Written by Todd Russ
During the last decade, numerous schools and school districts have made the move to a 1:1 computer device program. Millions of dollars have been poured into these initiatives in hopes that student achievement will be positively impacted. Unfortunately, the data is mixed regarding the impact of 1:1 technology (Sauers & MCleod, 2012). So how do non-public Christian schools – specifically WELS schools – justify the costs without definitive data or government funding? Bring your own device (BYOD) programs minimize the financial impact on the school, and hold the potential to build the foundation for improved student achievement.
BYOD programs minimize the cost impact to schools by sharing those costs with parents. In this type of program, students are required to bring a device to school that allows them to access the internet. The focus on “type of device” is minimized. Families are empowered to select a device for their student that fits his or her unique personality. At price points ranging from $75 – $500, this option has become affordable. A keyboard is always beneficial, but students are more adept at typing on virtual screens than most adults will ever be. Fortunately, Bluetooth keyboards make nearly every tablet workable (even the 7-inch ones). Schools are encouraged to develop parameters for the devices that take into consideration the physical limitations of their school. If the school building has limited electrical access, tablets and Chromebooks are great options due to their improved battery life. Since students own their own devices, they tend to take better care of them. Parents can choose whether to insure them as well as how to maintain them. This responsibility shifts from the school to the parent and student. This allows schools with limited available tech support to implement a robust 1:1 program that focuses on the use of the device rather than servicing the device. This shift alone makes 1:1 programs possible for most if not all WELS schools.
How do we propose this to parents without hard data? Despite mixed standardized data, qualitative data is positive (Hanover Research Council, 2010). In interviews, researchers found that students felt more engaged in the lessons when technology was integrated. Increased engagement leads to improved academic performance. Integrated 1:1 technology aids in 21st include improved collaboration and problem solving skills. The key to making this effort positive is the focus on how to use the technology.
Pitler, Hubbell, & Kuhn (2012) challenges educators to focus integrating technology into their typical lesson. Regardless of the type of device, how it used in the classroom will determine success and impact. Teacher training is essential in launching a successful 1:1 program. Schools that provide little or no ongoing training and support minimize the potential of a 1:1 program. This is a process. No teacher is ready on day one. However, the ongoing learning that takes place through trial and error is the same type of learning we want from our students. This provides an excellent opportunity to demonstrate learning for our students.
As we strive to meet the needs of our students and families, it is important for schools to explore all possibilities. Although a 1:1 technology program may not lead directly to higher test scores, it holds the potential to equip students with the skills to maximize achievement. At the same time, it provides a greater level of relevance to education as students perform tasks and use skills similar to those used by their parents in the workplace.
1:1 technology programs may not be practical in every situation. However, for those schools that are eager to implement technology at a new level, BYOD provides an affordable and sustainable approach. Coupled with ongoing professional development and training, 1:1 computing provides exciting opportunities to engage students.
Todd Russ (DMLC ’91) is the Academic Dean for grades 6-12 and Junior Religion Instructor at St. Croix Lutheran in West St. Paul, Minnesota.
References:
Hanover Research Council. (2010). The Effectiveness of One-to-One Laptop Initiatives in Increasing Student Achievement. Retrieved June 20, 2014 from: https:// techsvcweb.madison.k12.wi.us/files/techsvc/The%20Effectiveness%20of%20One-to-One%20Laptop%20Initiatives%20in%20Increasing%20Student%20Achievement.pdf
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., & Kuhn, M. (2012). Using technology with classroom instruction that works (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Sauers, N.J. & Mcleod, S. (2010). What does research say about one-to-one computing initiatives. Castle.Retrieved June 25, 2014 from: http://www.natickps.org/CASTLEBrief01_LaptopPrograms.pdf
BYOD also encourages life long learning in ways that school owned 1:1 programs often do not. The devices become integrated in the students’ lives outside of the classroom, outside of the school day, and outside of the school year. In school, the students learn to learn and find information using their computers. They can then transfer these skills to the ‘real world’ because of increased access to their BYOD devices.
For many schools and parents, BYOD is also a more efficient use of equipment and resources. In a typical school owned computer deployment (1:1 or otherwise), computers for student use often sit idle nights, weekends, holidays, and during the summer. At the same time, home computers that are often needed to complete homework assignments sit idle during the school day. With BYOD the total number of computers needed could be cut by as much as half. While public school families share the costs of school computers with the entire community, private school families often bear a larger percentage of the cost of school computers through tuition, fundraisers, and (in the case of most parochial schools) through their church offerings.