Was the tablet an expensive pill to swallow?

Two years ago I wrote an article about the introduction of the computer tablet into schools.  It was called, "The tablet, an expensive pill to swallow."  I questioned such an introduction due to the lack of certain infrastructure which was unavailable at the time.  I made suggestions for the powers that be to look into the innovation so as to make sure that the tablet introduction was a wise move.  The promotion of this innovation was on a wide scale, media houses made all of us aware of the wonderful possibilities that may help to change the classroom from the literal to the virtual.

After its world wind introduction the following was noted:

1.      The many of the pilot schools chosen were the schools that were the “work in progress” institutions.

2.      The selection of teachers who were trained in the usage of the tablets was limited to a small number amount.

3.      Students who were not truly accustomed to the academic application of the use of the tablet were given the device to use. 

4.      Students were allowed to carry this device to their homes.

There are some questions that I am now asking:

a.       What are the benefits from this electronic/computerized innovation?

b.      Will there be more introductions of the tablets into the traditional schools?

c.       Will the teachers who received the introductory training be given an opportunity to train other teachers in the other high schools how to utilize the tablets in their best practices?

d.      Were sufficient and relevant e-books were purchased and uploaded to the tablets to provide content to specific subject areas taught in schools?

I do believe that the introduction came with good intentions, however I believe that if these tablets were given to schools that have students who were actually introduced to the students who were exposed to its usage, they in turn would utilize and demonstrate how much the use of the device can be maximized in the classroom.   When this is achieved, then these students would be asked by the MOE to place into the “work in progress schools,” to demonstrate how to appropriately use the device in the acquisition of content in the learning environment (home and school).

What could have been done was to register each child who was given the electronic device to log in and upload assignments for teachers to track each child’s progress with actual work.  Yes, there is an School Management System (SMS) where many schools in Jamaica has signed on but using a similar platform that is controlled and analysed by both teacher and the e-learning unit that is currently in place.

Contract and pay the good practicing subject teachers to create supporting content to be placed on the tablets.  This would encourage teachers to support the use of tablets once they see that their work is used to facilitate learning.  In other words, teachers will be motivated and continue by giving literary and technical support to maintain the innovation.

The complaints from many parents  expressed from one of the pilot schools were that of disappointment and dissatisfaction with their children’s academic performance.  The comment was either, “De tablets dem a distract the pickney dem!” or “Dem a pre de tablets dem dan dem school book!”   This is indeed sad.  Many of the schools who had purchased their own devices or allowed their students to bring their own tablets in school had their students monitored in their usage when it was appropriate.  Those students and teachers reaped the benefits of such a device.

The tablet, a wonderful prescription for the transfer of information in the 21^st century classroom.   But if this innovation is to benefit the majority, then a serious review of its introduction and continued usage is needed to be done.  So much money has been spent on medicine to treat the problem diagnosed in education.  The cure needs to be had, thus the true practitioners must be allowed to analyse the new symptoms so that the healing can begin.