“
Alex Marrero, the interim superintendent for the New Rochelle school district, told me that technology costs for remote learning in his district ran up to $2.2 million. “That’s money that could hire a lot of teachers,” he said.
If a district creates a dedicated virtual option, the largest expenditure is personnel, as additional teachers are needed to work solely with remote students. Any money earmarked for remote programs, whether for staff or materials or services, is money that is not allocated toward programs in the building.
Beyond the indirect harm to students because of diminished resources, there is also the direct harm of so-called synchronous learning, in which teachers are forced to divide their attention between in-person and remote students, with neither enjoying a teacher’s full focus. It also compels students to remain on laptops or devices all day in the building, because lessons have to be conducted simultaneously for remote students. This has been the case in my New York State district, which has been in a hybrid model nearly all of this school year. Full-time in-person classes began this week here, and many in-person students in middle and high school continue to be tethered to their Chromebooks throughout the day to accommodate the relatively few peers who remain remote. A wealth of research shows that learning from a screen all day is generally inferior to a learning experience that centers on those old-fashioned tactile technologies of pencils, paper, and books, and in-person communication with a teacher; each of those elements are eliminated or dramatically reduced when all the lesson plans in the room are taught through an electronic device.
Join the Conversation
VIP members get the ability to comment on articles.