Friday, April 06, 2007

Editorial

An iPod for every kid? Are they !#$!ing idiots? (http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007704060333)

We have come to the conclusion that the crisis Michigan faces is not a shortage of revenue, but an excess of idiocy. Facing a budget deficit that has passed the $1 billion mark, House Democrats Thursday offered a spending plan that would buy a MP3 player or iPod for every school child in Michigan.

No cost estimate was attached to their hare-brained idea to "invest" in education. Details, we are promised, will follow.

The Democrats, led by their increasingly erratic speaker Andy Dillon of Redford Township, also pledge $100 million to make better downtowns.

Their plan goes beyond cluelessness. Democrats are either entirely indifferent to the idea that extreme hard times demand extreme belt tightening, or they are bone stupid. We lean toward the latter.

We say that because the House plan also keeps alive, again without specifics, the promise of tax hikes.

The range of options, according to Rep. Steve Tobocman, D-Detroit, includes raising the income tax, levying a 6 percent tax on some services, and taxing junk food and soda.

We wonder how financially strained Michigan residents will feel about paying higher taxes to buy someone else's kid an iPod.

That they would include such frivolity in a crisis budget plan indicates how tough it will be to bring real spending reform to Michigan.

Senate Republicans issued a plan a week ago that eliminates the deficit with hard spending cuts. Now their leader, Mike Bishop of Rochester Hills, is sounding wobbly, suggesting he might compromise on a tax hike.

We hope Bishop is reading the polls that say three-quarters of Michigan residents oppose higher taxes.

There are few things in the House budget outline from which to forge a compromise.

For example, Dillon says he would shift the burden of business taxes to companies that operate in Michigan, but don't have a facility here. The certain outcome of that plan is to drive even more businesses out of Michigan.

About all we see of merit is a call for government consolidation and a demand that state employees contribute more to their retirement benefits -- which is no more than House Democrats suggested for future state lawmakers a few weeks ago.

We find it ironic that the Democrats are proposing floating $5 billion in revenue bonds to pay for retiree health care, when Gov. Jennifer Granholm vetoed a nearly identical plan by Oakland County because it would cost the state money.

Instead of advocating cost-saving changes in public school teacher pension and health plans, Dillon suggests more study. There have been plenty of studies of the issue, with the conclusion being that hundreds of millions of dollars could be saved through reforms. Michigan needs action, not more study committees.

Dillon also proposes that the state cover 50 percent of the cost of catastrophic health insurance for everyone in the place, but once again doesn't specify a funding source.

Stop the stupidity. Michigan can't tax or spend its way out of this economic catastrophe.

The only responsible option is to bring spending in line with current revenues. The mission must be to expand the tax base, rather than to expand taxes, by crafting a budget that encourages growth.

We won't get there by wasting money on early Christmas presents for Michigan kids.

"We hope Bishop is reading the polls that say three quarters of Michigan residents oppose higher taxes"
Republican "genius" at its best. I suppose that a tax cut for everyone making over 1 Mill per year would be just what the state needs?
I'm surprised that only 75% of Michigan residents oppose higher taxes. Wow, that is some kind of really enlightening poll. You mean people don't like paying higher taxes? WHO KNEW!!!
But of course, paying higher taxes sucks. Just close up all the schools, continue to let the roads and bridges decay, lay off about half the police and fire fighters, and oh, by the way, stop corporate welfare and farm subsidies.
That should fix your budget just fine.
"Buy an iPod for someone else's kid" well, dick brain, if YOUR little fuckheaded brat goes to school, someone else will buy him an iPod!
I mean, fuck the community, how the HELL does it affect ME ME ME?
Really, the iPod plan sucks, especially because most kids probably have them, and an X box, and their own TV, courtesy of maxed out credit cards and the parents of this age who buy their kids everything they see to shut them the hell up.

I agree with the general sentiment. Our state legislature is filled with idiots, from both sides. Term limits insure that they won't accumulate institutional intelligence. Bishop and Dillon are part of the "Dumb and Dumberer" ticket.

The concept of provide ubiquitous access to 21st century technology for have-nots makes sense. Unfortunately, most every effort at a giveaway is fraught with technical and deployment challenges, never mind the politics.

FWIW, Granholm's vetoed tech toy giveaways proposed by Republicans state legislators in the recent past:

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17031

I have no idea what is going on. The governor is sleeping at the wheel and the legislature is filled with morons from both sides. Michigan needs new direction in a hurry or we will turn into Mississippi.

Granholm's not asleep at the wheel, AFAICT. But, a big part of Granholm's problem is that fundamentally, she's not the leader of the Michigan Democrats in office the same way that Engler could led the Republicans. She'd only been big in state politics for 4 years prior to being elected Governor, where it was 20 years for Engler. You would think that a landslide victory for her would've fixed that, but no. The notion that House Democrats made up a distinctly separate budget propopsal from Granholm's is fucked up. Unfortunately, given term limits, I suspect that'll be true in perpetuity, no matter who the governor is next.

Ahh yes, another classy bit of rhetoric from the Detroit News Editorial Staff.

As an educator I can tell you that iPod's are contributing to delinguent behavior in schools, not helping kids be more technologically advanced.

I'm all for a tax hike, but use it to fund a better education in someway besides iPods.

Here's a novel idea, help make sure schools have things like, oh, chairs and desks before putting another distraction in a kids hands. How about keeping teachers around as well. Maybe classes with fewer than 40 students in them would help kids learn better.

If teachers could replace legislators for a few weeks our state would be much better off.

Jethro:
My mid life crisis has been to quit a career (which was an accidental career, not a choice anyway), and go back to school to become a teacher.
I have been moved buy three books by Jonathan Kozol: Illiterate America, Savage Inequalities, and his latest: Shame of the Nation: The Return of Apartheid Schooling in America.
It isn't just politicians,but alot of parents need to see what their children are being thrown into.
Teachers have MY utmost respect, and that's why I want to become one when I grow up.
Anyway, you might check out those books if you haven't already.

Zip as a teacher would be strange, but almost definately fun.

I had to wait until I was old enough to be able to resist, um, well, let me just say that now that I have two daughters who are 18 or so, I'm OK to just be happy to teach them about nouns and verbs.

As an educator I can tell you that iPod's are contributing to delinguent behavior in schools, not helping kids be more technologically advanced.
Do you think that there's an intelligent curriculum choice that would make sense in the context of iPods and the like? Do you think it'd be worth the cost, not only of the iPods, but of the deployment, podcast materials, etc.?

My sense is "no", but I'm unsure if the problem is thinking too big (start with fundamentals, reliable power out the walls, deploying ubiquitous networking) or too little (a radical IT revolution -- kids with headphones on in front of computers that spew lessons all day, teachers supplementing computers, podcasts with subliminals for sleeptime learning -- turn that 21st century electronic babysitter into your teaching bitch). The implications of a complex external tool you have to have for a general-purpose curriculum haven't really been thought out, and those sort of choices widen the divide big-time.


Here's a novel idea, help make sure schools have things like, oh, chairs and desks before putting another distraction in a kids hands. How about keeping teachers around as well. Maybe classes with fewer than 40 students in them would help kids learn better.
My instinct is to agree, here.

But... is students per teacher the real problem, or some other dynamic? My gut feeling is that attention span is the real killer. I don't think kids attention span improves at 15:1 vs. 40:1. Perhaps most classes shouldn't be more than a half hour, tops. Beyond that, you're fighting for attention span, and there's much peer pressure to not prolong things. Think of the times you didn't raise your hand with questions at the end because you didn't want to hold up the rest of the class, or look stupid. Maybe that 40:1 ratio CAN work, but only in short bursts and supplemented with a lot more "office hours" time so 1-on-1 and small groups meet with the teacher (either at the teacher or student's initiative) during hours. Maybe teachers need to swap lessons every once in awhile, when possible, to keep things fresh. Sesame Street wouldn't do well if they just showed lovable furry old Grover, even if he's lovable.


If teachers could replace legislators for a few weeks our state would be much better off.
My problem with this is that it's the teachers who taught the legislators, and the teachers who collectively marginalize themselves when they're not being marginalized by others. And, to take a quote of yours slightly out of order:


I'm all for a tax hike, but use it to fund a better education in someway besides iPods.
"I'm all for a tax hike" is a marginalizing position -- "take more of me" versus "take less of me". Teachers are used to sacrificing for the good of the flock, because the choice to be a professional K-12 teacher at all typically involves big sacrifice. That's increasingly out of fashion in a world where people do lots of shit now that future generations will have to deal with, where the idea of "what's good for the children" takes a distant second place to "me me me". Look at how unions were marginalized. By far the most effective tactic was to keep current union members as fat cats, while penalizing would-be future union members.

Ok, enough rambling...

This can't be real? What the fuck will Ipod's do for kids? Take more of their attention away from learning? Dumbest idea I have ever seen. How can this possibly better their education. I wouldn't do this if they were free. What next, give them a little TV to watch while they are in class so they don't pay attention at all?

Unclemxy... I work for the state and I know a few things the general public doesn't know. Some of the cost cutting that has been going on has been hysterical. She got rid of the people that calculated the budget for the department I work in to save money and now nobody can calculate the budget. Everybody is laughing.

I don't think teachers have much to complain about. They have a fierce union, the best benefits, and work 9 months out of the year.

Mike, I certainly have plenty to complain about in regards to teachers. I hate the fact that the MEA must protect teachers that should be fired. In speaking with several MEA reps, they blame administrators for not doing things the right way. Allegedly, if administrators took the proper steps and completed the necessary forms, bad teachers could be let go, giving way to younger teachers that care and keeping that 68-year-old teaching from 1972 lesson plans from collecting $70,000 when he hasn't cared about students in at least 15 years.
I realize generalizations are made about everything here, but before talking about the union, benefits, and amount of work, realize that each district is different. Yes, all are a part of the same association. However, many districts are cutting back on the benefits - not all subscribe to the MEA negotiated package - and I think you'll find most educators work at least 10 months, for 9 months pay.
I once had someone tell me teachers were glorified babysitters and should be paid accordingly. I pursued that logic to ask him what babysitters would be paid. Common pricing is $3 per hour per child. So if I have 160 students for 1 hour each day, that works out to $480 per day. Then there are 180 days per year that I'm with them (I'll just attend teacher work days and development days for free. Parent conferences, coaching, working with clubs, lesson planning and grading, field research is all complementary in this setting). 180 x 480 = $86,400. So I say to this guy, please pay me like a glorified babysitter.

Any type of Union has been the demon of the right since 1994. It's a funny union that is so "strong" that its members are paid the amount that teachers are.
If teachers are glorified babysitters, it is because of something I have been saying and posting here for years: Most people who procreate do so before they are ready, throw their children at the system, cannot support the system, either financially or emotionally, and then crab about the results.
These same parents buy their children just about every type of attention span depriving device known to man: From spending zillions of dollars at Christmas buying worthless and useless junk, to cell phones, X box, televisions for their bedrooms, iPods, MP# players, and all the rest.
Teachers are the "front line" warriors in a declining social structure, aren't paid diddly, and seem to be the first ones blamed when children graduate without knowing how to read.
The parents of children bear the sole responsibility for the trouble their kids face at school. Most have kids before they are in any way prepared, only 25% of adults over 25 have a college degree (passing down a legacy of appreciation for education), and how many parents are out there worrying about their over priced house in the 'burbs that BOTH have to work for, and their over priced jalopies in the driveway that are anything BUT an investment?
Also, the model of American Education has undergone some changes that I wonder about. "Success For All" and other such curriculums, especially with the unfunded mandates of GW Bush's "No Child Left Behind" teach children how to pass a CRT test, and the educators coach for "The Test". If enough kids don;t pass, the district loses federal money, so they gotta pass that damn test.
The disparity in the types of education our children receive is alarming. Inner City schools (a nice little euphemsim for Black and now Hispanic schools) are forever forced to run kids through a robotic approach geared toward putting out "employable products", instead of educated and cultured learners and thinkers. Meanwhile, in the 'burbs, students get things like BOOKS that don't pre date the Reagan Administration, desks, well lit classrooms, and a lower teacher to student ratio.
Some union teachers have there, Mike.

WTFchris, I can see where iPods could be a useful teaching tool. TV can be a useful teaching tool. Watching a foreign language movie in English subtitles (or vice-versa) can assist with language retention -- something I occasionally fiddle with. Of course, there's a -big- stretch between "could be useful" and "IS useful".

MikeMyers, getting rid of the people who plan the budget could be a genius stroke, though I'm unsure of the specifics. Most of the time, in the absence of a real budget, you'll spend less, not do anything new, because you don't know how much you can safely spend. One of the best budget manuevers I ever implemented involved NOT telling someone how much they could spend. It was evil, but they innovated and I ended up getting more for less than I would have with normal budgets.

Jethro34, the seniority-based salary structures that pay incoming people less what they're worth while paying long-serving people more than what they're worth bug me. The NBA with rookie scale contracts bug me too. People only end up with a sensible view of their value by happenstance. When do you stop compensating for past underpayment?

Zip Goshboots, I'm mostly down on today's unions because of how they will cannibalize their young. Unions have done many great things, but I don't see them globalizing. I expect 21st century unions to look more like WTFDetroit than 20th century unions. About the only thing they'll have in common is that they'll both be considered terrorists.

funny, i just saw on the news a story about alternative treatments to fighting ADD, somethig to do with playing computer games with a sensory helmet on. well, after about 5 weeks of "treatment", the 6 year old was "cured", and the happy ending involved showing him doing homework while listening to his ipod... like a normal, well adjusted 6 yr old child would, i guess.

god do we live in a fucked up world.

ps: there was an article in the freep today about how the congressmen proposing the ipods got a trip out to california to visit apple's HQ, all bought and paid for by apple. tar and feathering enough, or is time to go french revolution style, and bring out the guilotine? viva la resistance!

Unions won't globalize? Wow, I never! I was just thinking that all those people making 12 cents a week in China to make my Mt Rushmore souvenir are just about to be signed up to the AFL-CIO-China.
Of course unions will never globalize. They're gonna be dead in the US in the foreseeable future. GM, Chrysler, and Ford are gonna walk one day soon on union retirees and take their pensions with them.
I like Unions. Again, just like voters can get rid of the GW Bushes of the world, union rank and file can get rid of their corrupt leaders.
It's a 12 year old mantra: "Unions DID some wonderful things, now it's time to get rid of 'em". Why is it time to get rid of 'em? Because they give power to the PEOPLE! Oh, Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich have done their evil work, indeed, and done it well.

http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6345567


Democrats talked about bringing technology to education during a press conference with House Speaker Andy Dillon last week. In that discussion, the idea of buying iPods or mp3 players for students came up.

But quickly, the question "How can the state afford to buy iPods for students when there isn't enough money to go around right now?" was asked.

In reality, there was never a plan to buy all students iPods. There is a $38 million line item to pay for technology, far less than it would take to buy mp3 players for 1.65 million students.

why spend 150-200 bucks on an Ipod when you can spend that money on used PC's that the kids could have encyclopedias on, search online, do their homework, etc? You can't tell me you can't find a decent used PC for 200 bucks. My brand new HP cost me 350 bucks after rebates (with printer and monitor too).

why spend 150-200 bucks on an Ipod when you can spend that money on used PC's that the kids could have encyclopedias on, search online, do their homework, etc? You can't tell me you can't find a decent used PC for 200 bucks. My brand new HP cost me 350 bucks after rebates (with printer and monitor too).
It's the management costs. You need networks and environments and administration to make this stuff useful as more than a glorified word processor. That's neither cheap nor easy.

FWIW, there never was a specific proposal for iPods A dumbass Democratic state rep, as part of discussing new technology spending, held up his iPod and mentioned that golly gee, it'd be great if every kid in Michigan had one. He was likely influenced by a recent lobbyist junket he took to Silly Valley that Apple (among others) paid for. A Freep reporter inferred that some random amount of money -would- definitely be spent on iPods, seemingly making up the specifics as he went along. The dumbass Democrats didn't know to debunk this in a hurry, and now the equally-dumbass Republican state reps and their fans feel justified.

It's the management costs. You need networks and environments and administration to make this stuff useful as more than a glorified word processor. That's neither cheap nor easy.

FWIW, there never was a specific proposal for iPods A dumbass Democratic state rep, as part of discussing new technology spending, held up his iPod and mentioned that golly gee, it'd be great if every kid in Michigan had one. He was likely influenced by a recent lobbyist junket he took to Silly Valley that Apple (among others) paid for. A Freep reporter inferred that some random amount of money -would- definitely be spent on iPods, seemingly making up the specifics as he went along. The dumbass Democrats didn't know to debunk this in a hurry, and now the equally-dumbass Republican state reps and their fans feel justified.

I didn't mean for the school. I meant a home PC for them to do their homework on. Imagine all the kids living in poor homes that don't even have a PC to do their homework on. That's what they need, not an Ipod. Heck, if they don't have a PC, what the fuck good is an Ipod anyway? You can't even put songs on it.

What you said specifically was:


have encyclopedias on, search online, do their homework, etc?

Encyclopedias call for software above and beyond the $200 el cheapo PC and|or (more realistically) a network, searching online definitely calls for network accesss, and only the "do homework on it" aspect may not involve something that goes beyond the computer (but of course, you want an OS like what others are using) most likely as "a glorified word processor". Factor that in with the costs of upkeep (which tend to be higher for depreciated gear -- you have to know what you're doing more), multiply by lotsa kids, and the costs start getting fun. It's easier to put the computers in central locations like libraries and maintain them there, and reduce the cost of access problem to "how do I get to the library" (which isn't exactly easy for the ones most in need).

What you said specifically was:



Encyclopedias call for software above and beyond the $200 el cheapo PC and|or (more realistically) a network, searching online definitely calls for network accesss, and only the "do homework on it" aspect may not involve something that goes beyond the computer (but of course, you want an OS like what others are using) most likely as "a glorified word processor". Factor that in with the costs of upkeep (which tend to be higher for depreciated gear -- you have to know what you're doing more), multiply by lotsa kids, and the costs start getting fun. It's easier to put the computers in central locations like libraries and maintain them there, and reduce the cost of access problem to "how do I get to the library" (which isn't exactly easy for the ones most in need).

I never said that the school/government was installing or paying for that stuff at all. I simply said give the kids a PC so they can have that stuff on there. And Wikipedia is free online...and that's an encyclopedia. and what's this network stuff? I said FOR AT HOME, not at school. why would they need to give every kid a PC at school? that's stupid. they already have PC's at school and you don't need one for every kid. I was simply saying that for the cost of an Ipod, they could simply get a used PC that would be good enough for kids to use microsoft word, internet explorer and any encyclopedia software the MAY have on it. at least they wouldn't have to worry about finding a way to the library (which may not even be open anymore because of a lack of funding) on crime ridden streets.

I like you as a poster, but what's with the ignoring what I said? I never said anything about putting the pc's in school. I'm talking about a program similar to what northern michigan did recently (giving every student a laptop).

Getting online at home isn't free, cheap, or easy. I think that's where our signals are crossed. Please forgive me if I've been coming across as an ass, as that wasn't my intent at all.

Sure, there's probably free dialup options for K-12. But, with high-speed connections being more ubiquitous, it's harder to surf the web via dialup. I have an older family member still using essentiallly the dialup (Juno) I set them up with many, many years ago. He's frustrated because he clicks something and floods their modem where he can't easy easily abort. He has to wait a while when first dialing up just for updated virus signatures. Most of what he does still is offline email. There's low-bandwidth options for some things, mostly owing to mobile wireless, but you have to know what you're doing to get at those. Dialup ties up a land line, which less young families have. The poor young mom with poor kids has a cell phone if anything at all.

So, that leads to broadband. Factor out the utilities-based Internet delivery mechanisms like phones, cable, and power, unless you expect the MPSC to develop a spine when all their relatives have jobs at AT&T and Comcast. To get to the home, you really need stuff like municipal wireless, and that's not an easy road to take. It's unclear how well stuff like Wireless Oakland and Wireless Washtenaw will cost and work out when all is said and done.

I know you didn't say stuff about putting PCs in schools, libraries, etc. All I'm saying is that's what most K12 sorts end up doing when they think in terms of giving disadvantaged youth access. It's a problem they can solve, while stuff like "how to get Internet to kids at home" is seen as a way-hard problem. If they go around grabbing pallettes of old equipment with variable OS loads and dodgy hardware and circulate to the needy, they expose themselves to legal liability and support headaches. It's easy for me, for most of us on here, to make some random piece of PC equipment into my bitch, but that's not true for most end users who didn't have computers in the first place.

I don't think you can compare K12 stuff with university programs like Northern. College students are older, pay money, and opt to be there. That's a hugely different dynamic. With K12, you either have to give it to everyone, even when they don't need it, or do some fucked up needs assessment exercise so it doesn't look like you're picking favorites. Ugh.

The wireless stuff is hapening now. I've been doing numerous data requests to the companys installing the equipment. Royal Oak and Troy should be entirely wireless pretty soon actually. The whole county I think by the end of the year. I hope Detroit follows suit but I won't hold my breath there.