Sweetwater iPad program, boom or bust?

<figure id="attachment_30854" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-30854" style="width: 300px" class="wp-caption alignright"><a href="http://laprensa-sandiego.org/featured/sweetwater-ipad-program-boom-or-b…; rel="attachment wp-att-30854"><img loading="lazy" class="wp-image-30854 size-medium" src="http://laprensa-sandiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Screen-Shot-201…; alt="Screen Shot 2015-03-31 at 8 50 36 AM" width="300" height="118" srcset="https://dev-laprensa.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Screen-… 300w, https://dev-laprensa.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Screen-… 900w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px"></a><figcaption id="caption-attachment-30854" class="wp-caption-text">Sweetwater school board. File photo.</figcaption></figure>
Sweetwater Union High School District’s iPad program has arrived at the crossroads — again. On March 9 the board held a 1:1 Teaching and Learning workshop. Aside from hands-on iPad presentations, trustees received a report on the success and challenges of the program. But, at the end of the day—what’s the plan?
University of San Diego’s Mobile Technology Learning Center presented the report which surveyed and inspected ten Sweetwater schools. The presenter couldn’t reveal the names of the schools—even when pressed by trustee Paula Hall.
Although the report cost $39,000, the information, for the most part, was well-known. Teachers, librarians, parents, and community members have told the district about these problems since the program’s inception. As one resident quipped from the floor, “We’ve been telling you this stuff for free, how do we get on the payroll?”
The report determined that middle schools, which have had iPads the longest, are more successfully integrating them into the curriculum than high schools. This factor may bode well for the future.
But the report reiterated the interminable challenges: no uniform policy for game playing or abuse, no uniform policy for what to do when a student has opted out, no uniform policy of how to deploy the devices to students — and continued problems with Wi-Fi connections.
Teachers and librarians told the research group that they have not been offered consistent training, or training that was differentiated at skill or subject level. But the most telling survey result was that many teachers and librarians did not feel the vision for the use of technology, had been clearly communicated.
Los Angeles Unified School District had similar rollout problems and ultimately suspended their iPad program in December 2014, shortly after the FBI seized district documents linked to the procurement process.
After Los Angeles Unified’s debacle, the Department of Education evaluated the district’s program, on issues similar to the USD study of Sweetwater. The Department of Education had many suggestions, but they also admonished LAUSD: “There is no district educational technology plan, goals, or metrics for success for how technology will support learning at the district level.”
Sweetwater has a fragile economy.
Under former superintendent Ed Brand, successive Chief Financial Officers warned Sweetwater that the district was headed for problems with continued deficit spending. In a January 2014 letter to Brand from the San Diego County Education Department, the county noted: “Continued deficit spending will erode the district’s ending fund balance and will minimize the districts ability to address unforeseen circumstances.”
Each year a new batch of incoming Sweetwater students will be given iPads. And in the near future, the first round of iPads will begin to expire. The ambitious deployment of one iPad per student has to a large extent been financed by finite funds.
In 2012-2013 the iPads were funded in part by Proposition O and Mello-Roos funds. Proposition O funds are needed for school reconstruction — some Sweetwater schools don’t even have air-conditioning.
Mello-Roos, is a special tax assessed on east side residents. Many of those residents want the Mello-Roos spent on refurbishing aging eastside schools.
Last year the state gave Sweetwater one-time funds, $8.1 million, for the implementation of Common Core standards and co-requisite testing. The district set aside $4 million for iPads and in 2013-14 used $1,214,354 million to purchase another round of iPads.
Can this program be financially sustained?
Mary Doyle is a librarian at Mar Vista High. After the USD group made their iPad report she wrote a letter to the trustees, which said in part:
“At the 1:1 information meeting, e-rates and broadband access touched on free and reduced lunch formulas and pricing, but the actual expense of an iPad never saw the light that night. As you read the rest of my letter, please keep in mind that each iPad costs about 489 dollars. Add the case, charger, cable, and all necessary app and eBook licenses to the 489 dollars and one SUHSD student-ready iPad costs closer to 1000 dollars.”
The March 9 workshop ultimately ended with more questions.
Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction, Dr. Roman Del Rosario, said, “There are still some important decisions to make.”
Del Rosario intimated that the district might choose a new device for the high schools—or for all schools. 
Board president Frank Tarantino asked, “When do we need to make a decision?”
Then Del Rosario said if the board were to choose a new device he would get back to the board regarding the price.
Trustee Paula Hall said there should be a committee that would include all the stakeholders and questioned how a committee could gather information, let alone reach out to vendors by May.
David Damico, Director of Educational Technology, said the district didn’t have a committee right now because in the last two years “all the resources and energy had gone to righting the ship.”
It takes a village.
There will be a public meeting at Sweetwater’s Professional Development Center, 680 L Street, Suite C, on Tuesday April 14, 4pm-6pm.

Sweetwater iPad program, boom or bust?

Tags