The iPad test, and how we flunked it.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that equipping our SPARK kids with a few dozen iPads would be lead to some very interesting possibilities. I know, because I thought of it in late 2009, even before iPads debuted, and I presented it to the SPARK technology committee shortly thereafter (I'll tell you how that went over in a minute).

Suddenly it's a year and a half later, and that same totally obvious idea is rapidly catching on elsewhere, as reported in the New York Times and elsewhere this week: New York City schools have ordered thousands of iPads; meanwhile, there's a whoops-the-reporter-totally-missed-the-whole-point article in the Times on the usefulness of giving every student an iPad instead of making them all tote around a bunch of textbooks.

In my mind, the whole point of giving kids at least some regular access to iPads was never about replacing textbooks or using them as a teaching aid. The point of an iPad in the hands of an elementary school student is to give them a way to create and communicate, not just another way to ingest the stuff we want to cram into their little heads.

Elementary school education can't be all about ingesting facts and spitting them back out onto test sheets, and yet at SPARK and other APS schools, that is indeed what it is about, because teachers are teaching to a test. In the (all too many) bad APS schools, teachers are threatened with all kinds of dire consequences if they don't get badly-parented and underprepared children up to the level where those kids can pass the ridiculously easy CRCT test. So the culture at APS is that you teach to the test and you follow the rote curriculum and if you have any time left over you let the kids make something out of paper and glue.

But it's 2011, people. Our children should be encouraged to create digital works of music and art and photography and video; they should publish blogs and make slideshows and do all sorts of other tasks in the digital environment where they will live and make a living their entire adult lives. If I have to persuade you that providing children with creative outlets is part of your job as a parent, you are definitely reading the wrong blog right now.

The iPad isn't necessarily the best vehicle for creative expression--I would much rather do all of that stuff I just mentioned on my Macbook. But kids think it is cool; many creative iPad apps are cool, and it is not up to us to tell children what means of creative expression they prefer, it is our job to listen to them and figure out what they'd like to do and then provide them with those tools if at all possible.

Part of this discussion must be about SPARK's curriculum. We emphatically do NOT have a good curriculum for SPARK. It may or may not be a good curriculum for the underserved, poorly parented children of typical APS schools, but even that point is arguable. It is inarguable that any curriculum for high-ceiling children must have room for teacher inspiration and teacher improvisation (and ours does not); it is inarguable that any curriculum for high-ceiling children may not use as its goal proficiency on the subminimal CRCT test, and our curriculum does.

But let's get back to the creative stuff. We all want our children to explore their creativity. We live in a digital world and on the Web. That's just the way things are now. Therefore, it falls to us as parents to make sure our kids have access to great digital tools and to those parts of the Web that are useful and safe.

That's where the iPad comes back into the equation.

When I brought up the idea of supplying our kids with, say, an iPad cart (which could be checked out by teachers and travel from room to room), I was under the assumption that our iBook cart and our iPad Touch cart--won from the tight-fisted and unimaginative APS bureaucrats only after a mighty struggle--were already in daily use around the school. But that turned out to be more than a little naive on my part.

When I asked the SPARK "technology specialist" (and I'm always going to put quotes around that phrase when I talk about her) exactly how many times the iBook cart had been checked out and used by teachers, I was told the answer was exactly zero.

Zero times. In four months of school.

Why isn't it being checked out? She couldn't give me an answer. But when I put a little blurb in the school newsletter asking for parent volunteers to help us figure out a way to get those iBooks used more often, she took it as a direct personal attack and asked her bosses to call me to retract the article.

Why do you want me to retract it? I asked. I was only relaying what you told me, and it wasn't like I was accusing you of being the reason we don't utilize the resource, I was just trying to ask parents how they would suggest we create more demand for the cart.

No, she said, you are blaming me and I want the article withdrawn.

But your name isn't in the article, and I never even mention you by title. How can you feel this is personal? Still, in the interest of maintaining a good relationship, I changed the article to be more "positive." (Looking back, this was a mistake on my part; our "technology specialist" is in fact a great hindrance to SPARK and to our children and I should never have considered trying to spare her the embarrassment she would diligently continue to earn).

Once again I will ask you to follow me back to this now-tortuous narrative about the iPad: after we'd had our little discussion about the iBook, I could not manage to get any of my fellow committee members, including the laptop-toting but totally useless "data specialists" from APS HQ to reply in any meaningful way about planning for the impact of iPads on our culture. It was as if I had suggested we all start training our children to breathe methane instead of air. They thought I was crazy.

This is exactly my point about the way SPARK is being managed. Of COURSE our school should have been among the first to try out iPads. We have some wonderfully tech-savvy parents and we have plenty of fundraising muscle. There is no chance we would have failed to raise the $20,000 or so it would have cost to do a pilot program, and there is no chance we would have failed to find creative ways to use iPads to enrich the classroom experience.

We could have blazed the trail for many other schools while giving our kids a fantastic new toolkit.

But there is such a failure of imagination among APS employees assigned to our school that the idea was never seriously considered.

It's the circle of life. Many of these APS employees went to dismal public schools and diploma-mill colleges and then were recruited by APS where they would come learn the Data-Driven Gospel According to Beverly Hall, and as a result any imagination they might have once had has vanished.

This is what will happen to your kids if they are not encouraged to create but are instead asked to absorb a bunch of stuff that's going to appear on a test. That's not learning; it's preparation for a life of mediocrity and drudgery.

There is a direct connection between the empty closet at SPARK where our iPad cart should now sit, and the quality of education your kids are now receiving. It may seem like not having iPads is a small thing. But it's not about having them or not having them; it's about failing to see the possibilities. The people to whom you are delegating the job of educating your children--your second-most important responsibility as a parent (after feeding and clothing them and keeping your children safe)--lack imagination.

They are the low ceiling over your child's future.

When you are ready for something better; when you are ready to go to work, let me know and we'll do better.