive in today’s environment.