[NewsPoster]

The Maine Department of Education is reversing course on a program that supplied iPads to grades 7 through 12. After polling students and staff, and negotiating a new deal with Apple, the department has offered a one-for-one swap for MacBook Air laptops at similar cost to the schools.

Maine Learning and Technology Initiative Director Mike Muir said that not only was there insufficient teacher training in iPad integration, but also that the state "underestimated how different an iPad is from a laptop." Muir also pointed out that coding and programming options were greater on the laptop.

According to the Lewiston-Auburn Sun Journal, 88.5 percent of the teachers, and 74 percent of the student body desired the laptop over the iPad. The swap offer for Edward Little High School and Auburn Middle school will see 1,718 devices exchanged. MacNN has spoken with an Apple educational representative, who expects other districts in Maine to make the same assessment, and take the same deal before this school year ends.

The Learning and Technology Initiate allows $254 per student per year for a device, plus teacher training. When the deal was signed three years ago, the MacBook Air cost for the device and education was $273 per student per year. The new deal will cost $217 per student per year for the next school year, and $248 per year afterwards. Muir added that three years ago "people chose iPads. They were within what the state would fund."

As mentioned on several episodes of the MacNN Podcast, we have been consulting with several dozen schools about information technology practices in schools, and how they have changed since the '90s. Muir's assessment about insufficient teacher training in technology integration is prevalent in our initial findings, and was also one of the major problems with the Los Angeles Unified School District's implementation as well.

One teacher said of the iPads in higher grades, that the tablets "provide no educational function in the classroom. Students use them as toys. Word processing is near to impossible … I applaud this change."

[panjandrum]

Overall I expect they will be happier with the MacBook Airs. As much as I like iPads, Apple did a very poor job helping to get them integrated properly into school environments; with buggy/limited tools such as Apple Configurator. Multi-user functionality, ease of transferring files to and from student accounts, etc. All of it is pretty terrible. There are even bugs in the licensing functionality in the VPPE program, causing IT to have to jump through hoops unless they purchase one extra copy of any app. I've seen iPads get a LOT of use in classroom setting, don't get me wrong. For many "content absorption" functions they work pretty well. But I also see the majority students go to the laptop or desktop computers for anything other than basic web-research whenever they can. One thing I will say; even if iPads (or other Tablets) never achieved their potential in the classroom; I have seen then be extremely useful for students with special considerations. There are a lot of nice Apps out there for practicing specific skills, and we've found that many of these apps have been very well designed by people who obviously understand what they are doing and the issues these students have. When it's done properly (and all too often it is not), there is an excellent fundamental intuitiveness to a touch-screen app that just doesn't translate well to non-touch-screen devices.

[Mike Wuerthele]

Regarding our discussion with schools, what we're finding is that Apple is giving a series of prices, one including in-depth training with the staff and educators at the school to familiarize them with the gear, plus help in integrating the devices into the curriculum. This adds between $15 and $21 per unit per year, as we understand it.

More than half of the districts we've spoke to refuse this offer. More than half of those opt for no training whatsoever from any source, and basically throw the hardware at the teachers.

[DiabloConQueso]

A company I used to work for proposed the idea of "tiered service options" -- platinum coming with in-field oversight, verification, and post-campaign reporting, gold coming with verification and post-campaign reporting, and bronze with nothing but post-campaign reporting.

I thought it was a horrible idea. Why even offer the client an option that is destined for failure (i.e., the bronze-level service)? That does nothing but drag the company's image through the mud, as most clients are going to always lean toward the options that are less expensive. Don't give the client the option to select a service level that has any potential to be a failure.

Sounds like Apple might have done something similar in this regard. The old, "welp, we got your money, now you're on your own, good luck!" is never a good business tactic.

[kserman]

In the last keynote Tim and Phil try to force us the iPad as a laptop replacement and in the processes insulted Mac users who owned a 5 year old Mac. Hopefully Tim and Phil will learn a lesson on their arrogance and rudeness. They are so disconnected from their customers and Apple products are paying the price for it.

[DiabloConQueso]

I... didn't get that impression at all.