Computer mandate unfair, some say

No. 2 pencils work the same, whether it’s a wealthy school or a poor one. That’s not necessarily the case with computer monitors, graphics cards and Internet connection speeds.

This school year, Ohio law required all schools to switch to computer-based testing on state assessments. A few school administrators have questioned whether state testing in 2017 boils down to a situation of the haves versus the have-nots.

Vicki Kerman, a school board member from Cardington-Lincoln local schools in Morrow County, brought up the fairness issue at a State Board of Education meeting earlier this month.

Students can opt out of computer testing for religious reasons or if they have a disability learning plan that explicitly spells out that they should test on paper.

Over the winter, Kerman did an informal survey of Ohio school officials about their computer testing practices. About 165 districts responded, or a little more than a quarter of all districts statewide.

First, Kerman told the state board, they reported using a wide variety of computer hardware. Monitor screen sizes vary from 11 inches to 15 inches or larger. Some schools use touchpads while others use a mouse. Some have PCs, including Chromebooks, while others use Apple computers.

“What this says is that we have districts that are administering a test, which we’re trying to be standardized on, on unstandard equipment,” Kerman said in the March 14 meeting. “If our objective is to compare the

mastery of a student from Cardington to Upper Arlington, we need to have a level playing field.”

She said she wonders how one can rightly compare the performance of districts that have been able to go to “one-to-one technology,” where each student gets a laptop or tablet all year long, with that of districts that have rolling carts of devices that go between classrooms because there aren’t enough to go around.

Brittany Halpin, a spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Education, said that students are supposed to be learning technology skills starting in kindergarten under the state’s learning standards, so students should be getting more comfortable every year with using devices.

“Taking into account the differences in technology currently in use by schools, the Department works to meet districts where they are and honor their local decision-making process,” she said by email.

Halpin also pointed

to several sources of public money that Ohio districts can tap into to beef up their hardware and their web connections, including the federal E-Rate program for Internet service and the Ohio K-12 Network connectivity subsidy. Since 2014, she said, the subsidy “has provided more than $24 million to districts ... to improve connectivity and purchase computer workstations, laptop computers, tablets and other software.”

Kerman’s testimony tracks the feedback that administrators offered on her survey. She promised not to reveal their identities so they would feel free to share. Several said that their schools have gone to one-to-one programs and the students are completely comfortable with the format.

Others think it will take more equipment and at least a few years to get in the groove.

“We have had to purchase many new chromebook carts to accommodate,” said one survey respondent. “The most feedback we receive from our teachers is that we continue to need more devices.”

“It would be helpful if the state provided some sort of funding to districts for computers since it is now the mandatory mean for testing,” another respondent said.

And finally: “Students who come to us from families of poverty, who do not have the available access to technology devices at home, make this more of a tech test than a reading or math test. Some question if this may be a civil rights issue?”

This is the first year that Ohio public schools were required to do their testing on computers, unless local school officials could absolutely prove that they don’t have the capability.

It was a mishmash of modalities last year, with districts still allowed their choice, and it appeared that there was some advantage to testing all on paper, though the state denied that schools gained any edge with either method.