Technology for teachers is understandable, but this technology should not be in the classroom. Technology does not educate and teach the basics the children need to learn. Technology creates laziness and lack of understanding how this technology teaches. Students need to learn by basic methods in order to understand how technology was achieved. Computers only offer students a guessing game of learning, they keep chosing answers until the correct one appears but they have no idea why the one answer is correct. A multiple choice education does not teach or impart knowledge that should be learned. Drop the dependence on computers and the massive expense and put those funds in real learning materials, like books, pencils, and paper and american teachers that know their stuff. On a side note, cell phones should be banned in schools as a disruptive and an unnecessary evil in education.

Stephenson couldn't really have used the following words:

"Drug of choice"
"(Teachers) are not knowledgable of what's available"
"educators go after them "like sharks fighting over a fish."

If he really did say those things then we have more problems than I imagined.

One thing our mighty legislators need to learn is you can't run software if you don't have a computer! At our school of 1,000 kids we have 3 computer labs. One is for general use and teachers sign up for it when it is available. The other two are used for CTE classes and are occupied by the same teacher all day long. They are not available for any other class.

That means we have 32 computers to be used by the other 936 kids. I'm sorry Mr. Stephenson but the teachers do know. They just don't have money to buy their own set of computers like they buy their own set of everything else.

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that a legislator thinks he knows what is best for a school. Seems to be part of the pre-requisite these days. Ask the people that work there what is needed. It isn't hard to figure out.

Arrogance at its best.

He almost seems proud that he has inadequately funded schools for so long that teachers are like "sharks" trying to get basic supplies for their classrooms.

This article really saddened me.

I think Stevenson has missed the point. All the software in the world is utterly useless unless you have something to run it on...

Teachers teach, not computers. We don't need computers, what we need is to have lower class sizes. Why go to school to sit in front of a computer when you can do it at home.

So now Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, wants another $40 million to $50 million allocated — and designated specifically for computer-assisted instructional software that he says could work wonders in a classroom.

HOW ABOUT HAVING OUR HIGHLY PAID AND OVER BENEFITTED TEACHERS DO SOMETHING NOT IN THEIR CONTRACT LIKE TEACH !!!

"Teachers don't know what is out there". ?????

No, we are all a bunch of dumb morons that don't keep up on what is available to us.

The guys attends one presentation from some software company and suddenly there is money to buy their program?

I have a masters degree in technology that I can't use in my classroom because we are so underfunded that I am lucky to get one or two days per term where the computer lab is open for us to use.

Fund the schools better please. Believe me I know what is out there and that just makes it even more frustrating to teach in Utah.

And no I'm not going to spend my free time writing grants so I can become one of his "sharks".

I really can't believe he said that either. Unbelievable!

"(I've) learned that educators' drug of choice is grants — they smell grants, and they will move heaven and earth to qualify," Stephenson said.

Listen to this guy talk about teachers. Could the disdain many of these legislatures have for the schools be more clear?

Our teacher are not "overpaid" nor "highly benefited". Get a clue.

This is another example of the fox being in charge of the henhouse. Sen. Stephenson, Chair of the Education budget committee, is head of the taxpayers association. He wants to make it APPEAR like he cares about and is funding education, while undermining funding for the real needs.

Computers don't teach. People do.

Perfect. Stephenson can send more state money to private software companies and as a previous poster noted, why fund public education when kids can sit at home in front of a computer?

Another case of Stephenson's relentless pursuit of sending more taxpayer money to big business and less to our children.

"highly benefited" ...

That made me laugh. Teachers now have almost zero benefits except retirement. The legislature has made it clear that they want to get rid of teachers before they reach retirement age.

So what benefits are left?

Medical ? Nope. They are paying for the premiums in many districts.
Vision? Never had it.
Dental? Never had it unless they pay for it.
Retirement? Yes if they can survive 30 years. About 5% will make it that far.
401k? If they contribute to it.

What benefits do people think teachers have?

Seriously.

I hope someone will call him on this.

Complete and total arrogance.

I've got some software that will write laws and actually make good comments to the press instead of asinine ones.

Can I get some money and have a grant writing frenzy from our legislators?

Howard Stephenson wants the legislature to buy a block of software licenses for a program that he has chosen from a vendor that he has chosen and then distribute the licenses to the schools, whether or not they have hardware in place to run the software.

Does that sound fishy? Of course it does. It's Howard Stephenson. The man runs charter schools and writes charter school legislation. He's a lobbyist for the "taxpayers association" but also a Senator and he refuses to file disclosures of the conflict.

The shark in these waters is a self centered business tycoon who only serves his own self interest and gets re-elected because he has money power in the party and Draper/Alpine only votes Republican.

Shame on us for re-electing him twice.

Listening to all these teachers complain about getting more tools to teach kids makes me laugh. If this was a democrat or one of the fake republicans on the hill proposing this the teachers would be loving it. But then again a democrat or a pretend republican could never come up with an original idea.

Running network software requires an IT specialist. IT specialists make 75k+ plus benefits before they turn 30. No teacher in Utah earns that. Many principals don't.

How will the schools run the software? Will teachers configure the network, install the software and maintain the user accounts?

Howard Stephenson said teachers "should be able to figure these things out" (words to that effect - in a prop 1 meeting) so that money can be spent on hardware and software instead of training.

It's a very curious world where the powerful get to write 40 million dollar checks to rich business associates without regard to the applicability of the expenditure.

Speak for yourself, Howard Stephenson, but most teachers are very knowledgeable about what technology is available. The problem is that the technology is not being made available because of prohibitive costs. Software is great, but without decent computer equipment, it is worthless. I should know, because I'm a teacher.

My district spent a huge amount of $ on a software program that was supposed to be the perfect teaching tool. I thing it cost close to a million dollars.

Students did, indeed, keep hitting answers until they chose the right one - didn't learn one thing expect how to waste time.

Computers are merely one tool out of many that are needed in today's schools. As an English teacher, I love giving my students access to word processing, internet research, power point production, movie making programs, etc. I don't need a legislator who thinks we are frenzied sharks or druggies for grants telling me what software I need.

By the way, if schools really were adequately funded, we wouldn't be forced to look for grants, either.

Who the heck keeps electing Howard - let me be your sugar daddy -- Stephenson, anyway. Please stop it!

Mr. Stephenson,

You owe every teacher and every student in Utah an apology.

Students because you have $40,000,000 to waste on a software program that could be used to pay for many more teachers and thus get the class size down to something manageable.

Teachers because those were idiotic things to say at a time where your state can't even get enough people to fill the open positions in the district.

Unbelievable.

Sen. Stephenson has friends in the software industry that developed the software he is trying to force education to adopt. Another conflict of interest that abounds amongst legislators. Maybe the media should follow up on the RFP issued by the state office of education to see how it has played out.

Software certainly has potential for the educational process because the student can have instantaneous and individualized feedback in the process of learning. The trick is to have the right kind of software to enhance the learning experience and to have the right kind of teachers and environment to benefit from it.

However valuable software may be, it cannot replace proven methods of rigorous study though from my experience it is a valuable supplement. Software should be used ideally from 20% to 50% of the time, depending on the age of the student and the subject matter involved.

As an educator in this state, I am upset with Sen. Stephenson's use of the phrase "drug of choice" when describing his perception of how educators pursue grants. How do I explain this idea of "drug of choice" to my sixth grader who reads the paper over my shoulder? So much for all the anti-drug education that goes on in the schools. But perhaps there is a computer program that will clear up that issue too. The senator's comments, combined with the idea that teachers don't know what software is available, show that there are members of the legislatue who have no confidence in educators. Here's a challenge for all the senators: Spend some time in the schools, talk to teachers and parents, and become informed before you try to make decisions. One size does not fit all in education.

Howard Stevenson working educational wonders using computer-assisted instructional software. Howard’s first task will be to sniff out, write, and submit one of those addictive grants. Next he will take 31 children to the computer lab with 30 outdated computers. When Howard arrives at the lab, he is in luck. The network is working today! Then oops, 5 of the computers freeze unable to keep up with the software’s demands. 5 hands go up. With lightening speed Howard is able to get all the computers running. That’s when he remembers that the new student who speaks no English is not entered on the class list and is not able to use the software. Howard uses his own login to enter the child onto the program via the “preview” mode. This is probably good because the kid only speaks Swahili and the program is in English. We wouldn’t want to have his scores count against Howard and get him voted out of the classroom. (Though maybe out of the legislature might not be such a bad idea.)

it should be more money for teachers before anything else..they have students and families to feed too. How can we set by and piecemeal to a segment of society who invests so much into our greatest assests , our children. In a state that promotes intelligence, we are so ignorant in continuing the wrong thing! We can pay now or pay later as a good education can not be false manufactured. Quit being stingy!

Reading this line of comments is stunning. You would think that technology has been a waste of time and energy for anyone who uses it.

I don't know anything about his idea other then what was written in this story, but I for one would like more ideas about education on the table.

The current system delivers the same education quality that it did at a fraction of the price 20 years ago. Even after adjusting for inflation. We have great teachers who deserve to be paid better. But the only way we will ever be able to pay them what they are worth is to find ways to be more efficient with our education dollars. Technology must be a significant part of that mix.

The state is doing some very good things, like the online high school. But we should investigate more and more options to improve the output of our public education system.

With this kind of force behind spending $40 million on software, it makes one ask "Who's selling the software, and who are they related to in the legislature?"

Buy all the software available, but don't expect my classroom set of Windows 98 computers to be able to run it.