How to Integrate Technology in the Classroom

Let's get back to the technology people!  I encountered this fabulous list of ideas of how to effectively integrate technology into the classroom.  The author, Adam Bellow, is an advocate for technology in education, and his website ( http://edutecher.net/ ) promotes new and effective technologies.  He recently wrote a post on Mind/Shift, itself an interesting website on education, policy, and technology.  You can see his full post on Mind/Shift, but here are his 7 Golden Rules for Using Technology in Schools:

1.  Don't trap technology in a room.  Remember "the computer lab"?  As Bellow says, technology should be like oxygen - ubiquitous, necessary, and invisible.

2.  Technology is worthless without professional development.  It's more than just "how-to".  It's "why" and "why this is worth your time".

3.  Mobile technology stretches a long way.  So why are cellphones banned from most classrooms?  Why not harass the power of smartphones and apps for the sake of learning (not just texting)?

4.  The new "F word" is fear.  Schools block access to websites, teachers are afraid that kids know more about technology than they do.  So perhaps it's our responsibility to teach kids how to use technology responsibly - to know about copyright laws and licenses, for one thing - and how to be good "digital citizens", as Bellow puts it.



5.  Tech tools are not just a passing fad.  Sorry folks, smartphones and tablets are here to stay.  And given how inexpensive some of these tools are (the iPod Touch, LiveScribe pen, etc.) and the countless uses they have, it's worth investing, and training people NOW.

6.  Money is not the problem.  See Khan Academy.


7. Invite every stakeholder to the conversation.  And yes, that includes students too.  Heck, throw in parents!

No Child Left Behind: 101

This is another post providing some background on education laws, so that I can discuss some very recent developments.

So, No Child Left Behind is widely viewed to have been originally enacted by Bush II in 2002.  The basic idea was to create standards-based accountability for K-12 nationwide.  The act mandated student testing every year from 3rd to 8th grade, and once in high school, to measure student progress.  Each year, a certain percentage of a state's schools must make annual yearly progress (AYP).  AYP means that this year's 5th graders, for example, test better than last year's fifth graders.  If a school doesn't make AYP, it is labeled "needs improvement"

The schedule of progress was defined as well - by the 2013-2014, all schools, in all states, are to be at "proficient" level.  If a school doesn't, then that school faces an escalating set of sanctions - tutoring, offering students school choice, etc. (each of which costs the states money) - and also puts federal funding at risk.

A couple of points about all that: First, NCLB was simply a reauthorization of an existing law - the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which was first enacted in 1965 (So sometimes, you'll see NCLB referred to as ESEA.  Another example of ed law alphabet soup).  So, it wasn't something that Bush II just created out of thin air.

Update! Douglas County Voucher Program Halted!

I've lost the "breaking news" aspect of this, since it happened last Friday, BUT a Denver district court judge issued an injunction to stop the implementation of the Douglas County voucher program.  I think this is the correct result, based on the legal arguments. Interestingly, even though the plaintiffs only asked for a preliminary injunction (meaning, a temporary halt to the program while its legal implications were sorted out), the judge issued a permanent injunction.  That means that the program is over, unless Douglas County decides to appeal.

Here's a link to the judge's ruling (pretty much a home run for the plaintiffs).  I don't expect you to read it because it's 68 pages, but it's a thorough explanation of why this program violates the Colorado state constitution.  And it also includes some fascinating details about some of the actions taken by the private schools - like how one school reduced the financial aid package for a student in the exact amount of the voucher.  How nice.  How helpful to lower-income families.

And here's some information about the implications of the decision from EdNewsColorado, a great website about educational issues, but it is focused primarily on Colorado. Since it's so close to the start of the school year, a number of families already planned to use the vouchers to attend the private schools.  So, what those families will now do is murky.

Congrats to the ACLU, but really, I still think the better argument lies with the Legal Center.

School Vouchers: the Discrimination Problem

This is Part III of my attempt to catch folks up on the pluses and minuses of school voucher programs, especially as they impact minorities and kids with disabilities.  As I've mentioned, there's a new school voucher program here in Colorado (in Douglas County).  The school district, obviously, thinks this is a good idea.

Again, the ACLU does not agree.  See earlier discussion here.

Plus, as discussed in this WSJ article about the voucher program, this looks like the classic case of vouchers "skimming off the top" - since the vouchers won't actually cover the entire cost of the typical private school, low income families really can't take advantage of them.  In essence, it looks like the vouches are subsidies to middle and upper class families, who can now leave public schools in favor of something they think is better.

Now, some states have actively tried to address concerns with school voucher programs by offering additional assistance to low-income families, and ancillary supports (like transportation).  Some have even enacted scholarship programs (another way to describe school vouchers) for kids with disabilities - Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, Utah, and Florida, just to name a few.  (The 12 year old Florida McKay Scholarship, a leader in this movement, will be the subject of another post). This is a great development (check out this interesting piece in the NY Times.)

But, not so in this case here in Colorado!

Dyslexie, or, Technology Rocks!

This video has been around for a while, but it is so cool and such a great example, again, of how technology can help kids with special needs - in this case, specifically dyslexia.

If you go to this YouTube video, you will see a demonstration of a new typeface called "dyslexie", which was designed by a guy with dyslexia to be more readable and cause fewer errors for people with dyslexia.  (You can also go to the guy's website, but it's mostly in Dutch and I don't speak Dutch).

The idea is to have the font itself be a tool for reducing errors.  So, as the video explains, the English alphabet was not designed with dyslexia in mind!  There are only 26 letters, and many of them look alike - v and w, i and j, d and b and p and q.  The problem is ascerbated by sans serif fonts that are widely used (like Arial, and Helvetica, and ones that like.)  So, "dyslexie" emphasizes differences between letters, weights the letters on the bottom so that it's easier to see a "d" instead of a "p", angles some letters to make them look different, and emphasizes punctuation and the capital letters at sentence beginnings (so that it's easier to know when the sentence ends and a new sentence starts).

According to one study at the University of Twente, this actually works.  Now, it wouldn't hurt to have a few more studies verifying it, but hey, the essential points are still there: (1) make letters look more distinct from each other and; (2) make it easier to know when sentences begin and end.

I think it's so awesome when people use technology in creative ways to solve problems like this.  Practically speaking, I'm not sure how to get dyslexie across the pond and into books for kids (or onto computer screens).  But I appreciate now knowing that a couple of simple changes in the way words are presented could make life easier for a kid with dyslexia.

More on School Vouchers: the Religion Red Herring

As promised/threatened, there's a lot more to say about private school vouchers and whether or not state methods of implementing them work for students with special needs.

Just some quick background: school vouchers permit students to basically go to private schools on "scholarship", using public funds designated for each child's education.  The public school district pays the private school an allocation of funds per student enrolled via voucher, usually dependent on a formula concocted by dividing the number of enrolled public school students into the general education fund.

A lot of folks like the idea because it promotes competition between public and private schools, and provides choices and opportunities to kids who might not have very many options.  If you think about the problems of underperforming public schools in poor, urban areas, vouchers could allow kids in such areas (often, minorities) to access better education.  There's been quite a bit of research in this area, much of which supports the idea that competition breeds improvement, and better educational choices for underprivileged kids.  (See, for example, the wikipedia on school vouchers, which is actually very good and fairly balanced.)

Now, a lot of folks do not like school vouchers because they do muddle the line between public and private schools. And these folks have their own research arguing that vouchers lead to a lack of accountability, and not necessarily even improvement in test scores.  Furthermore, when the private schools are also religious schools, questions arise about whether public funds ought to be spent on religious education (the whole minor issue of separation of church and state, you know). 

Special Ed Basics - Parentally Placed Private Placements

You might be getting the sense that special education law and policy is more complicated than you originally thought.  Boy has it been a learning curve for me, and I am still on that curve.  One of the interesting little wrinkles that we need to cover (so that I can post about some recent developments) is the situation where a parent is unhappy with the public school services that her kid is receiving.  Maybe she disagrees with the amount of services, or doesn't think the service providers are effective.  She finds a local private school, enrolls her kid in the school, and then notifies the public school of her decision.

Assuming the simplest case (the school had provided FAPE, and there's no due process hearing, no litigation about that issue), the public school system is basically done with this kid.  The LEA has no obligation to provide special ed services to the child, and no obligation to pay the tuition for the private school.  On the side of the private school, the private school has no obligation to provide any special ed services because they're not a public school, and not subject to the requirements of IDEA.  (Charter schools are tricky.  They are usually public schools, and so are legally subject to IDEA, but the fact of the matter is is that they rarely offer adequate special ed services to students, even though they receive funds from the LEA to do so.)

So this situation can put parents in a difficult position.  On the one hand, they might feel their child's education is suffering in the public school - but at least the kid is getting some kind of special ed services, at no cost to the parent.  On the other hand, if they want a (presumably) better education at a private school, there are no included special ed services, and all this is coming out of the parents' pockets.

The IDEA does provide an outlet, but one that's a hard road to travel.  In order to get the public school system to reimburse for a parentally-placed private placement, the parent must prove that (a) the public school did not provide FAPE, and (b) the parents provided notice of their intent to remove their child.  To do this, the parent generally needs to file for due process (in order to prove the first prong).  This is hard - due process hearings can be long and drawn out, and meanwhile, the parent is paying for this private placement.  A lot of parents simply can't take on this financial and emotional burden.

So, some states have tried to offer alternatives.  In Florida, the McKay scholarships are offered to students on IEPs that want to attend private schools.  In Colorado, Douglas County is offering school vouchers on a pilot basis to kids that want to attend private schools.  In Wisconsin, the Milwaukee school district had a similar voucher program - that became the subject of a complaint filed with the DOJ.   Sadly, in all of these cases, there have been serious flaws in the implementation, and how the programs support (or, more accurately, don't support) kids with disabilities.  And that, my friends, will be covered in my next post on this topic.