Mobile Carts Suck
They look so nice on day 1. Can’t wait for day 180.
I don’t know how else to say it. Mobile device carts pretty much suck as a way to increase student access to technology. Particularly when carts are shared between classrooms. Take a school with just one mobile device cart to share between all the 3rd-5th grade classrooms. The logistics of dividing up the days and weeks for equitable cart time would make a FedEx employee cringe. Then there is the time spent taking devices in and out of the cart, hoping they are ready to go from one classroom to the next, not to mention all that time spent moving the cart around campus. We’ve all seen it, the giant cart being ferried from room to room by students in a harrowing run of bumpy side walks, stuck wheels and the grass of Doom.
This cart is shared between 12 classroom
And then there is the responsibility factor. With shared carts, no one is every truly responsible for what happens to a cart or it’s devices. All the check out sheets and daily logs in the world can’t make everyone who uses the cart care about it as much as you do. It’s inevitable that a device’s Tab key will go missing without anyone noticing for a week or one device won’t charge anymore or a cables will get crunched. Whatever it is, it won’t be anyone’s fault but it will affect everyone’s ability to use the cart effectively in their class. This is the biggest downside I see to the cart model. The cart is a Nomad. It belongs to no one.
Now before you say, “So computer labs are better!”, let me say, No! they aren’t. Computer labs suck too, but for different reasons. Labs require dedicated space, power and cable infrastructure investments (using a 48-port switch on a table top and daisy chaining power strips along the floor doesn’t count) and fixed desktops don’t allow for flexible learning environments. That’s not to say that a dedicated media lab per school isn’t an awesome idea but labs as a way to provide daily access to technology integrated learning environments aren’t the answer.
What about a mobile cart in every classroom then? Best of both worlds? Access for everyone, mobile, and flexible. Well, that would certainly address a lot of the issues with shared carts. For a district that doesn’t trust it’s kids to take devices home, carts in every classroom is really the only answer to increasing student access to technology on a daily basis. However the cart still represents a cost overhead that could go into buying more student devices, presents challenges with power cords, wastes time taking out and putting devices away and provides a convenient conveyance for a thief to take all 36 devices in one haul. But certainly a cart is better than no devices in the classroom at all.
Power adapters installed by the teacher. A for effort!
The bottom line, if you haven’t guessed already, is that to me anything short of providing every student a device to take home is a half measure. It’s trying to jump the canyon in two leaps. By assigning a device to a student they have ownership of it. By allowing them to take it home, they have responsibility for taking care of it and charging it every night. We’ve been sending books home with kids for years. This really should be no different.
That’s why I’m very disappointed in LAUSD’s 1:1 iPad roll out. The administration obviously wasn’t prepared and they didn’t adequately prepare the community. Not only that, but they approached the device as something to be controlled, as if student learning could be confined to just those bits that LAUSD determined was required. They artificially constrained the devices and missed the point of providing every student with access to an internet connected device. Worse, they made it harder for the rest of us to get 1:1 programs off the ground.
1:1 for everyone. With open devices and lots of communication to students, parents and staff. It sends a message of trust and empowerment to students, provides the opportunities for teachers to transform learning in their classrooms, makes device support much simpler, requires less overhead for storage, power and time and spreads the risk of loss across all individuals.
How are your carts working out for you?
Andrew T Schwab, 
There is no box 
Devorah Merling 3:26 pm on October 11, 2013 Permalink |
Andrew, I agree with the above and just would like you opinion on this topic. What do you do with the students who perpetually do not charge their device? What is your answer for schools who are building new innovative programs with high powered laptops that need to be connected during the day as the battery power isn’t capable of lasting throughout the day? I feel while the ideal situation is for students to be responsible for their device, there are many additional factors we need to consider in a 1:1 program.
And I agree – the LAUSD debacle will be used as a reason for district to veer but if they investigate thoroughly, they will see the program was doomed from the beginning – too large of a scope too fast and definitely not enough control to the students, but they showed them that very quickly!
Kris Boneman 5:48 pm on October 11, 2013 Permalink |
I sooooo agree. The only successful mobile carts I have seen, are those where the mobility has been eliminated. Devices need to have ownership. A teacher needs to have both ownership and availability. Creating curriculum for students for every other Tuesday will never transform instruction. When the ownership is transferred to the student even better. Having students hold responsiblity for their devices and their learning is a goal I have for our district. We are not there yet, but every nudge we take that directions feels like a better fit.
We are implementing technology at our 13 sites K-12 to help support SBAC transition, about 80 devices per site. The recommendation I am giving sites is to identify a teacher to own the cart, and use the cart to change the way they do business. Don’t try to give everyone a little bit, go all in with a couple of classrooms. This will increase the chance that the technology will actually be in working condition come SBAC time.
The saddest thing I ever saw was a one year old laptop cart at one of our middle schools. It had been scavenged. The laptops left were missing keys and chargers, what a waste.
Cameron Moore 7:29 pm on October 11, 2013 Permalink |
What device did you go with? I see VGA ports!
Andrew T Schwab 7:42 pm on October 11, 2013 Permalink |
The Acer V5 11.6″ notebook with ubermix.
Mark Hall 8:53 pm on October 11, 2013 Permalink |
I agree Andrew, as usual. But with one point to add. What to do about those kids who do not have a safe secure home where their device will not be stolen. Or a safe secure route to and from school? There is not a huge resale market for literature texts, but stolen laptops? There is a market. Yea, you can insure them, but what happens when the device is stolen the second time?
Andrew T Schwab 9:55 pm on October 11, 2013 Permalink |
Not sure how many people would want to steal a Chromebook with a big “Property of BUSD” laser etching on the lid but it is a valid point. The first stolen iPad at Le Gand was stolen from a kid’s home by some of his older siblings friends but that was the only incident that I know of. I think if the school makes it very clear that the device is required for learning and their is a major parent outreach component of the deployment, like Sylvan Union is planning, then sending devices home will open up more possibilities than problems.
As for “neighborhood” theft with kids going to and from school, again, it didn’t happen in Le Grand. When every kid has one, why steal one? It might be different in an Urban setting but we haven’t even seen those stories coming out of LAUSD. I’m thinking it’s one of those Fear obstacles that just had to be overcome by the adults in the room. But maybe chromebooks need to come in theft deterrent pink to make some people feel better?