One to One vs Assessment

Two different mandates, two very different objectives!

Originally published June 12th, 2016 in the Citrus County Chronicle

Beginning in the 2014-2015 fiscal year, the State Legislature required that each district school board shall use at least 50 percent of the annual allocation for the purchase of digital or electronic instructional materials. It also specified that these could not be classroom sets but rather take home materials. This began the requirement for a one device to one student (known as “one-to-one”). It is important to understand that while the State provided an allocation of funds for the curriculum materials (digital textbooks), it did not provide funds for the devices that the materials would need to run on.

The primary purpose of one-to-one is for the delivery of digital interactive textbooks. Tablet type devices offer the most versatile single device for students as it combines a book-like experience, while also giving students note-taking abilities, Microsoft Office (And Apple iWork) suites of tools, internet access, and multimedia capturing features all in one portable device that students can carry from class to class and location to location. One of the industry’s most leading tablets for its cost effectiveness and ease of large scale deployment is the iPad. This device has been a leader in successful digital classroom transition from print to digital curriculum. This particular device is an easy-to-use device for both the student and the teacher. Since teachers are now also being asked become classroom technology specialists, they need a device that is easy-to-use and that performs well without having to be a computer technician.  In addition, the device is one that is most engaging for today’s students. Keep in mind that the digital textbook mandate has not come with any funding for the device.  While districts have been struggling to fund the one-to-one mandate and provide professional development for teachers to transition the ever- changing curriculum, the State Legislature has continued to push for more and more high stakes assessments (tests that both continue to be punitive to students in regards to promotion and teacher evaluations that are tied to salary increases). A major push with high stakes assessments has been transitioning to Computer Based Testing (CBT). The State has mandated CBT each year and have made it such a priority that they have even provided funding to each district for computer testing devices to ensure that districts comply. Because of how the law and rules were written by the State, this funding comes with restrictions and can only be used for devices that will expand the number of assessment testing devices at each school.

The trouble is that, due to security logistics, the device used for one-to-one cannot also be used for assessment testing. Why? This has nothing to do with the type of device (tablet vs. laptop) being used but because an assessment device—no matter what type—must be “sanitized” for testing. This means the device has to be set up with very limited functions and have many of the functions disabled. This process is completely contrary to the expectations and benefits of a one-to-one device where students’ textbooks are loaded onto the device and the student customizes their device to provide them with a personalized learning tool. Until the technology exists so that a student can take their one-to-one device directly into an assessment and put their device in a type of approved “testing mode,” their devices cannot be used for the over 85 days of testing required by the State. Essentially, the State has given us two separate mandates which require two separate technology devices.

Many districts are struggling with this. Because Citrus county was proactive in planning for the one-to-one mandate, we have recognized this (imposed) limitation and have been using existing traditional computers for high stakes assessment testing in the form of portable labs. This year the State significantly increased the number of testing devices required. This is a monumental task to address. However, because our district this year repurposed older teacher laptops that are no longer being used in the classroom into mobile testing labs, we have been able to meet the mandate without having to use additional funds. Many other districts in the state of Florida have had to make a difficult choice: either meet the one-to-one mandate for transitioning from print to digital curriculum or meet the State’s CBT assessment mandate where the results from the assessments are used for student promotions and teacher required evaluations that impact a teacher’s salary increases.  Many have chosen the latter.

Because of this, these districts are having to forgo what is best for students by focusing on the CBT State Assessments rather than ensuring they have the most relevant curriculum. This issue isn’t going away anytime soon. The State is adding on more and more assessments each year. Yes, there have been changes in legislation to say that local districts can choose a limited number of yearly assessments, but the State still has mandated that the data from those assessments are completed and tied to teacher evaluations. Therefore, the assessments are still mandated by the State even if the lawmakers try to distance themselves from them.

Citrus School District’s one-to-one initiative is recognized around the state and nation as a model for digital curriculum delivery.  Hundreds of our teachers are now experts in teaching using digital curriculum delivery.  The United States Department of Education released a publication highlighting Citrus County School’s one-to-one technology initiatives (http://sites.ed.gov/progress/2014/11/florida-county-uses-technology-to-engage-students-and-innovate-in-the-classroom). Our educators Dan Koch and Zac Leonard were awarded PBS LEAD LearningMedia Digital Innovator and PBS Digital Innovator for Florida.

Why has Citrus School District been one of the most successful districts in implementing one-to-one? Because we have understood that at the center of the digital transition is the teacher! The teacher is the facilitator; the teacher is the captain the steers the classroom’s learning. It is the teacher that sets the expectation and assists the student who is using these necessary tools to expand their learning world. With these digital tools our teachers have learned themselves that their classrooms have no boundaries. One moment students are reading classic literature, the next, they are virtually visiting locations around the world referenced in that story, and the next they are typing an essay and sending it through their devices to the teacher. The teacher is then able to grade it and return it back to the student—all through the device. By prioritizing funding assessment technology and virtually abandoning the funding of one-to-one classroom curriculum, the State lawmakers have shown that it is more interested in measuring outcome over providing critical career and college curriculum needs.

One must ask: Why? What could possibly motivate funding assessment over classroom instruction? This has been a continual theme in the recent educational reform movement by the State Legislature. Each time school districts, teachers, parents, and community members have asked or demanded that the legislators listen to them on these so called “educational reforms”, we are ignored. When do we as a people say enough is enough?

I urge voters to pay careful attention to those that have made these legislative decisions and then criticized the local leaders and local teachers that have worked so hard to achieve so much for our students. What can be done? There MUST be a change in thinking that the only way learning is measured or obtained is by these State Assessments.  If some of the greatest academic countries in the world rely on teacher–developed tests instead of a barrage of state or national assessments, why can’t we?

Comments Off on One to One vs Assessment
Filed under: Blog Posts