This is one of the few times in recent years I've seen such a presentation aimed at all three constituents rather than just teachers. Most of what I see places the onus on teachers to both inform themselves and inform everyone else.

I love that someone is tackling this problem. I love all of the free resources there are on line that can be used in the classroom but the problem is there are too many to really explore appropriately. Having said that, 20,000 resources is still too many. I love that someone is tackling this though.

I signed up.

The most troubling thing about this article is how 'new' they make this debate sound with respect to the internet being a place to conduct school activity. It is less a question of if schools should filter and more a question of how will they deal with the reality that filtering is an ineffective method of dealing with the complexity of the internet.

Isn't this is a mass of what statisticians call convenient sampling?

Seems to me to be a real disconnect with respect to assessment. Assessment, testing in the old model, did not authentically serve the learner. It served the system (modeled on the industrial reward paradigm). If we are focused on learning, assessment only serves the learner in terms of feedback but not as "assessment" as in: you worked hard and you get an 'A'. Getting an 'A' has even less relevance in the 21st centruy paradigm.

This is an example of the promise of Tech in Teaching. It promotes the Psycho/Social pedogogical reality of the learner's sphere of influences into the vital center of our concept of school. To me, it transforms academic discourse into intentional design. Because school experience is so culturally endemic, this is a change in cultural self-concept.

This sentence makes me think of an explorer who has discovered a vast mineral deposit and is looking for capital investment. To persuade teachers, parents, and school boards the explorer will need to show tangible evidence that ". . . our education system [can leverage] technology to create learning experiences that mirror students' daily lives and the reality of their futures." The sixth grade teacher will need to be able to demonstrate to the parent of a student the tangible benefits of a technology infused paradigm.

As journalism, this article observes well the cross conversation in the public debate. Before this conversation even begins it would be useful for the parties to agree on the goal of the interaction between teacher and student. This quote from the article, "digital devices let students learn at their own pace, teach skills needed in a modern economy and hold the attention of a generation weaned on gadgets . . ." Makes broad assumptions that the invitation to learn (things that are pre-conceived by adults) is all the students need. We have a system of education and no matter what we do, the system assumes s significant and active role for adults (rightly so). There is a persistant sense that the system is not working to our expectations, but that hardly argues for the abandonment of personal and substantive interactions among teachers and students. I agree more with this quote, ""Rather than being a cure-all or silver bullet, one-to-one laptop programs may simply amplify what's already occurring - for better or worse (Bryan Goodwin)," because it asserts the point that Technology promises to enhance the value of our effort in education with better tools to do what teachers do. Technology is not (as some seem to think) a replacement of what teachers do and that unspoken assumption seems to be underlying much of what I see as vague public discussion.

"It's not about a cool application," Dr. Brenner said. "We are talking about changing the way we do business in the classroom." This is a useful sound bite but this article is a quagmire of the issues facing education. Advocates who would rather spend the money on teachers are speaking into the wind politically but they are also not speaking to the point being raised by the event the ipad purchase or the opportunity to advance learning. Good teaching rests on good, personalized relationships as well excellent management. ipads help with both but the danger in not articulating that more clearly is the fear that ipads (or some such thing) will replace teachers. There are those who love the idea of ipads not as an enhancement to learning but as a way to drive up teacher production. That idea and the fear of it distracts from matter of using technolofy to enhance learning.