Posted on 04/11/2011 9:46:09 AM PDT by pillut48
And Auburn is not a rich area.
About 9.0% of families and 12.0% of the population were below the poverty line, including 16.6% of those under age 18 and 11.8% of those age 65 or over.
Liberal Democrats and Apple Cultists would like the government to be your personal shopper. Democrats know what people should have (Apples!) and take your money from you to buy you what they think you should have. And Apples cost 5 times as much as a perfectly valid alternative for a 5 year old.
I assume that they have Lobster every day for lunch? They don’t? Why not? Too expensive? What’s that?
Ok. On Average, Ipad users aren’t all that good with computers.
Why do people geek so much about them? Because they finally have a computer that they can master. Not all users,
I knew someone who bought an apple because he thought is was cool, but I had to fix his computer, even though I didn’t have a mac, because all this computer stuff was too much for him.
What I’m saying is that the apple fan base does include those clueless people as well as those who might appreciate the superior design.
Only apple has fans for the reason “couldn’t really get the other o/s - too hard”.
No one prefers android because they couldn’t figure out apple. No one prefers windows because they couldn’t figure out apple.
“It’s so intuitive” means “I’m stupid, but I can get the computer to do something”. It’s a computer for stupid people. Also people who feel good about themselves for owning something that other people also like. It is also a superior product to most competitors, certainly it’s better than something that costs 8 times less.
But can it DO anything more than the alternative?
Remember black and white tv, remember before cable. Fuzzy black and white pictures. But people watched it perfectly fine. And now tvs are better. But people did use the inferior product for years and years and years. everyone did.
The smallest of our little students do not need the most advanced technology when all they’re doing is listening to mp3s and pushing a letter on a screen.
To spend $500 on an ipad is a waste of $400.
Buy a $100 model. See if it does what you want it to do for the 5 year olds. If you think it’s not good enough, if it doesn’t DO what it’s supposed to do, try a $150 one. You will find that you don’t need to spend $500 to have the functionality that a 5 year old needs.
But if you think that I don’t know that the $67 tablet is crappier than an ipad, you’re mistaken. The ipad is less crappy than a $67 tablet. And that makes the $67 tablet ideal for a 5 year old.
The ipad actually does less than the $67 tablet, but the less that it does it does unnecessarily better. Get rid of the unnecessary, and you’ve got a perfectly acceptable (not better, and definitely worse) but perfectly acceptable tablet FOR A 5 YEAR OLD
OK, you’re an idiot.
Is it not true that people who have difficulty with computers are the ones who are embracing Apple.
Doesn’t Apple sell the fact that it’s easy to use?
Isn’t Apple trumpeting the fact that 2 year olds can use their intuition to operate the device?
That super easiness does not apply to people who don’t have problems operating other computer systems. I have no problem operating the computer I’m operating now. I have no problem finding “apps” which I’ve had no problem installing
on my computer.
This whole Ipad thing with the apps craze is almost like
an entire community of people gathering together to celebrate that they can now use computers the way everyone else has been using computers who is smart enough to use them.
There are others who appreciate the quality of apple. I’m not saying that every single person who likes the ipad is bad at computers, but Apple themselves seems aware that their customers really can’t be trusted to operate their own computers. Why not have Flash. Turn it on, turn it off. But Apple thinks that too tricky for their customers to figure out. Why is my battery so low? Do you have Flash on? Yes. Turn your Flash off. I guess Apple just didn’t want to take a million phone calls.
There are people who can accept that the ipad is intentionally withholding their best version of flash, and there are those who can’t accept that. People who can’t accept a crippled product are more likely to be better with computers.
So, accumulating all those not good with computer people in your user base is going to lower the average, even if lots of savvy users appreciate some of the many superior features of the ipad - and it does have many objectively superior features.
You’re right. The teachers are the most likely culprits in the scam.
AGREED!
It's one thing for a public school to provide a computer lab. It's quite another for a public school system to force the general population to pay for an iPad for EVERY student that crosses the threshold of those learning institutions. ( many of which are not TEACHING our children )
Will the school system be going out to bid for the different computer manufacturers? Or has Apple been given "Favorite Son" status? I have a feeling it will be business-as-usual and the public will pay through the nose.
I work as an IT Director and CTO of a company that provides systems for the disabled. Will my company be given a chance to bid on systems for children with disabilities with a more suitable tablet computer?
The funny thing is...these computers become personal property and turn into game pads eventually. And what happens when one is accidentally dropped? Is the child SOL? Or does John Q public get the cyber screw for another iPad. If I were the Apple regional Marketing Manager I would be elated with the new found business opportunity. If I was a Maine resident, I'd be looking for a new state to reside in.
And this won't happen in the real world? Some of the children who will be given these iPads will have little to no parental supervision at times. Who will be held responsible when one of these children's rights is violated by some cyber pervert? And the Cost! Will the children/parents be held financially responsible for whatever could go wrong with these bad boys? This is a very bad idea IMO.
What you've done with your children is your choice and, I am assuming, is under strict control and reasonably mature usage. But what this school district wants to do is an irresponsible use of tax payer dollars and possibly an endangerment to the children who are not supervised or monitored in the use of the iPad they will be given.
A computer screen is a poor replacement for an actual physical book. You can't flip through pages, dog ear pages, get tactile feed back or get even more subtle connections. When I crack open a reference book, even the smell helps prepare my brain for information acquisition.
A computer screen is a poor replacement for a book, and the iPad screen is a poor replacement for a computer screen. It just does not have enough pixels to duplicate a paper page.
Kids spend too much time in front of screens as it is.
5 year olds are not responsible enough to be responsible for a $500 dollar tool. I don't feed my kids off the fine china either.
Since the introduction of the computer into schools, the quality and outcome of education has gotten worse. I'm not saying it is a causal relationship, but it is obvious that throwing technology at the problem has not helped.
Just take a look at actual textbooks, Tom. When I was in high school about 10-15 years ago, we were the “golden” class in that we always got the newest textbooks. I did my best to keep my book in good condition, but oftentimes those books become completely tattered, beat up, wet, torn up, written-in, etc. Now a book will weather a rainstorm pretty well. The pages will get wrinkled, but in general, the book is useable.
There’s really very little tolerance on an electronic device. Kids will throw them in the bookbags, sandwiched between a math and science text book. If it’s raining on the walk home, that device will get wet. If the batteries die, they’re not immediately replaceable, and how many kids are actually going to keep tabs on the charger or have access to USB ports to charge?
Computers in a lab are one thing. Give the kids a login with an Active Directory setup, let them log into their desktops and play whatever is given to them, but a mobile digital device is just silly, esp. for anyone younger than 10.
There are ways to restrict internet access, deleting of programs locks, etc. built into the ipad. “Perverts” won’t be a problem. Look, I’m not talking about using this tool as a replacement for teachers, etc. I think it will work miracles in the “drill and grill” skills, such as multiplication, letter recognition, basic science skills, etc. For example, my daughter has always been interested in the stars, and we found a very neat astronomy app. It has a built in compass, and we can take the ipad out back at night, and line up the star chart with the stars in the sky (even shows what is below the horizon!) and learn the names of the various stars, constellations...my daughter loves this app and is learning things that
truthfully she wouldn’t if she just sat down at a PC or read from a book (as wonderful as books are!) As I said, the possibilities are endless to help students, especially failing students to be motivated and successful learners.
The teachers, yes, but also Angus King, the former governor of Maine. He’s also involved in the Wind Power Scam.
If money is being pointlessly wasted in Maine, there’s a good chance that Angus King is somewhere around.
I understand the idea of the iPad being a “WONDERFUL tool to add to a teacher’s arsenal for learning”, but we also have to ask the question of what tools to remove from the arsenal. The school district that I live in spends on average $11,300 per student per year...and yet as a person that highers some of these people it is amazing how many cannot do simple math. We will not solve the problems in our education system by throwing more money or gadgets at it.
I also am confused by your posts in this thread (pillut48) when I try to follow them. I believe it is in the first post you talk about how your grandson is using the iPad to teach himself but then in later posts insist that the teacher is still needed and then in later posts (post 50) you lament that others “would rather rely on unionized teachers,:-(” If the two year old is able to use the iPad to teach himself then shouldn't the parent be able to use the iPad to teach their own children so we would not even need public schools? This would solve the issue of to much money being spent on admin, unionized teachers, etc.
We are spending to much on education with out any real return for the investment...but we were warned of this all the way back in 1897..."when society once recognizes the possibilities in this direction, and the obligations which these possibilities impose, it is impossible to conceive of the resources of time, attention, and MONEY which will be put at the disposal of the educator." "Pedagogic Creed" by John Dewey 1897 as republished in "Education Today" in 1940.
John Dewey...the father of the modern public school system...and signer of the "Humanist Manifesto" 1933, could see where his plan would eventually lead. We will just keep putting more money and "stuff" into education when what is really needed is parents to be responsible for their own children.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.