US/ND-4: (no subject)
(no subject)
Jayne & Scott Hoffman (jayneh@cia-g.com)
Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:16:04 -0600 (MDT)
Bill Cosh, Wisconsin reported these survey results:
>Number of High Schools With Direct Internet Access: 109 high schools,
25.1%
Is it possible that universal access is only going to help those with
existing techonolgy?
>Number of High Schools That Pay Long Distance Phone Charges to Access
The Internet: 56 high schools, 12.9%
Maybe those schools with the existing technology don't need help with the
access charges as much as the FCC believes.
>Number of High Schools With Technology Plans: 399 high schools, 91.7%
Techonolgy plans don't seem to encourage technology. Yet, personally, I
will argue that schools need access to technology expertise. Most do not
know what is available or how to use it. I have seen two districts spend
money on soft/hardware that was either useless, didn't work or was
horrendously inadequate. What schools really need is the expertise of an IS
officer, but they cannot afford one.
>Barriers:
>Cost/Money/Revenue Caps - 81 responses
Long Distance Call Charges - 17 responses
Need To Establish a Policy - 11 responses
It appears that the biggest problem facing schools is not access; it's
equipment. I am more certain that Universal access is unecessary
legislation which will only drive up costs for more traditional phone
service. This is not the way to solve the problem; it's a bandaid on a
knee that isn't scraped.
If we truly want more schools to have access, we need to provide them with
equipment.
Several years ago Channel 1 came to schools and sold districts on their new
medium. If they had only offered the satellite news service, it would have
been useless because no school had the televisions, satellites, or other
equipment. If that same company had only provided the satellite feed and
the recording equipment, it would have still been useless to most schools.
This is analgous to Universal Access in that telecos can provide the "feed,"
but if schools don't have modems or routers, it will be useless. Even if
schools are provided with routers and modems, if they only have Apple IIs or
other outdated equipment, it is still useless. Reality is that this is the
situtuation of many high schools.
Channel 1 ended up providing the feed, the equipment and even the TV
monitors in every classroom. It was the only way that anyone could find
their service useful. In a similar way, the only way Universal Access can
be of use is if schools have the equipment. Most do not.
I have taught in several schools, both public and federal. I hope that these
stark truths can promote a better way for us to help schools gain access to
technology rather than develop "pie in the sky" concepts which have no
functionality, will cost the individual consumers and will not promote any
sort of real universal access in schools or libraries.
Discussions about how to divide UA, how to distribute it, etc. are not
helping schools. I wanted to be a part of a discussion that would help
schools; unfortunately we're discussing the wrong things.
jayne