Recently, the Grand Poobah of Idaho Education decreed that he wants to give every student a laptop. He wants every student to take online courses in addition to their in-school classes. He has a whole slew of other "wants," too, but I'm not here to analyze all of his proposals.
My senior year, as I've said before, I only had two classes that were physically at school. The rest of my courses were correspondence courses. This system worked really well for me. I was able to work at my own pace on each, individual class. I finished Health in a day, because it was not a hard class and I did not need help with it.
This said, I am not about to say that this system works for everyone, or with every class. If I had tried to take calculus online, I would have failed. If I tried to take French online, I probably would not have done well. There are some classes- Technical Reading and Writing, Economics, Health, to name a few- where I didn't need a physical teacher. I knew enough about the subjects already, and I didn't need to really study the material. Now, that in itself could be a reflection on how ridiculous some of our graduation requirements are, but I'm not here to discuss that today, either.
I did well because the subjects were fairly simple, the work was fairly easy, I'm fairly smart, and I have a fairly good work ethic. That is all on a personal level. For someone like me, this system worked. The old system wasn't working- the moment I get stuck in a boring class, I mentally check out of it. However, the traditional butt-in-seat system does work for a lot of people. There are plenty of students out there who need something explained at every step. They need the motivation to do their work that comes with going to class. There are a lot of people out there who won't just sit down and read their textbook on their own time.
Beyond the fact that online classes don't work for everyone's learning style, there's the more glaring problem- computers. The idea of giving every Idaho student a laptop is ridiculous. It's beyond that; it's unfeasible. It's no going to save the state any money at all do try and put any of this into place. Think about it. Think about your own computer. Think about everything that it does, good and bad.
I paid a lot for my computer. It does a lot of cool things, and it's also a pain in the butt sometimes. If you don't stay on top of constantly updating software, drivers, graphics cards, et cetera, your computer doesn't work well. How is the state supposed to make sure all those laptops are up-to-date? How are they supposed to make sure those computers don't get viruses? Are they going to pay for virus checkers? Do you even know how expensive Norton is? How is the state supposed to stay on top of every computer and make sure they all are working? What happens when a kid's computer dies, or something is faulty? Do they get penalized for missing whatever material was online while their laptop is broken? Do they get a kind of proverbial doctor's note, signed by a technician instead of a physician? How exactly is all of this supposed to work, Loony?
Then there is the worst of all assumptions in his proposal- how exactly do students get access to their online materials? In a place like Boise, even if your family doesn't have internet access, there is free WiFi everywhere. Fast food restaurants have wireless internet now. However, what about the rest of the state? There's a pretty good chance that internet is scarce in a place like Ola, Idaho. A pretty high portion of the Gem State's population lives at or below the poverty line. They can barely afford food, let alone internet. (If you've been to WINCO at the first of the month, you know what I'm talking about) Even if they might have internet access, it has to be a certain speed for online classes to work effectively. That means if you have dial-up, you're just SOL, my friend.
It's not just unfeasible, it's insulting. Luna really cares so little for his constituents that he would suggest that if you don't have internet access, you do not deserve to be educated in our system. I'm sure to this he would say that students could stay at school to get internet access, after classes. For most people who are in a situation where they already can't afford internet in their homes, they certainly don't have the resources to spend extra time at school. The truth of it is that Luna does not care about Idahoans. He does not care about education. He does not care about students. The fact that correspondence courses worked for me because I have different education needs than my students is lost on him. His concern is the bottom line. His concerns lie with the people paying for his campaigns. He does not care that people line up by the hundreds at their grocery stores with food stamps during the first week of the month. He does not care that school lunch is likely the only meal a large number of kids will get during the day. He does not care that a majority of Idahoans do not have the means to deal with online classes for their kids. He cares about money, and he cares about getting elected.
Why, then, would he have won elections multiple times? If he was really so bad for education, why do people vote for him? The truth is that people will vote for anyone, so long as that person says the right things. Certainly, at a superficial level, getting a free laptop sounds great. Getting a free anything is great. But the moment you contemplate the implications that proposal has, as I did, you realize it's a trick. This will never happen, and it's insulting that Luna tries to sound like these are legitimate ideas. He's simply saying the right things to please those who put him in office.
It's akin to high school elections. It's like a person saying, "If I'm elected to be your student body president, there will be doughnuts for everyone, every day." Is that realistic? Of course not. There would be no way to provide for a promise like that. But would that person get elected?
Well, it worked for Luna.
No comments:
Post a Comment