Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 77

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

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Flaherty View Post
    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.
    I don't understand how moving the thread would be censorship, favoritism, or a disservice. In fact, moving it would both improve the current thread and give more prominence to my exchange with Jeff B. Or is that what you DON'T want to have happen? Can you please elaborate? For the record, I didn't ask that it be moved or removed.
    Last edited by Jeff Dieffenbach; 04-11-2010 at 04:33 PM. Reason: Added "In fact ..." and "Or is ..." sentences

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Flaherty View Post
    Several people I've heard from have been aghast at the condescending and rude behavior of an elected official.
    I don't suppose any of these several people would like to identify themselves, would they? If they were truly aghast, wouldn't they perhaps wish to express themselves? And exactly what don't they like? And what comments do they have about Jeff B.'s rude behavior? Does he get a pass because he's not an elected official? That would hardly seem right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    Kim, I too have heard from several folks offline who are flabergasted that an elected official is behaving in the manner he is.
    Same deal, I guess--no takers on offering up their thoughts publicly? Curious.

    In fact, as far as I know, there have really only been two people other than the two Jeffs willing to weigh in on our respective behaviors publicly: Carl Rosenblatt and John Flaherty. The latter sides with his close friend, Jeff B. The former, whom I don't think I've ever met (Carl, if we have, and I've forgotten, my apologies), took somewhat the opposite position. I'd love to what others who, like Carl, don't really have a dog in the fight, have to say.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    I don't suppose any of these several people would like to identify themselves, would they? If they were truly aghast, wouldn't they perhaps wish to express themselves? And exactly what don't they like? And what comments do they have about Jeff B.'s rude behavior? Does he get a pass because he's not an elected official? That would hardly seem right.

    Same deal, I guess--no takers on offering up their thoughts publicly? Curious.

    In fact, as far as I know, there have really only been two people other than the two Jeffs willing to weigh in on our respective behaviors publicly: Carl Rosenblatt and John Flaherty. The latter sides with his close friend, Jeff B. The former, whom I don't think I've ever met (Carl, if we have, and I've forgotten, my apologies), took somewhat the opposite position. I'd love to what others who, like Carl, don't really have a dog in the fight, have to say.
    Jeff, honestly, how many people are willing to participate in this forum publicly on any subject. Not many. The fact that people comunicate to me offline is not new. I refuse to 'out' people who write to me offline, not would I expect you (or anyone else) to do so.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    I wasn't asking for anyone to be outed, but rather, to volunteer their identity and their specific flabbergasm. I mean, how am I supposed to clean up my act if real people won't offer real specifics? [grin]

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    I wasn't asking for anyone to be outed, but rather, to volunteer their identity and their specific flabbergasm. I mean, how am I supposed to clean up my act if real people won't offer real specifics? [grin]
    Real specifics?

    Re-read this thread, in the order in whiich it was posted.

    And that is why I don't want Kim to slice & dice it. The continuity, the flow would be lost entirely. The context is important.

    And Jeff, it is not a good idea to assume personal things about people on here that you know nothing about, such as Jeff Baron and I being "close friends". Don't get me wrong, I like Jeff B a lot and have tremendous respect for him, but I will not be put in the position to either confirm or deny whether or not we're close friends to someone like you who knows neither of us very well and is not in any position to make such a statement. This reminds me of your statement on the WickedLocal site a couple of weeks back that I "dislike all or most of the SC and School admin", or words to that effect. It is irresponsible of you to make such statements of someone you don't even know. I ask that you cease and desist with making personal comments. Thank you.

    Now, to get back to the matter at hand, I will refer back to Jeff Baron's umpteenth request that you simply respond to his questions. Will you do that?
    John Flaherty

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

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Flaherty View Post
    Real specifics?

    Re-read this thread, in the order in whiich it was posted.

    And that is why I don't want Kim to slice & dice it. The continuity, the flow would be lost entirely. The context is important.
    That's not specific. You haven't cited a single thing that I've said that you think is inappropriate. And, do you think that everything that your acquaintance Jeff B. has said is appropriate?

    Quote Originally Posted by John Flaherty View Post
    And Jeff, it is not a good idea to assume personal things about people on here that you know nothing about, such as Jeff Baron and I being "close friends". Don't get me wrong, I like Jeff B a lot and have tremendous respect for him, but I will not be put in the position to either confirm or deny whether or not we're close friends to someone like you who knows neither of us very well and is not in any position to make such a statement.
    I retract my characterization of Jeff B. and you being close friends. I certainly didn't mean this in any negative way.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Flaherty View Post
    It is irresponsible of you to make such statements of someone you don't even know. I ask that you cease and desist with making personal comments. Thank you.
    It would help me if you could give some examples of where "personal" starts and stops. You've got a long history of not just criticizing, but insulting, my actions as a School Committee member. It's a difference without a distinction to say that such attacks aren't personal when they address questions of judgment and integrity.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Flaherty View Post
    Now, to get back to the matter at hand, I will refer back to Jeff Baron's umpteenth request that you simply respond to his questions. Will you do that?
    I think that I was quite clear in saying that I had no intention of answering Jeff B.--his bad behavior doesn't warrant any further response from me beyond my post #24.

    To try to get this thread back on track, I'll again encourage residents interested in educational technology and the Wayland Public Schools to attend the Technology Information Exchange.

    • Thursday, April 15
    • Wayland Middle School Auditorium
    • 7pm
    Last edited by Jeff Dieffenbach; 04-11-2010 at 06:11 PM. Reason: Added reference to post #24

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    I think that I was quite clear in saying that I had no intention of answering Jeff B.--his bad behavior doesn't warrant any further response from me beyond my post #24.
    And yet, you went on to post to Jeff B's posts in the following:
    30
    32
    34
    36
    39
    41
    47
    49

    You've posted about posting.
    You're talking about talking.
    Why don't you just answer Jeff's questions rather than talk about talking.
    John Flaherty

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

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Writing about writing?

    I'm happy to discuss what I think is bad behavior on Jeff B.'s part. Relatively early on in this thread, and after the milder of his bad behavior, I said that I would post the initial and final plans. Having said that I would do so, I did. Following that posting, his behavior worsened, in my opinion.

    I'm under no obligation to respond to him on educational technology, and as I've said, don't intend to do so. I suspect that anyone that this upsets probably didn't vote for me last time around, so it's not as if I'm imperiling a future School Committee run. And as for such a run, should it happen, I would be happy to stack my behavior in this thread up against his.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    Writing about writing?

    I'm happy to discuss what I think is bad behavior on Jeff B.'s part. Relatively early on in this thread, and after the milder of his bad behavior, I said that I would post the initial and final plans. Having said that I would do so, I did. Following that posting, his behavior worsened, in my opinion.

    I'm under no obligation to respond to him on educational technology, and as I've said, don't intend to do so. I suspect that anyone that this upsets probably didn't vote for me last time around, so it's not as if I'm imperiling a future School Committee run. And as for such a run, should it happen, I would be happy to stack my behavior in this thread up against his.
    Jeff D. hides behind this "bad behavior" thing because he has no answers. He'll jump on and say he does, and that he's not answering to punish me. I'll suggest his 'bad behavior' as a member of the WSC punishes all Wayland residents. Financial mismangement helps nobody, and my contention is that things like the SCI are representative of such. So sorry Jeff D. does not like being challenged, but referring to post 25, there is nothing personal in there. There are legitimate questions that he, nor the WSC, has answers for. If there were answers, nobody would be afraid/unwilling to post them for all to read.

    Here's Post #25 in it's entirety, a direct response to Post #24 where Jeff claims we can find the plan for the SCI. Point out what is so offensive...

    Without forcing anyone to slog through the rest of these documents, I have extracted the part of the final technology request for this year that pertains to the SCI (the subject of this thread). It reads:

    The Student Computer Initiative (SCI) is the beginning of a model 21st century school design in preparation for the opening of the new High School in 2012. The goal is to expand on teaching and instruction at the High School with online project based
    methodologies that are similar to those used in higher education and the workplace. The plan for FY11 is to implement student computer usage in a systematic way based on current efforts (see http://www.wayland.k12.ma.us/distric...strictTech.htm).

    A pilot-scale initiative will provide students with computers for in-school (not take-home) use from “pools” of computers available in selected departments. The pilot will integrate current and new classroom instruction with the use of a Course/Learning Management System/Virtual Learning Environment such as Moodle (http://moodle.org/). This will foster a movement to instruction that is rich with online resources and 21st century teaching and learning methodologies. Professional development for teachers will focus on the use of the Learning Management System to support the blended/hybrid/online learning integration.

    The objective of the pilot is to define a broader, comprehensive implementation plan for all of Wayland Public Schools, whether via the pool approach or a true student 1:1 initiative in which students would be assigned computers for school and home use. In addition, the District will experiment with student/family supplied computers with an eye towards having students supply the majority of computers, redeploying the District computers to those students who do not have or choose not to use student/family supplied computers. The District will also pursue private fund-raising, for instance from alumni and/or local/national companies, to partially offset the cost of the SCI.

    Implementation details:

    (a) Technology will be fully integrated into the Curriculum.
    (b) Professional Development for Teachers will include an introduction to the Learning Management System and the delivery of Hybrid Professional development over the summer focusing on 21st century teaching and learning methodologies. We will offer PD in-house, through the Learning Curve, VHS, and/or other online course options.
    (c) Five teachers will work together in an Inter-disciplinary Professional Learning Community to craft implementation plans and strategies that work well for future growth in our Wayland Community. They will document successes and failures and share with the entire staff.
    (d) All students involved will sign an acceptable use policy and take a pre and post assessment based on Technology Standards required by the State of MA for all graduating seniors.

    Ongoing cost:

    The assumptions that follow assume eventual 1:1 implementations at the MS and HS levels and computer pools at the ES level. Costs will be lower with a poolbased implementation at the MS and/or HS levels, with family supplied computers, with
    private-fundraising, and/or with a combination of these approaches. The Student Computer Initiative (SCI) has two distinct plans. In the Elementary Schools, the plan is to maintain two computer labs and eventually a pool of five computers in each classroom for a consistent ‘workshop model’ integration. This represents 380 classroom computers and 130 lab computers for Claypit Hill, Happy Hollow and Loker Schools. If we reach that goal, the 5-year replacement cycle would be $102,000/year.
    An eventual 1:1 SCI implementation (the high cost alternative) would see 900 computers at the High School and 600 at the Middle School. The 5-year replacement cycle for such an implementation would be $300,000/year.

    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.

    Before spending money on the SCI and then figuring out the plan, how about figuring out the plan and then asking for the resources? Seems like that's what the FINCOM concluded as well by slashing this request. I'd say any money spent this year on this upcoming FY is foolish given our lack of preparedness as evidenced above. I'd advocate for removal of any dollars in the capital request related to SCI at TM.

    Just one man's opinion based on what has been posted. Interested in others...

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    Jeff D. hides behind this "bad behavior" thing because he has no answers. He'll jump on and say he does, and that he's not answering to punish me.
    Actually, no, I don't even know if I have answers to your questions, as I haven't read them. And I certainly don't see my lack of reading your questions as "punishing" you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    Here's Post #25 in it's entirety, a direct response to Post #24 where Jeff claims we can find the plan for the SCI. Point out what is so offensive...
    I didn't say anything in your post #25 was offensive. Having still not read it, I'm in no position to do so. No, the offensiveness that my post #34 cited was:

    • Your post #6 (2x)
    • Your post #12 (3x)
    • Your post #15
    • Your post #33 (6x)

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default Can you say "Red Herring"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    Actually, no, I don't even know if I have answers to your questions, as I haven't read them. And I certainly don't see my lack of reading your questions as "punishing" you.

    I didn't say anything in your post #25 was offensive. Having still not read it, I'm in no position to do so. No, the offensiveness that my post #34 cited was:

    • Your post #6 (2x)
    • Your post #12 (3x)
    • Your post #15
    • Your post #33 (6x)
    This is getting weirder and weirder.
    Jeff, you won't respond to Jeff B's questions and claim you haven't even read his post, because he was rude.
    Yet you go on and on incessantly replying in great detail to all of his other posts that talk about the post he wants you to reply to.
    What is up with that?
    John Flaherty

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

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    I'm under no obligation to respond to him on educational technology, and as I've said, don't intend to do so. I suspect that anyone that this upsets probably didn't vote for me last time around, so it's not as if I'm imperiling a future School Committee run. And as for such a run, should it happen, I would be happy to stack my behavior in this thread up against his.
    So, what happened to the idea of our elected board members representing ALL of the residents of the town?
    The people that this upsets - what, you have no obligation to answer to them because they didn't vote for you?
    John Flaherty

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

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    I never said that I wouldn't answer questions from someone who didn't vote for me, John. No, that's just your spin.

    I responded to Jeff B.'s main question. Anyone who is upset by my lack of response to Jeff B.'s follow-on, or by my calling him out for bad behavior, but who prefers not to do so publicly, should feel free to contact me privately at the email address below. I won't share their identity with anyone without their permission.

    As anyone who has contacted me throughout my fifteen years of service to the town can attest, I've got a pretty good track record of responding. I haven't always managed to respond to every communication, but I'd be surprised if there are any town officials who've done better.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    Actually, no, I don't even know if I have answers to your questions, as I haven't read them. And I certainly don't see my lack of reading your questions as "punishing" you.



    I didn't say anything in your post #25 was offensive. Having still not read it, I'm in no position to do so. No, the offensiveness that my post #34 cited was:

    • Your post #6 (2x)
    • Your post #12 (3x)
    • Your post #15
    • Your post #33 (6x)
    This response borders on ridiculous (uh oh, bad behavior because I said the post was ridiculous). All you've done is memorialized in writing that you are unwilling to answer legitimate questions about the lack of planning related to a capital request. You claim this is because you won't respond to my questions because you don't like the words I use in *some* of my posts (one time, for example, is I use the word 'screwed' in post #6) but are willing to read and respond to posts about everything else. You also continue to assert 'bad behavior' on my part while taking no responsibility for the multiple examples of similarly nasty language on your part both in this thread (see nearly every post of yours from #32 onwards) and others. Yet, unlike you, I respond regularly.

    What would you do if I asked my question at the big technology forum, refuse to answer? Of course, scheduling such forum the night before school vacation begins is always key to limiting the attendance.

    Elected officials are, indeed, not obligated to answer questions. However, no answer is almost always because there is no good one. You can no longer hide behind this facade, Jeff. You have no answers here. I get it. Your continued assertion that you still haven't read it is juvenile, however.

    I therefore can only conclude that the money requested for the SCI (and potentially the entire technology capital request) is a baseless request at this time. Given that, why should anyone vote to write a blank check to the WSC for this? Rather, it seems the smart thing to do is strip that entire request from the budget at TM until there is a willingness to answer the questions about the plan publicly. Consider my questions in this forum public as anyone in town can read both the question and the answers in full.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    This response borders on ridiculous (uh oh, bad behavior because I said the post was ridiculous). All you've done is memorialized in writing that you are unwilling to answer legitimate questions about the lack of planning related to a capital request. You claim this is because you won't respond to my questions because you don't like the words I use in *some* of my posts (one time, for example, is I use the word 'screwed' in post #6) but are willing to read and respond to posts about everything else. You also continue to assert 'bad behavior' on my part while taking no responsibility for the multiple examples of similarly nasty language on your part both in this thread (see nearly every post of yours from #32 onwards) and others. Yet, unlike you, I respond regularly.
    Jeff B., I've let you know my specific objections to your language. You've failed to cite even one place where you think that I've gone astray.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    What would you do if I asked my question at the big technology forum, refuse to answer?
    I encourage you to ask your question at the technology forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    Of course, scheduling such forum the night before school vacation begins is always key to limiting the attendance.
    I'd hate for any community members to be thrown off by your error here--school vacation does NOT begin on Friday, April 16. Rather, it begins on Monday, April 19.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    Your continued assertion that you still haven't read it [Jeff B.'s post #25] is juvenile, however.
    If I were to assert anything else, I'd be lying, since I have not in fact read it.

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
  •