<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19120"></HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana>
<DIV id=fb-root></DIV>
<DIV class=header>
<DIV class=left><A href="http://www.nytimes.com/"><IMG
title="http://www.nytimes.com/
CTRL + Click to follow link" border=0
hspace=0 alt="The New York Times" align=left
src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo153x23.gif"></A> </DIV>
<DIV class=right> </DIV></DIV><BR clear=all>
<HR align=left SIZE=1>
<DIV class=timestamp>September 3, 2011</DIV>
<DIV class=kicker></DIV>
<H1><NYT_HEADLINE version="1.0" type=" ">In Classroom of Future, Stagnant
Scores</NYT_HEADLINE></H1><NYT_BYLINE>
<H6 class=byline>By <A class=meta-per title="More Articles by Matt Richtel"
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/matt_richtel/index.html?inline=nyt-per"
rel=author>MATT RICHTEL</A></H6></NYT_BYLINE><NYT_TEXT>
<DIV id=articleBody><NYT_CORRECTION_TOP></NYT_CORRECTION_TOP>
<P>CHANDLER, Ariz. — Amy Furman, a seventh-grade English teacher here, roams
among 31 students sitting at their desks or in clumps on the floor. They’re
studying Shakespeare’s “As You Like It” — but not in any traditional way. </P>
<P>In this technology-centric classroom, students are bent over laptops, some
blogging or building Facebook pages from the perspective of Shakespeare’s
characters. One student compiles a song list from the Internet, picking a tune
by the rapper Kanye West to express the emotions of Shakespeare’s lovelorn
Silvius. </P>
<P>The class, and the <A title="The district Web site."
href="http://www.kyrene.org/ksdportal/">Kyrene School District</A> as a whole,
offer what some see as a utopian vision of education’s future. Classrooms are
decked out with laptops, big interactive screens and software that drills
students on every basic subject. Under a ballot initiative approved in 2005, the
district has invested roughly $33 million in such technologies. </P>
<P>The digital push here aims to go far beyond gadgets to transform the very
nature of the classroom, turning the teacher into a guide instead of a lecturer,
wandering among students who learn at their own pace on Internet-connected
devices. </P>
<P>“This is such a dynamic class,” Ms. Furman says of her 21st-century
classroom. “I really hope it works.” </P>
<P>Hope and enthusiasm are soaring here. But not test scores. </P>
<P>Since 2005, <A title="Web site to school scores."
href="http://www.ade.az.gov/srcs/find_school.asp">scores in reading</A> and math
have stagnated in Kyrene, even as statewide scores have risen. </P>
<P>To be sure, test scores can go up or down for many reasons. But to many
education experts, something is not adding up — here and across the country. In
a nutshell: schools are spending billions on technology, even as they cut
budgets and lay off teachers, with little proof that this approach is improving
basic learning. </P>
<P>This conundrum calls into question one of the most significant contemporary
educational movements. Advocates for giving schools a major technological
upgrade — which include powerful educators, Silicon Valley titans and White
House appointees — say digital devices let students learn at their own pace,
teach skills needed in a modern economy and hold the attention of a generation
weaned on gadgets. </P>
<P>Some backers of this idea say standardized tests, the most widely used
measure of student performance, don’t capture the breadth of skills that
computers can help develop. But they also concede that for now there is no
better way to gauge the educational value of expensive technology investments.
</P>
<P>“The data is pretty weak. It’s very difficult when we’re pressed to come up
with convincing data,” said Tom Vander Ark, the former executive director for
education at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and an investor in
educational technology companies. When it comes to showing results, he said, “We
better put up or shut up.” </P>
<P>And yet, in virtually the same breath, he said change of a historic magnitude
is inevitably coming to classrooms this decade: “It’s one of the three or four
biggest things happening in the world today.” </P>
<P>Critics counter that, absent clear proof, schools are being motivated by a
blind faith in technology and an overemphasis on digital skills — like using
PowerPoint and multimedia tools — at the expense of math, reading and writing
fundamentals. They say the technology advocates have it backward when they press
to upgrade first and ask questions later. </P>
<P>The spending push comes as schools face tough financial choices. In Kyrene,
for example, even as technology spending has grown, the rest of the district’s
budget has shrunk, leading to bigger classes and fewer periods of music, art and
physical education. </P>
<P>At the same time, the district’s use of technology has earned it widespread
praise. It is upheld as a model of success by the National School Boards
Association, which in 2008 organized a visit by 100 educators from 17 states who
came to see how the district was innovating. </P>
<P>And the district has banked its future and reputation on technology. Kyrene,
which serves 18,000 kindergarten to eighth-grade students, mostly from the
cities of Tempe, Phoenix and Chandler, uses its computer-centric classes as a
way to attract children from around the region, shoring up enrollment as its
local student population shrinks. More students mean more state dollars. </P>
<P>The issue of tech investment will reach a critical point in November. The
district plans to go back to local voters for approval of $46.3 million more in
taxes over seven years to allow it to keep investing in technology. That
represents around 3.5 percent of the district’s annual spending, five times what
it spends on textbooks. </P>
<P>The district leaders’ position is that technology has inspired students and
helped them grow, but that there is no good way to quantify those achievements —
putting them in a tough spot with voters deciding whether to bankroll this
approach again. </P>
<P>“My gut is telling me we’ve had growth,” said David K. Schauer, the
superintendent here. “But we have to have some measure that is valid, and we
don’t have that.” </P>
<P>It gives him pause. </P>
<P>“We’ve jumped on bandwagons for different eras without knowing fully what
we’re doing. This might just be the new bandwagon,” he said. “I hope not.” </P>
<P><STRONG>A Dearth of Proof</STRONG> </P>
<P>The pressure to push technology into the classroom without proof of its value
has deep roots. </P>
<P>In 1997, a science and technology committee assembled by President Clinton
issued an urgent call about the need to equip schools with technology. </P>
<P>If such spending was not increased by billions of dollars, American
competitiveness could suffer, according to the committee, whose members included
educators like Charles M. Vest, then president of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, and business executives like John A. Young, the former chief
executive of Hewlett-Packard. </P>
<P>To support its conclusion, the committee’s report cited the successes of
individual schools that embraced computers and saw test scores rise or dropout
rates fall. But while acknowledging that the research on technology’s impact was
inadequate, the committee urged schools to adopt it anyhow. </P>
<P><A title="The report."
href="http://tacticalthinkers.com/technology/Teacher%20Resources/technreporttopresident.html">The
report’s</A> final sentence read: “The panel does not, however, recommend that
the deployment of technology within America’s schools be deferred pending the
completion of such research.” </P>
<P>Since then, the ambitions of those who champion educational technology have
grown — from merely equipping schools with computers and instructional software,
to putting technology at the center of the classroom and building the teaching
around it. </P>
<P>Kyrene had the same sense of urgency as President Clinton’s committee when,
in November 2005, it asked voters for an initial $46.3 million for laptops,
classroom projectors, networking gear and other technology for teachers and
administrators. </P>
<P>Before that, the district had given 300 elementary school teachers five
laptops each. Students and teachers used them with great enthusiasm, said Mark
Share, the district’s 64-year-old director of technology, a white-bearded former
teacher from the Bronx with an <A class=meta-classifier
title="Recent and archival news about the iPhone."
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/iphone/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier">iPhone</A>
clipped to his belt. </P>
<P>“If we know something works, why wait?” <A title="The article."
href="http://www.azcentral.com/community/ahwatukee/articles/1019ar-override19Z14.html?&wired">Mr.
Share told The Arizona Republic</A> the month before the vote. The district’s
pitch was based not on the idea that test scores would rise, but that technology
represented the future. </P>
<P>The measure, which faced no organized opposition, passed overwhelmingly. It
means that property owners in the dry, sprawling flatlands here, who live in
apartment complexes, cookie-cutter suburban homes and salmon-hued mini-mansions,
pay on average $75 more a year in taxes, depending on the assessed value of
their homes, according to the district. </P>
<P>But the proof sought by President Clinton’s committee remains elusive even
today, though researchers have been seeking answers. </P>
<P>Many studies have found that technology has helped individual classrooms,
schools or districts. For instance, researchers found that writing scores
improved for eighth-graders in Maine after they were all issued laptops in 2002.
The same researchers, from the University of Southern Maine, <A
title="The study."
href="http://maine.gov/mlti/resources/MLTI_March_09.pdf">found that math
performance</A> picked up among seventh- and eighth-graders after teachers in
the state were trained in using the laptops to teach. </P>
<P>A question plaguing many education researchers is how to draw broader
inferences from such case studies, which can have serious limitations. For
instance, in the Maine math study, it is hard to separate the effect of the
laptops from the effect of the teacher training. </P>
<P>Educators would like to see major trials years in length that clearly
demonstrate technology’s effect. But such trials are extraordinarily difficult
to conduct when classes and schools can be so different, and technology is
changing so quickly. </P>
<P>And often the smaller studies produce conflicting results. Some classroom
studies show that math scores rise among students using instructional software,
while others show that scores actually fall. The high-level analyses that sum up
these various studies, not surprisingly, give researchers pause about whether
big investments in technology make sense. </P>
<P>One broad analysis of laptop programs like the one in Maine, for example,
found that such programs are not a major factor in student performance. </P>
<P>“Rather than being a cure-all or silver bullet, one-to-one laptop programs
may simply amplify what’s already occurring — for better or worse,” wrote Bryan
Goodwin, spokesman for <A title="The Web site."
href="http://www.mcrel.org/">Mid-continent Research for Education and
Learning</A>, a nonpartisan group that did the study, <A title="The essay."
href="http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/feb11/vol68/num05/One-to-One_Laptop_Programs_Are_No_Silver_Bullet.aspx">in
an essay</A>. Good teachers, he said, can make good use of computers, while bad
teachers won’t, and they and their students could wind up becoming distracted by
the technology. </P>
<P>A <A title="The review."
href="http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf">review
by the Education Department</A> in 2009 of research on online courses — which
more than one million K-12 students are taking — found that few rigorous studies
had been done and that policy makers “lack scientific evidence” of their
effectiveness.. <A title="Division Web site."
href="http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/">A division</A> of the Education Department
that rates classroom curriculums has found that much educational software is not
an improvement over textbooks. </P>
<P>Larry Cuban, an education professor emeritus at Stanford University, said the
research did not justify big investments by districts. </P>
<P>“There is insufficient evidence to spend that kind of money. Period, period,
period,” he said. “There is no body of evidence that shows a trend line.” </P>
<P>Some advocates for technology disagree. </P>
<P>Karen Cator, director of the office of educational technology in the United
States Department of Education, said standardized test scores were an inadequate
measure of the value of technology in schools. Ms. Cator, a former executive at
Apple Computer, said that better measurement tools were needed but, in the
meantime, schools knew what students needed. </P>
<P>“In places where we’ve had a large implementing of technology and scores are
flat, I see that as great,” she said. “Test scores are the same, but look at all
the other things students are doing: learning to use the Internet to research,
learning to organize their work, learning to use professional writing tools,
learning to collaborate with others.” </P>
<P>For its part, Kyrene has become a model to many by training teachers to use
technology and getting their ideas on what inspires them. As Mr. Share says in
the signature file at the bottom of every e-mail he sends: “It’s not the stuff
that counts — it’s what you do with it that matters.” </P>
<P>So people here are not sure what to make of the stagnant test scores. Many of
the district’s schools, particularly those in more affluent areas, already had
relatively high scores, making it a challenge to push them significantly higher.
A jump in students qualifying for free or reduced-price lunches was largely a
result of the <A class=meta-classifier
title="More articles about the recession."
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/r/recession_and_depression/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier">recession</A>,
not a shift in the population the district serves, said Nancy Dundenhoefer, its
community relations manager. </P>
<P>Mr. Share, whose heavy influence on more than $7 million a year in technology
spending has made him a power broker, said he did not think demographic changes
were a good explanation. </P>
<P>“You could argue that test scores would be lower without the technology, but
that’s a copout,” he said, adding that the district should be able to deliver
some measure of what he considers its obvious success with technology. “It’s a
conundrum.” </P>
<P>Results aside, it’s easy to see why technology is such an easy sell here,
given the enthusiasm surrounding it in some classrooms. </P>
<P><STRONG>Engaging With Paper</STRONG> </P>
<P>“I start with pens and pencils,” says Ms. Furman, 41, who is short and bubbly
and devours young-adult novels to stay in touch with students. Her husband
teaches eighth grade in the district, and their son and daughter are both
students. </P>
<P>At the beginning of the school year, Ms. Furman tries to inspire her students
at Aprende Middle School to write, a task she says becomes increasingly
difficult when students reach the patently insecure middle-school years. </P>
<P>In one class in 2009 she had them draw a heart on a piece of paper. Inside
the heart, she asked them to write the names of things and people dear to them.
One girl started to cry, then another, as the class shared their stories. </P>
<P>It was something Ms. Furman doubted would have happened if the students had
been using computers. “There is a connection between the physical hand on the
paper and the words on the page,” she said. “It’s intimate.” </P>
<P>But, she said, computers play an important role in helping students get their
ideas down more easily, edit their work so they can see instant improvement, and
share it with the class. She uses a document camera to display a student’s paper
at the front of the room for others to dissect. </P>
<P>Ms. Furman said the creative and editing tools, by inspiring students to make
quick improvements to their writing, pay dividends in the form of higher-quality
work. Last year, 14 of her students were chosen as finalists in a statewide
essay contest that asked them how literature had affected their lives. “I was
running down the hall, weeping, saying, ‘Get these students together. We need to
tell them they’ve won!’ ” </P>
<P>Other teachers say the technology is the only way to make this generation
learn. </P>
<P>“They’re inundated with 24/7 media, so they expect it,” said Sharon Smith,
44, a gregarious seventh-grade social studies teacher whose classroom is down
the hall from Ms. Furman’s. </P>
<P>Minutes earlier, Ms. Smith had taught a <A class=meta-classifier
title="More articles about American Civil War."
href="http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/civil_war_us_/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier">Civil
War</A> lesson in a way unimaginable even 10 years ago. With the lights off, a
screen at the front of the room posed a question: “Jefferson Davis was Commander
of the Union Army: True or False?” </P>
<P>The 30 students in the classroom held wireless clickers into which they
punched their answers. Seconds later, a pie chart appeared on the screen: 23
percent answered “True,” 70 percent “False,” and 6 percent didn’t know. </P>
<P>The students hooted and hollered, reacting to the instant poll. Ms. Smith
then drew the students into a conversation about the answers. </P>
<P>The enthusiasm underscores a key argument for investing in classroom
technology: student engagement. </P>
<P>That idea is central to the <A title="The Plan."
href="http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010">National Education Technology
Plan</A> released by the White House last year, which calls for the
“revolutionary transformation” of schools. The plan endorses bringing
“state-of-the art technology into learning to enable, motivate and inspire all
students.” </P>
<P>But the research, what little there is of it, does not establish a clear link
between computer-inspired engagement and learning, said Randy Yerrick, associate
dean of educational technology at the University of Buffalo. </P>
<P>For him, the best educational uses of computers are those that have no good
digital equivalent. As examples, he suggests using digital sensors in a science
class to help students observe chemical or physical changes, or using multimedia
tools to reach disabled children. </P>
<P>But he says engagement is a “fluffy term” that can slide past critical
analysis. And Professor Cuban at Stanford argues that keeping children engaged
requires an environment of constant novelty, which cannot be sustained. </P>
<P>“There is very little valid and reliable research that shows the engagement
causes or leads to higher academic achievement,” he said. </P>
<P><STRONG>Instruct or Distract? </STRONG></P>
<P>There are times in Kyrene when the technology seems to allow students to
disengage from learning: They are left at computers to perform a task but wind
up playing around, suggesting, as some researchers have found, that computers
can distract and not instruct. </P>
<P>The 23 kindergartners in Christy Asta’s class at Kyrene de las Brisas are
broken into small groups, a common approach in Kyrene. A handful stand at desks,
others sit at computers, typing up reports. </P>
<P>Xavier Diaz, 6, sits quietly, chair pulled close to his Dell laptop, playing
“Alien Addition.” In this math arcade game, Xavier controls a pod at the bottom
of the screen that shoots at spaceships falling from the sky. Inside each ship
is a pair of numbers. Xavier’s goal is to shoot only the spaceship with numbers
that are the sum of the number inside his pod. </P>
<P>But Xavier is just shooting every target in sight. Over and over.
Periodically, the game gives him a message: “Try again.” He tries again. </P>
<P>“Even if he doesn’t get it right, it’s getting him to think quicker,” says
the teacher, Ms. Asta. She leans down next to him: “Six plus one is seven. Click
here.” She helps him shoot the right target. “See, you shot him.” </P>
<P>Perhaps surprisingly given the way young people tend to gravitate toward
gadgets, students here seem divided about whether they prefer learning on
computers or through more traditional methods. </P>
<P>In a different class, Konray Yuan and Marisa Guisto, both 7, take turns
touching letters on the interactive board on the wall. They are playing a
spelling game, working together to spell the word “cool.” Each finds one of the
letters in a jumbled grid, touching them in the proper order. </P>
<P>Marisa says there isn’t a difference between learning this way and learning
on paper. Konray prefers paper, he says, because you get extra credit for good
penmanship. </P>
<P>But others, particularly older students, say they enjoy using the technology
tools. One of Ms. Furman’s students, Julia Schroder, loved building a blog to
write about Shakespeare’s “As You Like It.” </P>
<P>In another class, she and several classmates used a video camera to film a
skit about Woodrow Wilson’s 14-point speech during World War I — an approach she
preferred to speaking directly to the class. </P>
<P>“I’d be pretty bummed if I had to do a live thing,” she said. “It’s
nerve-racking.” </P>
<P><STRONG>Teachers vs. Tech</STRONG> </P>
<P>Even as students are getting more access to computers here, they are getting
less access to teachers. </P>
<P>Reflecting budget cuts, class sizes have crept up in Kyrene, as they have in
many places. For example, seventh-grade classes like Ms. Furman’s that had 29 to
31 students grew to more like 31 to 33. </P>
<P>“You can’t continue to be effective if you keep adding one student, then one
student, then one student,” Ms. Furman said. “I’m surprised parents aren’t going
into the classrooms saying ‘Whoa.’ ” </P>
<P>Advocates of high-tech classrooms say computers are not intended to replace
teachers. But they do see a fundamental change in the teacher’s role. Their
often-cited mantra is that teachers should go from being “a sage on the stage to
a guide on the side.” </P>
<P>And they say that, technology issues aside, class sizes can in fact afford to
grow without hurting student performance. </P>
<P>Professor Cuban at Stanford said research showed that student performance did
not improve significantly until classes fell under roughly 15 students, and did
not get much worse unless they rose above 30. </P>
<P>At the same time, he says bigger classes can frustrate teachers, making it
hard to attract and retain talented ones. </P>
<P>In Kyrene, growing class sizes reflect spending cuts; the district’s
maintenance and operation budget fell to $95 million this year from $106 million
in 2008. The district cannot use the money designated for technology to pay for
other things. And the teachers, who make roughly $33,000 to $57,000 a year, have
not had a raise since 2008. </P>
<P>Many teachers have second jobs, some in restaurants and retail, said Erin
Kirchoff, president of the Kyrene Education Association, the teacher’s
association. Teachers talk of being exhausted from teaching all day, then
selling shoes at the mall. </P>
<P>Ms. Furman works during the summer at the Kyrene district offices. But that
job is being eliminated in 2014, and she is worried about the income loss. </P>
<P>“Without it, we don’t go on vacation,” she said. </P>
<P>Money for other things in the district is short as well. Many teachers say
they regularly bring in their own supplies, like construction paper. </P>
<P>“We have Smart Boards in every classroom but not enough money to buy copy
paper, pencils and hand sanitizer,” said Nicole Cates, a co-president of the
Parent Teacher Organization at Kyrene de la Colina, an elementary school. “You
don’t go buy a new outfit when you don’t have enough dinner to eat.” </P>
<P>But she loves the fact that her two children, a fourth-grader and
first-grader, are learning technology, including PowerPoint and educational
games. </P>
<P>To some who favor high-tech classrooms, the resource squeeze presents an
opportunity. Their thinking is that struggling schools will look for more
efficient ways to get the job done, creating an impetus to rethink education
entirely. </P>
<P>“Let’s hope the fiscal crisis doesn’t get better too soon. It’ll slow down
reform,” said Tom Watkins, the former superintendent for the Michigan schools,
and now a consultant to businesses in the education sector. </P>
<P>Clearly, the push for technology is to the benefit of one group: technology
companies. </P>
<P><STRONG>The Sellers</STRONG> </P>
<P>It is 4:30 a.m. on a Tuesday. Mr. Share, the director of technology at Kyrene
and often an early riser, awakens to the hard sell. Awaiting him at his home
computer are six pitches from technology companies. </P>
<P>It’s just another day for the man with the checkbook. </P>
<P>“I get one pitch an hour,” he said. He finds most of them useless and
sometimes galling: “They’re mostly car salesmen. I think they believe in the
product they’re selling, but they don’t have a leg to stand on as to why the
product is good or bad.” </P>
<P>Mr. Share bases his buying decisions on two main factors: what his teachers
tell him they need, and his experience. For instance, he said he resisted
getting the interactive whiteboards sold as Smart Boards until, one day in 2008,
he saw a teacher trying to mimic the product with a jury-rigged projector setup.
</P>
<P>“It was an ‘Aha!’ moment,” he said, leading him to buy Smart Boards, made by
a company called Smart Technologies. </P>
<P>He can make that kind of decision because he has money — and the vendors know
it. Technology companies track which districts get federal funding and which
have passed tax assessments for technology, like Kyrene. </P>
<P>This is big business. Sales of computer software to schools for classroom use
were $1.89 billion in 2010. Spending on hardware is more difficult to measure,
researchers say, but some put the figure at five times that amount. </P>
<P>The vendors relish their relationship with Kyrene. </P>
<P>“I joke I should have an office here, I’m here so often,” said Will Dunham, a
salesman for CCS Presentation Systems, a leading reseller of Smart Boards in
Arizona. </P>
<P>Last summer, the district paid $500,000 to CCS to replace ceiling-hung
projectors in 400 classrooms. The alternative was to spend $100,000 to replace
their aging bulbs, which Mr. Share said were growing dimmer, causing teachers to
sometimes have to turn down the lights to see a crisp image. </P>
<P>Mr. Dunham said the purchase made sense because new was better. “I could take
a used car down to the mechanic and get it all fixed up and still have a used
car.” </P>
<P>But Ms. Kirchoff, the president of the teachers’ association, is furious. “My
projector works just fine,” she said. “Give me Kleenex, Kleenex, Kleenex!” </P>
<P><STRONG>The Parents </STRONG></P>
<P>Last November, Kyrene went back to voters to ask them to pay for another
seven years of technology spending in the district. The previous measure from
2005 will not expire for two years. But the district wanted to get ahead of the
issue, and leave wiggle room just in case the new measure didn’t pass. </P>
<P>It didn’t. It lost by 96 votes out of nearly 50,000 cast. Mr. Share and
others here said they attributed the failure to poor wording on the ballot that
made it look like a new tax increase, rather than the continuation of one. </P>
<P>They say they will not make the same wording mistake this time. And they say
the burden on taxpayers is modest. </P>
<P>“It’s so much bang for the buck,” said Jeremy Calles, Kyrene’s interim chief
financial officer. For a small investment, he said, “we get state-of-the-art
technology.” </P>
<P>Regardless, some taxpayers have already decided that they will not vote yes.
</P>
<P>“When you look at the big picture, it’s hard to say ‘yes, spend more on
technology’ when class sizes increase,” said Kameron Bybee, 34, who has two
children in district schools. “The district has made up its mind to go forward
with the technologically advanced path. Come hell or high water.” </P>
<P>Other parents feel conflicted. Eduarda Schroder, 48, whose daughter Julia was
in Ms. Furman’s English class, worked on the political action committee last
November to push through an extension of the technology tax. Computers, she
says, can make learning more appealing. But she’s also concerned that test
scores haven’t gone up. </P>
<P>She says she is starting to ask a basic question. “Do we really need
technology to learn?” she said. “It’s a very valid time to ask the question,
right before this goes on the ballot.” </P><NYT_CORRECTION_BOTTOM>
<DIV
class=articleCorrection></DIV></NYT_CORRECTION_BOTTOM><NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM></NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM></DIV></NYT_TEXT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2
face=Verdana>_______________________________________</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana>Wayne A. Fox<BR><A
href="mailto:wayne.a.fox@gmail.com">wayne.a.fox@gmail.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>