Year One of the Nation's Most Expensive School Tablet Program Wasn't Pretty

If you were feeling generous, you might say the $1 billion project to put iPads in the hands of every Los Angeles public school student is suffering from front-of-the-pack syndrome. Bold tablet initiatives in North Carolina and Texas schools did not go according to plan either. But many critics suggest the weaknesses of the L.A. district program are too egregious to excuse.

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) tablet mega-plan is the brainchild of School Superintendent John Deasy. His goal: Put 650,000 iPads in grades K–12. That quantity figures one for every student, about 80 percent of whom qualify for free or reduced-price meals. These are the kids that the plan is aimed at. They are far less likely to have computers and Internet at home, which places them on the wrong side of the digital divide. But the implementation process has been challenging and isn't getting any easier as concerns from critics mount.

The latest difficulty results from the unexpected death of a school board member, which last Tuesday caused the board to push back to Jan. 14 a vote on the next phase of the proposal.

This coming phase would involve the purchase of iPads for students and staff at 38 schools, along with 67,000 iPads for use in standardized tests and laptops for trial in several high schools as a more cost-effective substitute. Without a December vote, the devices won't be ready in time for scheduled tests and trials.

“We were on a strict time line that has already been pushed to the edge,” board member Tamar Galatzan tells the Los Angeles Times. “That’s why it was being brought back in December. Whether it’s tablets, laptops or whatever, there’s a whole bunch of steps that have to happen.”

The first wave of iPads went out to 47 low-income Los Angeles public schools at the beginning of the 2013–2014 school year. Some schools backed out of the program, citing lack of planning on the part of the district. Others that participated complained of stolen tablets and simplistic security filters, which students immediately hacked in order to browse unapproved websites.

“Students can remove security policies as easily as they can delete an app,” says Paul Martini, CEO of iboss Network Security. “The LAUSD is moving forward with its iPad deployment but is not adequately addressing this core security flaw. It is very easy for a student to remove the policies that are added to the iPads and completely remove all web security with a few clicks.”

“The program was way too ambitious to begin with, and a much more gradual rollout would have saved all concerned a lot of grief. To say this plan was poorly thought out would suggest that some thought actually went into it.” -Larry SandIn his opinion, a school district's “best bet is to force iPads to remain on campus and restrict connectivity to the campus wireless network if the security policy is removed.”

Some critics have more fundamental concerns about paying for the program with school construction bonds that will be reimbursed over 25 years. They say that is a long period considering that the technology only has a guaranteed three-year life span and the software expires in the same time frame.

When the per-iPad price was released everyone wanted to know why these iPads, at $678, cost more than those in stores. In a TV spot in October, Deasy clarified that the amount included a generous replacement warranty, curriculum software (that has to be re-upped in two years), a secure classroom storage system, and training for teachers.

But wait, the public said. Why iPads in the first place? Why not a PC laptop or a Google Chromebook for a fraction of the price? Although the board has not provided adequate answers for those questions, it has included, in the program’s upcoming phase, a laptop trial at seven high schools.

Larry Sand, president of the California Teachers Empowerment Network, a nonpartisan group that aims to disseminate balanced information on educational issues, says that the plan was simply too grand. “The program was way too ambitious to begin with, and a much more gradual rollout would have saved all concerned a lot of grief. To say this plan was poorly thought out would suggest that some thought actually went into it.”

Sand says the massive iPad deal failed to include the keyboards necessary to take the new standardized tests. Their purchase has been estimated at an unbudgeted $38 million, an amount that is not so large when compared with the $500 million Apple was projected to receive from the district. The other half of the $1 billion budget has been marked for other aspects of the plan, such as staff training and school Internet system upgrading.

Perhaps more embarrassing than any of the other missteps is the lack of scrutiny with which the educational software from Pearson was approved. The L.A. Times says the deal was made “sight unseen” during a period when a former Pearson employee served on the school board. Then initial reviews from teachers, students, and education writers have been lackluster. Add to that an unknown fee for renewing the software every few years.

Joan Kramer, who worked for 30 years as a coordinating field librarian for the LAUSD, says that the district should better evaluate the way it spends money, especially when it is already closing libraries and only high school librarians, many of whom can only work a few hours each week, are funded. “Schools are in desperate need of updated technology,” Kramer says. “It would make more sense to fund the schools with good computer labs that can be shared by all the students and kept at school, with library personnel keeping track.”

A committee that oversees school bond spending and includes representatives from city government, unions, and the public isn’t 100 percent on board with the proposal either. Earlier this year, it rejected major portions of the plan, refusing to authorize $135 million for the project and instead offering only $45 million. It also decreased the number of iPads for students and teachers and has recommended further reductions.

For all the controversy, Deasy, who considered stepping down from his post in October, seems committed to pressing on with his iPad plan because students, particularly economically disadvantaged ones, need to be prepared in this technology-driven society. "It's no longer a maybe or a luxury," he said during his TV spot. "It is a fundamental right of students."

This article was created as part of the social action campaign for the documentary TEACH, produced by Participant Media, TakePart's parent company, in partnership with Bill and Melinda Gates.

Related stories on TakePart:

• Are iPads and Other Classroom Gadgets Really Helping Kids Learn?

• This Is Your Baby’s Brain on iPad

• Teachers Tell Us Their Favorite Class Projects of the Year

• Growing Up in Gangland Made This Teacher Unstoppable

• It's Not How Obama Planned It, But There's New Hope for All-Access Preschool in America

Original article from TakePart