LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCHOOL-IT Archives


SCHOOL-IT Archives

SCHOOL-IT Archives


SCHOOL-IT@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCHOOL-IT Home

SCHOOL-IT Home

SCHOOL-IT  December 2009

SCHOOL-IT December 2009

Subject:

Re: What version of Office are people using?

From:

Eric Hall <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

School Information Technology Discussion <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 9 Dec 2009 17:56:32 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (202 lines)

Likewise introducing software that may not be perfect in every aspect, or
that requires some re-learning and flexibility on the part of adults, or
that challenges us (within reason) to figure out how to make it do what we
want to. It is this type of learning through exploration, trial and error
that may lead us and our students to develop the skills necessary to adapt
to the technologies they will use in the workplace: technologies that we can
barely imagine now!

Within reason: few of us (particularly busy teachers) have sufficient time
and energy for extensive trial-and-error learning.

Eric


on 12/9/09 4:15 PM, Stephen Barner wrote:

> The argument "We need to teach the programs the students will be using"
> tends to feed the monopoly. We have long said that we should be teaching
> skills, not software.  While it's hard to do that completely, in
> practice, it's an excellent goal to keep in mind.  We make assumptions
> as educators about what students will be running into when they enter
> the business world that are not necessarily valid.  For decades, I have
> heard drafting teachers say that they need to be teaching AutoCAD, as
> that is the software students will be using in the workforce.  Yet I
> have spoken with many architects and designers who use other software.
> There are lots of other CAD software companies out there; who are they
> selling to, if everyone is using AutoCAD? Ditto for Photoshop and any
> other piece of software.
>  
> I think the biggest factor in our choices of what software to use in our
> schools is what we feel most comfortable using.  That's not the best
> reason to select one program over another.  If we really want to be
> helping students become agile, unconstrained learners, we should
> consider teaching the software that is NOT the predominant in its field,
> instead of the other way around.
>  
> Steve Barner
> South Burlington High School
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: School Information Technology Discussion
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bryant Patten
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 1:11 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: What version of Office are people using?
> 
> 
> Discussion of the free (no cost) aspect of Open Source is mostly around
> saving dollars for school budgets by supplanting proprietary, for-fee
> software.  While saving $500 - $50,000 is important in this time of
> plummeting budgets, we rarely discuss the other, more important value of
> Free software - closing the Digital Divide.  Don Davis put together a
> nice video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZIs8lCzk5k ) about it.
> {The content is good - the compression is grim}
> 
> Until we can guarantee that each student has access to the software, can
> we (techs, teachers) fully integrate it into our curricular world?
> Since we can give away OpenOffice to every student (and provide
> refurbished Linux computers to any family without a computer), moving to
> a Open Office solution district wide would be a significant step to
> helping close the Divide.  We have to deal with the conversion costs and
> PD funds moving from 2003 -> 2007 anyway so spend the money on making
> the switch to a more equitable solution.  Shouldn't we be training them
> on software they can share with their 21st century skilled,
> project-based, internationally focused teammates?
> 
> Are there school systems in VT that promise to buy a copy of MS Office
> for every student that needs it?  Perhaps there are but I haven't heard
> of many.
> 
> Bryant Patten
> Technology Consultant
> Orange East Supervisory Union
> 
> On Dec 9, 2009, at 10:59 AM, Bob Wickberg wrote:
> 
> 
> It's only $5 a year if you use the license for 10 years, and
> only upgrade
> when support ends for the previous version.  Who does that?  If
> you buy
> new licenses every time a new version is released, it's more
> like $15-$20.
> Still a bargain, I suppose, but with 1100 computers on our
> campus, that's
> over $20k/yr.
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> Bob Wickberg
> Technology Coordinator
> Brattleboro Union High School District # 6
> 802-451-3418
> 
> School Information Technology Discussion
> <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> 
> 
> OO isnt the only option ZoHo, Abiword and Gnumeric.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Microsoft Office @ $50 each over 10 years of mainstream
> support, the
> 
> 
> costs 
> 
> 
> are miniscule compared to other costs to educate
> students. (I don't mean
> 
> 
> that 
> 
> 
> negatively, I mean it's a bargain).
> 
> 
> 
> Seems odd to me that given the salary/benefit costs of
> any given
> 
> 
> employee, 
> 
> 
> one would even think of quibling over $5/year for office
> software ...
> 
> 
> 
> There are hidden costs using OO, the first time that
> there is a issue
> 
> 
> with 
> 
> 
> conversion, and that file doesnt quite look right, how
> much payroll are
> 
> 
> you 
> 
> 
> going to burn through to get it resolved, how much
> payroll to get clipart
> 
> 
> 'good 
> 
> 
> enough' or rejigger your lesson plans ...
> 
> 
> 
> However, if OO provides some competition and MSFT
> therefore makes a
> 
> 
> better 
> 
> 
> product or sells it to us cheaper, so be it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> R.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> ______________________________________________________________
> This email may contain information protected under the Family
> Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) or the Health Insurance
> Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).  If this email contains
> confidential and/or privileged health or student information and you
> are not entitled to access such information under FERPA or HIPAA,
> federal regulations require that you destroy this email without
> reviewing it and you may not forward it to anyone.
> 
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, ClamAV and Bitdefender  and is
> believed to be clean.
> 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information protected under the Family Educational Rights and
Privacy Act. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender
by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the message.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager