Pennridge technology spending is excessive

To the Editor:

In the past two months, the Pennridge School Board has approved expenditures of nearly $2 million for new technology, equipment and support. There was an attempt at last week’s school board meeting to introduce a motion for a request for another $500,000 for Apple computers. This motion was not on the agenda and the administration tried to slip it in under the radar.

Why is our district rushing so fast into technology? Why is everyone buying into the idea that new computers will solve all of our education problems? lut of the many clinical studies, few have demonstrated improvement in test scores and many show no change. Excitement, engagement, motivation … yes. Test scores … not so much. This was reported in an article from the New York Times titled “In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores” and a very recent study as reported by Sarah hessler “2.5 Million Laptops Later, lne Laptop Per Child Doesn’t Improve Test Scores (Study).”

The district needs another $500,000 in computer equipment? Here is a list of recently approved motions on technology: $17,110 for a new Windows 2008 standard server, voted on Aug. 27; $130 per hour rate for using JLR as acting IT director, voted on Aug. 27; $38,350 for hapersky Antivirus Software, voted on Aug. 27; $387,438 for 383 laptops, 113 desktop computers, software and accessories, voted on July 30; $100,881 for the hiring of an acting director of curriculum and instructional technology; $14,098.12 worth of change orders for the new computer server room, voted on July 30; $5,413.44 for the purchase of technology and As supplies, approved on July 30; $10,926.74 for the purchase of new software, voted on July 30; $16,352.91 for the purchase of new math software, voted on July 30; $840,917.88 requested for wireless configuration centralized management and additional IT items, voted for on June 27; $154,024.00 for new cabling for the computer system, voted on June 27; $114,400 for JLR Consulting that recommended the new computer wireless configuration, etc., voted on June 27; $50,000 set aside for contingency for wireless, voted on June 27; $297,000 for the new one-to-one pilot project, voted on June 27; $63,196 in laptops, thinClients, Apple computers, etc., approved January 2012; $17,026.74 for new HP servers, voted on March 19.

While I encourage the use of technology, I don’t believe that technology is anything other than a tool. What really bothers me is that the district is investing in all of this technology in a rush with- out any long-range planning. Where was this in its long-range plan five years ago or three years ago or even a year ago?

The district doesn’t have the proper personnel in place to develop an educational strategy. It doesn’t have the proper personnel in place to maintain the infrastructure. It doesn’t have the personnel in place to train the teachers. It doesn’t have a plan in place to properly utilize this massive input of technology that it is spending money on. Without proper planning, much of the investment will be wasted.

I encourage our school directors to use restraint when discussing and voting on the use of technology in our district until all of the proper planning and personnel are in place and the return on our investment is fully understood.

Scott J. Edgell President, Pennridge

Taxpayer Group