Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 77

Thread: Educational Outcomes and Research from 1:1 Computing Settings

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default Uh, No....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    Post 24 pretty much sums it up. Anything more would more or less only amount to "he said, she said..
    Jeff, I beg to differ. Following Post #24, I posted the following as part of a response:

    Most of what is written above is high-level summarizations. So, my question all along has been around the implementation plan associated with the SCI. Seems pretty light to me, as suspected. Under implementation details shown above, here's my questions (the letter in brackets refers to the points of the implementation plan):

    (a) What does that mean? This is a 500,000-ft. sentence with no detail.
    (b) Will this summer PD/training be required of all teahcers, or optional? If required, is there an additional cost(s) to Wayland in the form of compensation, fees for training programs, etc. If optional, how can we be assured this training will occur such that this program is ready to go come day #1 of school next year so that the computers are being used right away?
    (c) Which five teachers? How are/were they selected? Again, will there be additional compensation afforded these teachers for this extra work? If so, how much? What other resources (people, materials, training, etc.) will be required for them? How much will they cost?
    (d) Nothing substantive, except I can't see why the SCI is required for this? Need to understand this assessment requirement from the State before I can ask anything real here...

    My bigger question is, why can't we look at what others have done and model our plans based on what has worked in other places instead of re-inventing the wheel here, all the while spending precious dollars that are probably better utilized elsewhere? For example, look at Wellesley (a peer town), which has already worked on this. Amongst other resources, check out http://www.wellesley.k12.ma.us/progr...ech/index.html and look under the Core Curriculum link. It has detailed plans for how technology is used at each level of their school system. Why not meet with them, understand what works and what doesn't, and then build off that? Simply view the link above (http://www.wayland.k12.ma.us/distric...strictTech.htm) after reading through Wellesley's plans and realize how embarassingly little detail our own implemetation of technology has.


    Not he said, she said. These are legitimate questions in response to your answer. What say you?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    I think that I have an explanation for the disconnect. I didn't read your follow-on posts to my post 24, and therefore, am not in a position to comment. To do so would be to reward your bad behavior, and I don't see an upside in doing that. Some might argue that engaging in discussion on unrelated topics (term limits, campaign finance) is in a sense such a reward, and I can't really argue with them, but I chose to do so nonetheless.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    I think that I have an explanation for the disconnect. I didn't read your follow-on posts to my post 24, and therefore, am not in a position to comment. To do so would be to reward your bad behavior, and I don't see an upside in doing that. Some might argue that engaging in discussion on unrelated topics (term limits, campaign finance) is in a sense such a reward, and I can't really argue with them, but I chose to do so nonetheless.
    Last I checked, asking legitimate questions of an elected official is not "bad behavor," Jeff. Bad behavior is fleecing the Wayland electorate's tax dollars time and time again (see ridiculous lawsuits, approval of admin raises in huge recessions, requests for laptops without implementation strategies, lack of support for operational audits, etc.) Just because others are willing to let you and others on the WSC do it, doesn't mean other citizens have to.

    I hardly believe you didn't read the posts. You just have no justifiable position, so you throw up smokescreens or avoid difficult responses. Answer or don't answer. Certainly your prerogative. No answer just lends further credence to the avoid-and-spin strategy employed in other situations. Just don't post paternalistic retorts in an attempt to shame me. I have a right to ask questions, and question things. Gosh knows there is enough of a poor track record to warrant it.

    BTW, I frequently question why I engage with you as well. Some would argue it is batting your head against a wall, and I can't really argue with them, but I choose to do so nonetheless. So, don't feel lonely on that front...

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    No, Jeff B., bad behavior is evidenced by this particular parade of yours. Sadly, it's par for your course. You are ill-mannered and do not deserve even the attention I've given you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (POST #6)... with zero research or plan in place ...
    A complete mischaracterization.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (POST #6)... She appears to have screwed the Wayland students out of technology by not doing her job ...
    An unfair accusation, and coarse to boot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (POST #12)For now, I'm going to take the lack of a response more than 48 hours later as the documents do not exist. ...
    Accusing me of lying (not even 3 days had passed).

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (POST #12)... I've also asked around town, and looked online in the interim, and have unable to produce any written technology plans on my own.
    Not sure whether to chalk this one up to a lie or an inability to search the web--prior to my post 24, there were plenty of online documents outlining WPS technology plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (POST #12)... freewheeling spending ...
    Insulting hyperbole. Don't worry, my skin is thick enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (POST #15)... blow $150k of taxpayer money ...
    Insulting hyperbole.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (Post #33)... fleecing the Wayland electorate's tax dollars ...
    Insulting hyperbole.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (Post #33)... see ridiculous lawsuits...
    Insulting hyperbole.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (Post #33)... approval of admin raises in huge recessions ...
    Hyperbole. (Not really insulting, since you aren't really accusing me of causing the recession.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (Post #33)... I hardly believe you didn't read the posts. ...
    Essentially accusing me of being a liar. I did not read your post 25.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (Post #33)... avoid-and-spin strategy ...
    Your opinion. And based on the instances of bad behavior that I've cited above, it speaks for itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    (Post #33)... enough of a poor track record ...
    Again, merely your opinion. And the above is all from a single thread.

    Since you raise the issue of track record, I'll add to my litany your registration AND deceptive use of the soswayland.com domain name and your curious explanation of your non-vote on the WHS project.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    No, Jeff B., bad behavior is evidenced by this particular parade of yours. Sadly, it's par for your course. You are ill-mannered and do not deserve even the attention I've given you.



    A complete mischaracterization.



    An unfair accusation, and coarse to boot.



    Accusing me of lying (not even 3 days had passed).



    Not sure whether to chalk this one up to a lie or an inability to search the web--prior to my post 24, there were plenty of online documents outlining WPS technology plans.



    Insulting hyperbole. Don't worry, my skin is thick enough.



    Insulting hyperbole.



    Insulting hyperbole.



    Insulting hyperbole.



    Hyperbole. (Not really insulting, since you aren't really accusing me of causing the recession.)



    Essentially accusing me of being a liar. I did not read your post 25.



    Your opinion. And based on the instances of bad behavior that I've cited above, it speaks for itself.



    Again, merely your opinion. And the above is all from a single thread.

    Since you raise the issue of track record, I'll add to my litany your registration AND deceptive use of the soswayland.com domain name and your curious explanation of your non-vote on the WHS project.
    So-called mischaracterizations, insulting hyberole, inabilities to search and perceived accusations of lying are all in the eye of the beholder, Jeff. I see things one way, and you see them another. That is not bad behavior, that is called disagreement. You don't like the way I raise points/ask questions. I get it. Same on this side. But I stand by my earleir remarks that bad behavior is fleecing the Wayland electorate's tax dollars time and time again (see ridiculous lawsuits, approval of admin raises in huge recessions, requests for laptops without implementation strategies, lack of support for operational audits, etc.). Yes, my opinion, but definitely not mine alone.

    Let's face it, we probably don't agree on much and I imagine never will. My questions about the SCI, though, were/are legitimate and your attempts to smear me or cry about my points as hyberbole or mischaracterizations in an attempt to avoid the subject are, in my opinion, shameful as an elected official who is answerable to ALL residents of this town.

    By the way, the track record I spoke of was that of the WSC, not you individually. Your 'think-skinned' reaction of going after
    me personally on totally unrelated issues speaks volumes. As Dennis Green once said, and I'm slighlty paraphrasing -- you are who I think you are.

    For the record, I'm done with this back and forth with you. It is unproductive and wasteful of everyone's valuable time. Happy to re-engage if you want to talk about real issues and not our personal dislike for one another.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Jeff B., nice attempt at spin! Saying that you're referring to my WSC track record and not me individually is ludicrous given how much you attack my integrity--an individual trait if ever there was one--in attacking the former.

    As to your bad behavior, I'm speaking much less about what you say and much more about how you say it, the latter likely explaining the current makeup of the School Committee.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default Why?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    I didn't read your follow-on posts to my post 24, and therefore, am not in a position to comment.

    So......
    You read all of Jeff Baron's posts prior to #25, about which you had plenty to say, and you read all of his posts after #25, about which you had plenty to say, and you chose not to read post #25.

    Why?
    John Flaherty

    Any views expressed are NOT mine alone.
    Wayland Transparency - Facts Without Spin
    http://www.waylandtransparency.com/

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    Jeff B., nice attempt at spin! Saying that you're referring to my WSC track record and not me individually is ludicrous given how much you attack my integrity--an individual trait if ever there was one--in attacking the former.

    As to your bad behavior, I'm speaking much less about what you say and much more about how you say it, the latter likely explaining the current makeup of the School Committee.
    Think what you want, Jeff. I was speaking of the WSC as a whole and not any one member in those comments.

    You're probably right about the WSC, though. It certainly wasn't because the best candidate was elected. I'd give more credit to the SOS folks for the makeup of the WSC, though, than the way I speak. Without them, you wouldn't be there.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    You're probably right about the WSC, though. It certainly wasn't because the best candidate was elected. I'd give more credit to the SOS folks for the makeup of the WSC, though, than the way I speak. Without them, you wouldn't be there.
    Classic Jeff B. Why insult Jeff D. when you can insult the majority of voters?

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    Classic Jeff B. Why insult Jeff D. when you can insult the majority of voters?
    Insulting Wayland voters? No. Everyone makes mistakes....

    By the way, Jeff, winning by less than 40 votes is a statistical anomaly. Consider yourself lucky...

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    I'd give more credit to the SOS folks for the makeup of the WSC, though, than the way I speak. Without them, you wouldn't be there.
    I couldn't agree more. My endorsement by SOS was worth gold. What? They didn't make endorsements? Huh. Well, their running of my campaign was certainly a service I couldn't have done without. Wait, I'm mistaken again? They didn't do that? Oh. Well, anyway, their work on a few of the specifics--coordinating letters, posting lawn signs, giving me visibility holding signs around town, creating a web site--proved to be invaluable. Oh no! Don't tell me ... they didn't do any of those things either? (Thanks to those who did!) Jeff B., remind me, exactly how did SOS get the word out about my campaign? Was there some secret phone chain about which I wasn't aware? Some sort of mass telekinetic mind connection, perhaps? Sure, people who I knew before they even were part of SOS may have supported me, and may have told a few friends, but that's hardly the same thing.

    And I'd say claiming that Wayland voters could have been duped by SOS (had they actually done any campaigning) is an insult to those voters, as if they weren't able to make up their own minds.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    By the way, Jeff, winning by less than 40 votes is a statistical anomaly. Consider yourself lucky...
    Ah, statistics. I'm by no means an expert, but by both education (engineering) and profession (consulting, marketing), I've had some exposure. As chance would have it, I'm currently reading the excellent The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives by Leonard Mlodinow. A significant case that he makes is that people aren't really genetically wired to be good at understanding probability, statistics, and randomness. To say that 40 votes is a "statistical anomaly" supports his point.

    First of all, the town only ran one trial (election). On the surface, then, it's not possible to tell whether the outcome was an anomaly. To do that, you'd need to understand the population, the number of voters, the margin, and run a number of trials. So let's look at what we have to work with. Roughly 40 votes out of approximately 1,400 voters means a margin of 2.5-3% or so. Correction: it's been pointed out to me that there were about 3,500 voters--I was recalling roughly the average number of votes received by the top four of the five candidates. I don't know how 5 candidates for 2 seats changes the margin of error calculation. Note also that my margin over Jeff B. was about 70 votes (slightly under 5%), not 40 (40 was the margin over Paul Grasso). Much wider than what typically triggers automatic recounts. Wikipedia puts the margin of error for a sample size of 1,067 at 2% and 2,401 at 3%. So, the margin in our race was hardly well within that error range, and may have been outside it (I don't have the expertise to calculate exactly what it was).

    Was I lucky? Maybe. Would I have only won one time out of five? Ten? Twenty? I have no idea. Maybe I'd have prevailed four times out of five, or nine of ten, or nineteen of twenty. But to call the outcome a "statistical anomaly" and "lucky" with the certainty you claim is bunk.
    Last edited by Jeff Dieffenbach; 04-11-2010 at 01:23 PM. Reason: I corrected the number of voters, adding the comment in italics.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    726

    Default

    I'm not exactly clear that these last dozen posts or so are exactly on topic... Is there maybe a new thread we could open for this discussion?

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Reichelt View Post
    I'm not exactly clear that these last dozen posts or so are exactly on topic... Is there maybe a new thread we could open for this discussion?
    I have no objection to your moving the posts beginning with #32 to a new thread (started by me or you as Administrator, whatever works best) entitled "How acceptable is imflammatory language in public discussion?" or something to that effect. I would then add a new post #32 to this thread explaining that my response to Jeff B.'s repeated request for an answer to his question wasn't really on the topic of 1:1 computing. Might be worth a note at the beginning of the new thread to the effect that it's an extension of the back and forth on the 1:1 thread.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Kim,

    Before you go slicing & dicing this thread, please consider this:
    Several people I've heard from have been aghast at the condescending and rude behavior of an elected official.
    In the past you were asked by this same elected official to remove an entire thread because it was pointed out to him just how offensive and in bad taste it was.

    He has done it again here:
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    As to your bad behavior, I'm speaking much less about what you say and much more about how you say it, the latter likely explaining the current makeup of the School Committee.
    I ask that you leave this thread alone. It is not the first thread to wander off topic, but I believe the people have a right to see it in its entirety, because it is telling on so many levels.

    To move or remove it would be censorship, favoritism and a disservice to the people of Wayland.
    John Flaherty

    Any views expressed are NOT mine alone.
    Wayland Transparency - Facts Without Spin
    http://www.waylandtransparency.com/

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Flaherty View Post
    Kim,

    Before you go slicing & dicing this thread, please consider this:
    Several people I've heard from have been aghast at the condescending and rude behavior of an elected official.
    In the past you were asked by this same elected official to remove an entire thread because it was pointed out to him just how offensive and in bad taste it was.

    He has done it again here:


    I ask that you leave this thread alone. It is not the first thread to wander off topic, but I believe the people have a right to see it in its entirety, because it is telling on so many levels.

    To move or remove it would be censorship, favoritism and a disservice to the people of Wayland.
    Kim, I too have heard from several folks offline who are flabergasted that an elected official is behaving in the manner he is. I agree with John. Leave it alone so the context is clear to all.

    Therefore, getting back to the SCI, I ask for the 'gosh knows how many' time, of Jeff D (as shown originally in Post #25):

    Most of what is written [in Post #24] is high-level summarizations. So, my question all along has been around the implementation plan associated with the SCI. Seems pretty light to me, as suspected. Under implementation details shown above, here's my questions (the letter in brackets refers to the points of the implementation plan):

    (a) What does that mean? This is a 500,000-ft. sentence with no detail.
    (b) Will this summer PD/training be required of all teahcers, or optional? If required, is there an additional cost(s) to Wayland in the form of compensation, fees for training programs, etc. If optional, how can we be assured this training will occur such that this program is ready to go come day #1 of school next year so that the computers are being used right away?
    (c) Which five teachers? How are/were they selected? Again, will there be additional compensation afforded these teachers for this extra work? If so, how much? What other resources (people, materials, training, etc.) will be required for them? How much will they cost?
    (d) Nothing substantive, except I can't see why the SCI is required for this? Need to understand this assessment requirement from the State before I can ask anything real here...

    My bigger question is, why can't we look at what others have done and model our plans based on what has worked in other places instead of re-inventing the wheel here, all the while spending precious dollars that are probably better utilized elsewhere? For example, look at Wellesley (a peer town), which has already worked on this. Amongst other resources, check out http://www.wellesley.k12.ma.us/progr...ech/index.html and look under the Core Curriculum link. It has detailed plans for how technology is used at each level of their school system. Why not meet with them, understand what works and what doesn't, and then build off that? Simply view the link above (http://www.wayland.k12.ma.us/distric...strictTech.htm) after reading through Wellesley's plans and realize how embarassingly little detail our own implemetation of technology has.


    These are legitimate questions in response to your answer. What say you? If you spend 1/2 the time on answering this that you have going after me, the response is likely to be more than sufficient.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •