If it doesn't get used, it doesn't get broken
Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 08:29AM "Don't touch it, you might break it." Seth Godin
This is, of course, the opposite of,
"Touch it, you can make it better."
What's the default where you work?
Godin's simple post reminded me of the philosophy of one of the first tech guys I ever worked with - Jim. A former math teacher, his rule was simple - the less kids touch the technology, the less likely it is to get broken and the less work that means for me. (He refused to install the Gothic font on the computers in the Mac lab because he was convinced the kids would use that font only write dirty words. Really.) Jim was overworked so one could somewhat understand his POV.
The mindset conflict between the educator and the technician is something that I have experienced and written about for 25 years.
- Keep Your Building Technicians by Keeping Them Happy, School Library Journal, May 2000
- Good Policy for Policies (Techno Intelligence), School Library Journal, March 2003
- The DJ Factor: Why Technical Support is Critical, February 1996
- Librarians are from Venus; Technologists are from Mars, May 1998
- Who should be running your school’s technology department? KnowlegeQuest, 2000, Vol 28 no. 5
- Preventing Technology Range Wars, The School Administrator, October 2005
I boil the conflict down to differing, but equally valid and interdependent, value-laden priorities:
Tech: We need adequacy, relibabilty, and security.
Educator: We need access, simpicity, and flexibility.
As we begin to issue devices to individual students in my district, the discussion regarding control will need to be held among all stake holders. To what degree do we set up student devices for ease of management, for controlling functionality, and for security? To what degree do we give students ease of use, broad functionality, and sensible security measures?
I sometime think that we forget that by allowing students to control (to touch) their own devices, the probability of them improving their functionality is as great or greater than breaking them.
Sorry, Jim.
Reader Comments (2)
We are in the process of purchasing three $1200 quad-copters, two of which will eventually be flown by students. Although they are about the same price as the computer the students use, I have been very nervous about giving the remote to any student - especially since there is such a wow factor - and all they want to do is stunts and fly fast.
I did have one of the kids make a hard landing and broke the first set of prop guards. After my initial reaction, I realized that there is only so much I can do.
Hi Kenn,
Wondering how these machines support the curriculum. Hate to see toys for teachers being passed off as some STEM necessity!
Doug