Why do we want every student to have a connected device in the first place? If our primary goal is improving test scores, we can probably find better, less expensive solutions.
How should the curriculum and classroom practice change as a result of every kid carrying a powerful communications tool? If teachers continue to lecture, drill, and test based on a largely fact-based program, 1:1 would be a huge waste of money. Very similar to the way we’ve wasted a lot of funds on instructional computing over the past decade and a half.
For those not of the ready, fire, aim mentality, Tim's questions have to resonate. Although I believe our district will eventually supply school-owned devices to all 6-12 students, I don't want to call it a 1:1 program.
Instead of being device-centric, our initiatives will be based on using our learning management system to provide differentiated instruction and ubiquitous access to resources to all students in all core classes 6-12.
Just co-incidentally, all students will need a device to get access to these opportunities in order to insure equity.
This is not just semantics. This really is the “why” of adding student devices to the system. While I believe many, if not most, teachers will initially use the LMS at the substitution and augmentation levels, there will be those pioneers who move ahead rapidly - and there is a clear path for all teachers toward more powerful uses.
Will student devices be use only to access the LMS? I certainly hope not. But LMS use will provide a launch pad that all students and teachers will use.
Let's not call it a 1:1 program, unless the 1:1 stands for 1 unique learning experience to every 1 student.