We are taking steps towards a possible implementation of a 1 to 1 program at my school in 2007. However, a great deal of time and resources has been devoted to providing our faculty with a laptop of their own and ample time to become comfortable with using the technology on a daily basis. Our faculty laptop program began three years ago and in the years since we first started the implementation process, we have seen significant increases in faculty technology proficiencies and comfort levels. Anxiety levels have gone down and our teachers are now reluctant to turn their computers in before the end of the school year for updates and maintenance. Schools attempting to pilot or implement a 1 to 1 should allow time for their faculty, in many ways the most important component of such a program, to fully develop as technology users. The final decision to move to a 1 to 1 will be made during the course of this school year, yet I am hopeful and optimistic that we are both ready as a school community, but more importantly, prepared to support the new forms of teaching and learning.

web.mac.com/antonioviva

Hmmm... I just have to comment on this piece of the original post, Sara: "Proponents of these types of initiatives contend that having one computer per student at school not only decreases the persistent digital divide but also allows for improved curricula and student engagement. Some suggest, however, that technology alone doesn't do the trick." You see, I sit on both sides of this "fence." Yes, the kids need to have access to 1:1 because such is the way the world works in 2006, and no, technology alone will never "do the trick" when it comes to teaching and learning.

I think any advocate for 1:1 access should say, as my other postings echo, that the best can happen when access to the tools of today is coupled with involvement in rich school environments that feature project-based learning experiences that engage kids with comunity and vice-versa.

Along these lines, I am pleased to see Antonio's statement above: "...I am hopeful and optimistic that we are both ready as a school community, but more importantly, prepared to support the new forms of teaching and learning." I have to feel confident that given the preparation they have put into the groundwork, they probably are ready for squeezing the best out of 1:1. Good luck, Antonio, and please, let us know how it goes.

I would love every student to have a laptop. However, I think that setting up focused lessons on the computer is a lot of work. How do you implement this rather than say, "Here's a computer."

One-on-one computing could enhance the learning process if classrooms weren't so crowded, teachers could assist students and not spend time troubleshooting tech problems (tech assistance has been all but eliminated because of lack of funding). Project based learning with technology is so much more effective when you have 20 or fewer students in your classroom. You can keep students on task and monitor their work. Right now I'm thinking give the money to reducing class size rather then spend it on technology.

Jim Moulton phrased my sentiments. Joan Ray

Susan Adler's comments ring true for me, but there is a level below the access. Many teachers have not learned to integrate technology into learning. If the use of technology fails, it is because we do not give proper time, attention and expertise in subject matter to the teachers who are learning to use computers at any level. One to one computing, i wish I had been so lucky. Five computers worked for me, but I can imagine the possibilities. I would love to be given such a task, that is to teach using one to one computing.

THERE IS SUCH AN EXISTING GAP BETWEEN HAVE AND HAVE NOT COMMUNITIES AS IT IS. tHE HAVAE NOT COMMUNITIES OFTEN CANNOT AFFORD EVEN ONE WORKING COMPUTER PER CLASSROOM. I THIK THE MONEY WOULD BE BETTER SPENT MAKING EDUCATION MORE EQUITABLE--FIX THE SCHOOLS, HIRE MORE QUALIFIED TEACHERS AND SUPPORT STAFF, REDUCE CLASS SIZES. THE LAST SCHOOL I WORKED IN HAD NO FREE CLASSROOM AT ANY TIME DURING THE DAY, AND NO USABLE LIBRARY OR COMPUTER ROOM. STUDENTS AND TEACHERS WENT WITHOUT COMPUTER ACCESSABILITY FOR HALF THE YEAR, OTHER THAN IN ONCE CLASSROOM. I WAS UNFORTUNATE TO TEACH A CLASS OF SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS IN THAT ROOM. THEY COULD NOT CONTROL THEMSELVES WHEN GIVEN COMPUTER ACCESS; ALL THEY WANTED TO DO WAS LOOK ON WEBSITES FOR SNEAKERS, RAP STARS, AND MYSPACE TO HOOK UP WITH OTHER PEOPLE. I REQUESTED A TRANSFER TO A COMPUTER FREE ROOM AND THEIR LEARNING AND EFFORT INCREASED. FURTHERMORE, I HAVE MET MAY STUDENTS THAT THINK RESEARCH CAN ONLY BE DONE ON A COMPUTER; NOT USING BOOKS, MAGAZINES, OR NEWSPAPERS. HOW WRONG THEY ARE, AND HOW MUCH THEY ARE MISSING....

I agree with Maryanne's viewpoints on "teacher integration" of technology. teachers modeling computer use is a great demonstration for students. The subject of this poll also leads a few other issues with computing in the classroom still to be uncovered. The cost of hardware and infrastructure are always at the forefront of any discussion. What is usually neglected in "costing" discussions is the software and services that many administrators flock to, as the key to integration success.

Programs such as gradespeed, schoolnet, and other administrative functions serve their purpose and life would be difficult without them, but the essential software for student learning is a little harder to identify. Can a school computing environment be successful with a productivity suite of programs such as MicroSoft Office? Can you integrate technology effectively with just Word, Excel, Access and PowerPoint? Many administrators look beyond software packages and consider online services and textbook technology packages. The cost of technology integration is usually lost in this area and failure of many computing efforts are tied to just one or two software packages or services.

I agree that technology in the classroom is a tool. I would like to extend that just a bit further. If you take your car to well-stocked garage with all the latest tools, it still won't be fixed if you don't have skilled technicians with proper training.

Technology is a tool, and computer thinking is a skill. If I asked, "How do you create a calendar?", some of you would do it in Word, some in excel, and some in Publisher, or other software. The point is, you considered the task, and determined how you would complete a task and produce a product. That is computer thinking. It is becoming functional with the tools you have available.

Success in any computing initiative, or any educational initiative, is getting students to pattern their thinking in those ways. Get them to think about being productive, not just being busy surfers and downloaders. Critical thinking is important to technology integration, just as it is with all educational initiatives.

One common problem with technology integration is that "student thinking processes" or sometimes

the shortcomings of one to one computing lie in poor implementation, poor teacher training, and lack of vision. Implementated correctly the role of the teacher changes dramatically to a diagnostician, manager and prescriber of instruction and learning.

Unfortunately, there are not enough models in place (that stay in place long enough) for this to be truly examined and evaluated. My guess is we will see it implemented best in specail environments (charter schools, private settings, etc.)

We need to remember that technology is a tool, just like any other tool in the classroom. Computers can be used in multiple ways within the curriculum. The key is to have the use of technology become transparent. For this to happen we need to have teachers trained on how to integrate technolgy into their teaching so its use does become transparent. In researching for my dissertation on technology integration, I have read that for schools to be successful with the use of technolgy everyone from the administration on down must become involved with the practice. Teachers are at the core of making one-on-one computing work, therefore staff development needs to be redesigned. Many barriers exist to why technology doesn't work within the classroom but the literature suggests that the teachers should be the leaders of change that make computing in schools work.