Mead schools’ tech wish list on hold

Nine-year-old Austin Cozza began his morning at Brentwood Elementary School on Monday by logging on to the world.

All around him, Cozza’s third-grade classmates at the Mead school were also powering up white Apple iBook computers and connecting wirelessly to the Web. Online at their desks, the students measured reading levels, which will be available to parents during conferences next week.

In other classrooms, students put together digital movies and multimedia packages about the Revolutionary War. Lunch money is handled on the computer, as is attendance. Parents can access their child’s grades and report cards online.

“Technology is so much a part of what we do as educators,” said Kim Montecucco, an instructional technology training specialist for the district. “So much of what our kids do now is animated and alive.”

While technology is alive and well at Mead schools today, district officials are worried about the future after the failure of its technology levy last week.

While most voters were supportive – about 59 percent voted “yes” – the district was fewer than 100 votes short of the 60 percent needed to validate the measure.

The levy would have raised just under $3 million for updates to technology already in place in Mead schools over the next three years.

A portion of a 2004 voter-approved bond issue included $3.7 million for technology improvements through 2006 and paid for resources such as the mobile computer labs with laptops like those in use at Brentwood.

The district was hoping to add two more mobile carts at each high school and one cart at each middle school and elementary school, for a total of 403 computers for students, and 394 computers for teachers and staff.

One-time proposed purchases included printers for each classroom and eight keyboarding carts for each elementary school.

Also included were upgrades to servers, routers and other technology infrastructure.

The bond proceeds already paid for districtwide wireless network installation, projectors for teachers, and access to online learning tools.

The technology levy would have added 30 cents per $1,000 assessed valuation in 2007. The tax rate that includes the maintenance and operations levy rate passed by voters would have decreased by 5 cents per $1,000.

“I suppose, but don’t really know, that people who voted against it simply don’t see technology as essential to an education,” said Teri Inman, a teacher at Mead’s alternative high school. “If the equipment is maximized, it can make a huge difference in how students learn and what they retain, partly due to interest level.”

Inman said her son’s advanced placement government teacher uses a blog for homework and discussions, and the students love it.

Students at Inman’s school can make movies to show understanding of a skill or concept, she said. “They do it … really few students are willing to do homework anymore.”

But some voters said they’re unsure of the need for the expense.

“I voted for the Mead tech levy, but with misgivings,” said David Giffen in an e-mail to The Spokesman-Review.

“I voted for it because public schools need unwavering support from the public,” Giffen said. “However, I would rather have seen the money go elsewhere. I think about current technology … and how quickly today’s great systems become tomorrow’s junk.”

A bond spread over three years would have allowed the district to keep computers for about five years before replacing them.