Computers Counterproductive in Classroom

Evidence continues to mount that our Chromebook initiative was a poor decision:

A report issued by the UK's Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has evaluated how technology in classrooms affects test results, and found that the availability of computers provides "no noticeable improvement" to students' test scores. According to the report, "Students who use computers very frequently at school get worse results." Also, "high achieving school systems such as South Korea and Shanghai in China have lower levels of computer use in school." The organization warns that classroom technology can be a distraction if implemented unwisely, and it also opens the door to easy ways of cheating. [HT:/.]

Sticker Shock

The Social Media world and my personal phone went ablaze when Registration Fees came due this year. So many families wanted to know why their fees went up so dramatically. If your kids are in elementary school, the check you wrote to the School District roughly doubled. It was a tough pill to swallow for so many who are on tight budgets, and just about everyone complained about these fees in light of our high property taxes.

Registration Fees grew so much because the Chromebook initiative has finally come to all grade levels. Every student pays an additional $75 per year to help fund the Chromebooks and tablets. I still maintain that using technology in this way is a bad idea for our district--let's stick to computer labs and home computers. Studies are showing that using personal technology in the classroom is distracting and inhibits long-term memory [c.f. The Pen Is Mightier than the Keyboard, Mueller & Oppenheimer]. So far the District has ignored the science and refuses to comment on these issues.

Here was GROBatavia's FAQ position on Technology:

We favor the use of strategic technology and its proper use in the classroom. We recognize that technology can unlock greater potential in education under proper application. The District, however, has pursued an initiative that requires every K-12 student to purchase and use a personal device, and it raises a few concerns. The District has not demonstrated the rationale or benefits of a personal device for younger elementary students, such as Kindergartners, nor have they justified the requirement of personal devices in the classroom over community resources like computer labs. Costs are a significant factor to the District (approx. $500,000 per year) as well as to families ($75 per student per year), especially when many families could provide a compatible device. Teacher feedback on the initiative has been anemic and parental input has been unwanted by the Board [except for one current School Board Member]. The District must provide justification beyond hearsay and anecdotes.

We are pro-technology, yet it will never be a substitute for caring teachers that will guide, motivate, challenge, and hold the students accountable for doing the work of learning. We encourage you to watch  a short video by Derek Muller called This Will Revolutionize Education [or start from the Main Thesis].

More Studies Against Computers in the Classroom

Batavia is running full steam ahead with their technology initiative next year. Every student will have their own device for use in the classroom. [Source, Digital Learning Plan: Next Steps for Grades K-5]

As stated in our FAQ, we promote the positive use of technology in education. However, new studies are rolling in, and they overwhelmingly indicate that Batavia's plan is exactly wrong.

• Research on In-Class Use of Laptops and Other Devices: Effects on Students' Learning and Attention
• Classroom Laptop Users Distract Others As Well As Themselves
• You’ll Never Learn! Students can’t resist multitasking, and it’s impairing their memory.

The first study references the Mueller/Oppenheimer study I mentioned on ViewPoint. Nothing good is coming out of these experiments. As a school district, we seem bent on harming our students' ability to learn.

Our only hope at this point is for the board or administration to honestly measure outcomes and reverse the initiative before the harm becomes permanent.

GRO Technology FAQ

We favor the use of strategic technology and its proper use in the classroom. We recognize that technology can unlock greater potential in education under proper application. The District, however, has pursued an initiative that requires every K-12 student to purchase and use a personal device, and it raises a few concerns. The District has not demonstrated the rationale or benefits of a personal device for younger elementary students, such as Kindergartners, nor have they justified the requirement of personal devices in the classroom over community resources like computer labs. Costs are a significant factor to the District (approx. $500,000 per year) as well as to families ($75 per student per year), especially when many families could provide a compatible device. Teacher feedback on the initiative has been anemic and parental input has been unwanted by the Board, except for one current School Board Member. The District must provide justification beyond hearsay and anecdotes.

We are pro-technology, yet it will never be a substitute for caring teachers that will guide, motivate, challenge, and hold the students accountable for doing the work of learning. We encourage you to watch  a short video by Derek Muller called This Will Revolutionize Education [or start from the Main Thesis].

Question for Voters

I am a data geek, so I've been working to analyze the election results from last Tuesday. I'll do a deeper analysis when I get more data, but based on what I've seen so far, there is a strong correlation between a vote for Dryden and votes for Dremel and Lowe.

It's relatively clear what the source of that correlation is, but philosophically these candidates don't belong together. I believe the Daily Herald also made the same mistake with their endorsement (Dryden, Dremel and Impastato). The problem is that, when you look at the issues, a vote for Dryden should imply a vote against Dremel, Impastato and Lowe. It's clear there was overwhelming community support for Dryden, but the votes that followed him don't add up.

Dryden ran for school board because he claimed there were significant problems with the organization, administration and governance of the district. If you agree with Dryden, then you should oppose anyone who supports the status quo. Dryden's platform can be summed up as anti-establishment. Yet the others who won basically represent the establishment. That leaves me a bit perplexed.

This leads to my question: whom did you vote for, and why? I'd love to hear your perspective, especially if you voted for Dryden, Dremel and Lowe.  You can send an email to election@grobatavia.org. You may also post a comment, and I'll approve any that are free of offensive content (foul language, derogatory, etc.), though be prepared for a public discussion. I really am interested in the perspective of Batavia's voters, so I encourage you to share freely and speak your mind.

Thank you,
Bill

Concession

We offer congratulations to the winners of the School Board Election. Naturally, we're disappointed in the outcome, but many positives came out of the race. The whole experience was good, and we look to the future to see how best to stay involved.

We ran a positive campaign that focused on the issues and poured so much effort into all aspects of the race. It was a season of growth for us, and we met a lot of outstanding people over the past few months—we learned so much.

We offer our heartfelt thanks to all who gave their support and encouragement to our team. We are humbled by the many kind words, financial support and willingness from hundreds of people to host our yard signs.

This is not the end. Keep an eye on this space for more articles about the Batavia School District. Feel free to email us [info@grobatavia.org] with anything you’d like to discuss, and let’s keep fighting for Batavia.

Sincerely,
GROBatavia - Bill Gabriel, Ron Rechenmacher and Michelle Olache

Reader Question: How Are Salary Contracts Tied to CPI?

Question

On March 24, I received a letter in the mail [view image] from an observant person who asked if Cathy Dremel's statements about tying salary contracts to cost of living (CPI) were true.

These links to the BATV ViewPoint show and League of Women Voters Forum begin with the exact statement asked about in the letter:

• ViewPoint Link
• League of Women Voters Link

While the CPI statement is technically true, it is misleading. The portion of the contracts linked to CPI is the least significant part in determining how teachers get paid. Currently, the school district's expenses are projected to outstrip revenues, contrary to what the Board President claims.

Note: This post is not a commentary on the equity of teacher pay. I believe that teachers deserve every penny they're worth.

Step and Lane: Crash Course

The most common way teachers get paid in our state is according to the contract negotiated between the School Board and the Teachers' Union which includes a grid system commonly called "step and lane". The contract specifies exactly how much a teacher's salary will be based on the number of years of teaching experience as well as how much graduate education has been completed. The more years of service or the more education received, the higher the salary will be. These contractual values are not related to CPI at all, and the typical increase is far greater than CPI has been over the past decade.

You may view the current teachers' agreement here, and page 56 has the step and lane grid. This step and lane page, specifically, may be viewed at this link.

The CPI Factor

So where does cost of living factor into how teachers get paid? CPI determines how much the contract grows every year. A step is equal to the number of years teaching, and the lane is based on level of education (e.g. BA8 is Bachelor's Degree plus 8 hours towards a Master's Degree). The years of service and hours of education are two dimensions that set a teacher's salary, and CPI adds a third dimension to this grid. Teachers will get the step increase along with the CPI increase every year, and most of them have the option to move over a lane by going to graduate school^[1].

FY2015 Contract				FY 2016 Contract
Teachers move down a step every year		CPI    Adjustment --> 0.23%		Teachers move over a lane with education

Pay Raise Heatmaps

So the question remains, what kind of raises can teachers expect every year? Even without the CPI adjustment, salaries increase from 0.3% to 4.8%. The first grid below shows the contracted raise for every cell in the chart when just a step (ordinary yearly increase) occurs. The second grid shows the percentages including the CPI component, and the last grid shows what a raise looks like if a teacher completes 8 hours of graduate work and moves over a lane.

Percentage Increases (3.5 = 3.5%) for a Step [One More Year Experience]

Percentage Increases for a Step with 2016 CPI Adjustment

Percentage Increases for a Step and Lane Move with 2016 CPI Adjustment

Conclusion

The concerns raised in the original letter are exactly right, and we haven't even discussed issues like benefits. Health care^[2] is a problem for every company in the U.S. since costs have been rising over 10% per year for more than a decade. That is a challenge for us all.

All of this is the reason that, as a school district, we need to be as fiscally responsible as possible with the funds we do have. What's most important is being open and honest with the community so that we accurately understand the challenges of the future. Trying to claim that there is no fear of expenses outstripping revenues is the exact type of dishonesty we don't need. My observation is that this is a pattern coming out of the district, and that's why an important part of our platform is to increase transparency.

Be sure to Vote GRO on April 7 for openness, honesty and transparency. Batavia deserves to be fully informed with the full truth.

Footnotes

1. It is worth noting that the School District will reimburse up to $150 per credit hour for teachers to pursue this continuing education. See page 34 of the CBA, or look at the pages directly here.
2. Health Care is also covered in the CBA on pages 32 and 33.

Tax Bill, Inflation, Income, and Extension

The school district has prepared a graph to show that tax growth is in line with CPI ("cost of living"), but the presentation is lacking in two regards. First, the starting year was specially chosen to support the conclusion, but it misses the bigger picture regarding the bigger picture of Batavia's financial health. See what happens when you move the starting point just one year; then the picture is not as rosy:

From 2007 to 2014, the amount of taxes the district has extended has increase by  36.8%.  The average residential tax bill (the district's portion) has increased by 20.3%.  Overall increase from inflation, according to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), has been 16.6%. Batavia's Median Household Income has increased by 1.5%.
For the heart of Batavia, the increased tax burden has well out paced their household income.