Talk:One-to-one computing

List of possible sources This list and layout was compiled in 2007: so before the iPads and Chromebooks phases. Yoasties (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Results in Maine after 2 years

Edutopia article

Schools doing one-to-one - Resources

replacing books with laptops article

eSchool News article

OLPC - Program to get one laptop per child in third world countries

NY Times article about problems with one-to-one

US Depatment of Ed information

MrRyanH 16:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Possible Outline

 What is One to One Computing Why do it - Benefits Risks/Concerns Costs Suppliers Experiences Recommendations  <li>Parental controls</li> <li>iTeams (technical support BY students)</li> </ol> <li>One-to-one teaching strategies</li> <li>Summarized list of who is doing it now</li> </ol>

MrRyanH 16:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

For 2007 it was a good suggestion, but in those days the support and tech-admin loads were much higher. The success of the iPads was mainly started as stand-alone devices that were user-friendly and the availability of many stand-alone applications. At their peak they topped 50% of sales into USA/K12 classrooms, so they deserve separate mention. The rise of the Chromebooks came after and also deserves separate mention. Availability of general productivity apps (google-apps) that allowed collaboration, leading to inquiry based learning and a profound transformation in the way they teach. Yoasties (talk) 09:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Is It Correct?
I Want To Study True Green Anarchy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:7C02:EC00:68E0:2D90:AC35:1EAD (talk) 02:48, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Cleanup tag
It seems to me that this article repeatedly violates Wikipedia's manual of style, so I've added the cleanup rewrite template. I apologize if this article does not need cleanup. CampWood (talk) 23:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I would favour a rewrite that improves on this. I made many of the changes in 2017/2018 on the basis of;
 * red research and the one to one institute.
 * The NY-Times may 2017 article about the googlification of education (rapid growth of Chromebooks )
 * Futuresource-consulting's reports on sales of devices into the schools in the USA. up to 58% chromebooks at the start of 2017 and the growth slowing to 59.6% in Q3.
 * Some real-world examples.
 * Then a structured approach to take a sample of schools and check their 1:1 status from their own published material.
 * A comparison of the schools that were mentioned in the 2007 NY Times article as having abandoned 1:1 and comparing it to what their status was now. This clarified that the 2007 doubts about 1:1 had not led to permanent abandonment. 10 years on uptake was back.
 * the netp site of the edtech section of the department of education.

The re-write should add more verifiable research sources as they become available. I have continued adding references from academic journals, besides the original publications by school districts and general sources.

Main problem remains that previous to 2010/2011 there was no great uptake of cloud-services in schools so the maintenance and support burden on teachers was greater and the data was often stored on the devices or LANs. Currently one can see universities choosing LMSs partly because they integrate with G-Drive, Onedrive etc. So educatonal institutions are increasingly aware that collaboration and storage are being used.

Costs and educational merits will remain intersting topics with occasional publications. Yoasties (talk) 20:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC) Does CampWood have more specific suggestions on what to improve?

I have started re-writing myself.

I started by imposing more headed structure to the original article. I will need to add some of the suggested other new headings.

I have added the phases/eras of 1:1 along the timeline of laptop, ipad, Chromebook because I have come across that distinction in many sources. This means I have had to alter the original more drastically since it was from the first era and therefore addresses points that have become viewed differently since. I hope these changes will not be seen as vandalism. The Boston College article in ditrictadministration, fo example clearly lists the disadvantages of old-style approaches. In 2013 the Boston College research published about 1:1 Chromebook implementations that no longer had those disadvantages. I will need to add some references here.

I will need to think about the clearest use of 1:1 examples. The Niche approach is clear (not randomly selected). The comparison between 2007 and 2017 can be referred to in the phasing/eras (It is a good and useful list). The individual schools/districts I originally chose can be put in a table, but I would prefer to add some logic to them. I could use the examples mentioned by red-research (they have a list of 10+). I could use districts used in example studies in journals. Clear feedback appreciated on this.

I Would like to know more about the effectiveness studies.

Yoasties (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Bare URL
About the https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:BURL&redirect=no and rot links, There are certain references from research papers that need rearrangement. SerhatSinan (talk) 04:56, 4 November 2021 (UTC)