Confessions of an Educational Heretic

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank, first and foremost, my wife and best friend, JeanneE Hand-Boniakowski. Thank you for your support over the past three years writing this book. Thank you for 20 years of mental, physical and spiritual stimulation, advice, proof reading, editing and companionship. That which I found too often missing from traditional education, engagement, discussion, debate, the search for meaning and activism was always available at home. Thanks Poncho.

I also wish to acknowledge my colleagues in the Burr and Burton Academy Mathematics Department. Isolated as they are in the “New World” of the Smith Center for Science Communications and Technology, they were audience to unsolicited progressive and radical news and views on a daily basis for the past 15 years.
I wish to express profound gratitude to the Vermont and national progressive movement and its activists for rejuvenating my spirit. These caring and dedicated people reaffirm my belief that there is more to life than worrying about security, establishing 401K plans and totaling one’s portfolio assets. A lucha continua.

© Jozef Hand-Boniakowski

Wells, Vermont
March 31, 2000
INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR EDUCATION:

TRANSFORMING A RURAL SECONDARY SCHOOL INTO THE INFORMATION AGE TOWARD TECHNOLOGICAL UBIQUITY

or

THE CONFESSIONS OF AN EDUCATIONAL HERETIC

Jozef Hand-Boniakowski

Dissertation under the direction of George Wolford, PhD
The phenomenon of the rapid growth of instructional technologies including computer and Internet usage has had a dramatic effect upon secondary school education in all geographic locations both urban and rural. Educational institutions are spending millions of dollars bringing the World Wide Web and other New Media technologies into the classroom.

Schools are being held more accountable for their effectiveness and quality of final product. They are undergoing a restructuring incorporating information technology alongside pedagogical reform.

Globalization and neo-liberalism through corporatization of education is reaching into education redefining how teachers instruct and how students learn. The drive toward technological ubiquity is being defined not without serious concern nor unintended consequences.

FINDINGS: Staff have mixed opinions as to the direction technology is taking education. Most worry about technology driving the curriculum rather than the other way around. Staff are open minded believing that time and perhaps, a new generation of teachers, will lead to technological ubiquity, though there exists an undercurrent of instructor skepticism across most academic fields, age groups, experience and education levels. Intense reaction to ubiquitous technology necessarily challenges status quo thinking asking serious and seldom asked questions. What is technological and/or computer ubiquity? How is it achieved? Minority voices, subdued by the rising tide of growing adherence to the ever-present techno-corporate-military-prison-industrial media complex are often those of educational heretics. These heretics are found in Burr and Burton Academy of Manchester, Vermont, a rural secondary high school who has completed the construction of a multi-million dollar technology and science building bringing unparalleled change to the school. Staff believe that in the end, technology is a tool like any other, to be used when warranted.

CHAPTER 1
Introduction

In the New York Times Op-Ed piece dated November 17, 1999, Thomas L. Friedman, writing in the Foreign Affairs column entitled, “Next, It’s E-ducation”, questions what comes next in the “E-revolution” (the computer-based electronic revolution). With E-mail and E-commerce “fully underway”, Friedman asks Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers the question, “What next?” Cisco systems manufactures the hardware routers that play a major role in making the Internet function. Chambers replies,

Education…The next big killer application for the Internet is going to be education. Education over the Internet is going to be so big it is going to make e-mail usage look like a rounding error… (Friedman)

Not only will E-ducation make everything that has thus far been done on the Internet appear insignificantly small “in terms of the Internet capacity it will consume” as Friedman puts it, but in terms of how it will revolutionize education itself.

At the turn of the millennium, the scientifically advanced and economically privileged nations of the world seem to produce one technological “revolution” after another. Like others before it, the digital revolution with all its inventions and innovation is changing the way people live, work and interact with each other. It comes to commerce early through the implementation of value exchange mechanisms. The digital revolution has finally come to education where its impact cannot be ignored. It is here to stay. Techno-educators and their supporters are often heard overusing the cliché, “Once education on the Internet takes off, it will for the most part make education as we know it obsolete.” This is a bold statement. Past inventions have elicited similar predictions. In the 1880s, the invention of the blackboard was called revolutionary creating a networked world that would truly change life, because its implications touch so many areas. (Schmidt)
Chiding. In 1995, Stanley Chodorow, Ph.D., provost of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, speaking at the 106^th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Colleges in Washington, D.C., chides educators, saying that they must take the electronic revolution seriously. Chodorow points to multimedia packages which will “drastically change traditional teaching and learning.” One statement Chodorow made is fast becoming a mantra for the educational-technologically enabled.
…faculty members' effective contact with students will not be bound by time and place; students can learn at their own paces in their preferred modes; and the distinction between elementary and advanced learning will be virtually impossible to maintain. (Chodorow)
Chodorow makes a good case for joining the techno-faithful in this newest manifestation of the continuing electronic age. Indeed, this author is in fact pursuing a personally preferred method of learning  working on a doctorate in information technology and distance education completely on-line. That being said and acknowledged, it is not, I believe, the electronic revolution that is making traditional instruction, teaching and learning obsolete by replacing the ancient way with a more efficient modern way. Rather, the consequences of that revolution have altered the learning dynamic.

Some educators contend that the typical arrangement of secondary and elementary schools in the United States today is already obsolete. Traditional primary and secondary education in the United States is based upon an agricultural era model of schooling. The traditional teacher dominates. The teacher dispenses while the learner receives. This model is anathema to many. Growing up in an electronic culture where fast, changing images are the norm, the lecture appears to have fallen into disfavor. Beyond the question of whether learners any longer possess the necessary stamina or desire to participate in lecture-based teaching is the dislike of school in general and the perception that it is “boring.”

I have been a teacher for over twenty-nine years. Half of my career has been on the secondary level. I come to the conclusion that students are today not well-equipped to maintain focus on a lesson delivered through an experienced human teacher using lecture as a method of delivery, even if the lesson is a good and interesting one.

Reserving judgment as to whether this state of affairs is good or whether it is a failure, it is nonetheless apparently true. It is not that the lecture as a method of instruction is outdated, rather, the ability to learn from it is  a consequence of an ever-changing virtual reality of ever-refreshing distractions. By virtue of their decreased faculties of aural concentration, learners today expect or require a pseudo entertainment environment while learning. Educators are asking, “Is technology replacing the learner’s ability to creatively think? Is a machine’s merely presenting subject material attracting attention merely because it is more entertaining than the teacher?”

Perhaps, a much more fundamental question is, are schools as we know them today, regardless of their educational philosophy or pedagogy, any longer needed? Lewis Perelman, a follower of technological trends for business and a former teacher states,

Current reform efforts are as if business leaders of the 1890s instead of investing in Ford and Delco and Goodyear, instead of lobbying for paved roads and traffic lights and parking lots, put millions of dollars into “business-stable partnerships,” “wrangler of the year” awards and “break-the-mold” horse breeding demonstrations.

As ridiculously shortsighted as this sounds, it accurately reflects how technologically blind the past decade's costly and futile education “reform” movement will appear to future historians. For a technological revolution is sweeping through the U.S. and world economies that is totally transforming the social role of teaching and learning. . . . In its aftermath, most of what now passes for education “reform” will appear as useful to economic security in the 1990s as the Maginot Line was to military security in the 1940s. Lewis J. Perelman, School's Out (New York: Avon Books, 1992), p. 20 (Bunday)
After teaching for three decades, I find it difficult to ignore that schools are oppressive by the very nature of the way they are set up. A traditional delivery approach contains an element of herding and control that is less and less useful toward achieving successful learning.
More Time. At the same time that many secondary schools are rushing to incorporate technology, they are replacing the instructional Carnegie unit of 45 minutes with the much longer block scheduling unit, typically 84 minutes. (See: Rethinking Instructional Time Frames and Technology) More and more time is available for instruction, but is less and less of it is actually being used for learning? Many of my BBA teaching colleagues are asking this question.

While computers and technology can easily fill the bigger time period with “hands on activity”, whether or not more learning takes place as a consequence is debatable and often difficult to assess. More computer time does contribute to student-technology interaction, but does that necessarily lead to better education, an increased knowledge base and the attainment of critical thinking skills, such as checking information or answers for reasonableness?

Mastering critical thinking skills fosters decision making ability. The ability to critically think requires the mastery of at least a rudimentary acknowledgment of subtleties that are an integral part of reaching conclusions and checking them for reasonableness. Many mathematics teachers would be quick to point out that calculators are a wonderful addition to the tools a learner has at their disposal to enhance learning. They will be just as quick to point out that for many they are a monumental impediment to learning, if not a complete roadblock to mathematics understanding if used as a substitute for good critical thinking skills.

In January 26, 2000, I attended a meeting of our BBA’s mathematics department and a representative of the Vermont Institute of Science and Mathematics Teachers (VISMT). The purpose of the meeting was discussing Vermont Standards based mathematics programs used throughout the state. It was stated that learners receive calculators very early on in their mathematics instruction. They receive them as early as the third grade. Computers are entering into the youngster's educational venue at a very early age as well. The question I asked is, “Does increased learner-machine interaction lead to mastery learning or even place a learner on the path to making it possible?” Coming as no surprise to the BBA mathematics department that question could not be answered. The best that could be said was that different researchers draw different conclusions.

Technology, aka computers and computer usage, like many other previous gifts of invention handed over to education, is billed as yet another ultimate in the plethora of learning-enhancing human devices. Is it? It might be.

I do not believe, however, that technology will ever replace the benefits of the instructor-student relationship and the face-to-face, give-and-take human dynamic. Instead, it will supplement it. The danger may be, however, that the rush to incorporate technology within instruction is further contributing to the inability of instructors and learners to have that relationship. Change itself is also a distraction.

Is it the school or the technology that hinders learning? Perhaps, another question needs to be asked instead. Is it the marriage between traditional school and technology contrary to the survival of the relationship between the two? Is this union doomed to divorce by virtue of their incompatibility? Are they antithetical and if so, to what degree?
Self-Education. There is a world-wide movement toward self-education, toward taking responsibility for one’s own learning (the author being a case-in-point using distance education and information technology in attaining his Ph.D. through Greenwich University). Home schoolers are part of this movement, of which there are one-million participants in the United States. Computer and Internet ubiquity, if achieved across socio-economic sectors in society, will further contribute to the probability of more self-education by the masses. Sometimes called “learning in freedom”, the movement espouses that “School is Dead” (Bunday)
In this Book. I take a look at Burr and Burton Academy (BBA), a rural New England High School in the small but well-off municipality of Manchester, Vermont. A picturesque town heavily involved in the tourism, skiing and the retail industry, its bicentennial marker located on the Village Greens boasts,
Born of Liberty

and Nurtured by the Freedom Loving

Hub for Wayfarers

Host to Generations

This Pleasant Land Among the Mountains

In a very short time BBA progressed from little information technology to achieving technology overload. Beginning with a single surreptitiously installed computer phone connection, BBA now has hundreds of networked computers, and specialized high-technology learning facilities. The school quickly went from computer illiteracy to incorporating and using the school-wide technology platform. It insisted that professional goals and responsibilities revolve around it.

In 1993, I arranged to have long distance Internet access from my small amateur radio office to my graduate school alma mater, Monmouth University of West Long Branch, NJ. The phone connection on the third floor of the Seminary building was not authorized. I simply parallel spliced an existing telephone line that ran near by. It was the only way to access the Internet at the time, and in DOS-based text format only. A long-time friend and amateur radio colleague, Dr. Jack Bronfeld, professor emeritus of Monmouth University became my on-line mentor.

By May, 1997, this line was replaced with a 256 Kilobaud frame relay line and the campus transformed through the addition of a seven-million dollar building incorporating much in the latest technology. Today (March 12, 2000), the entire multi-building campus is wired for multimedia access through a full T1 line providing broadband bandwidth. One student in my computer classes is setting up a Linux server which allows outside access to the Internet through twelve separate incoming dial-up phone lines.

Linux is a free computer operating system fast becoming an alternative to Microsoft Windows. Created by Linus Torvalds and others, the source code is freely available for download and modifications. Linux is a Unix-type operating system which “includes true multitasking, virtual memory, shared libraries, demand loading, proper memory management, TCP/IP networking, and other features consistent with Unix-type systems.” (Linux OnLine)

Bell Laboratories developed the Unix operating system beginning in 1969. Development was based upon creating a computer operating system which was “simple and elegant using, written in a high level language other than assembly language and allowed for re-use of code.” (Severance)

While BBA and other schools have taken a major step toward on-site universal access, the United States as a nation is far from achieving universal access. The disparity between groups is striking and is of concern. “Among families earning between $15,000 and $35,000 annually, more than 33 percent of whites own computers, compared with only 19 percent of African-Americans.” (Boyte)

Not only does the BBA technology platform offer everyone on-site access to the full spectrum of what is available on the Internet, it demands as much. Each classroom, student, teacher and staff member has access to full cable and satellite TV services as well as a MacIntosh publications studio with multiple workstations and a complete TV studio with digital editing and cable broadcasting capability.

I have been a faculty member at BBA for fifteen years and served as its first technology coordinator. Jeff Clemens fills the present BBA technology coordinator position. The position's salary is provided through an endowment fund made possible by a generous contribution of a benefactor who is the CEO of a multinational corporation within the communications industry.

In the beginning of the school’s technological revolution (if I may again use the phrase), a mere seven years ago, I was single-handedly involved with the Internet. Back then, the future promise of Internet computer usage by the masses suggesting a glorious technological future was a yet unrealized. I remember being impatient for the chance to use the Internet with my students. Today, I am not so certain; as the vision is clouded with uncertainty.

Monumental Change. This book is about monumental change. This change that takes place when a successful secondary educational institution develops, adopts and incorporates a technology platform for the first time. This book is about the continuation of change taking place in the education and lives of young people. Some suggest that the change is out human control.
When Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992, there were 50 Web pages worldwide. Today, there are more than 50 million. In 1992, e-commerce did not exist; this year, its retail level will reach $50 billion. (Boyt)
Monumental technological change layered upon television and video games has spawned a less attentive and focus-capable learning audience. Forty-five years ago, the average attention span of a first-grade student was 20 to 30 seconds. Today, that time span is greater than most adults are capable of attaining. (Jones) Some attribute the decrease in attention on television’s “technical events.” (Mander)

Technical events are incorporated by producers to make the physical act of staring at a box (TV or monitor) captivating and of some marketing interest. They consist of camera pans, zooms, angle changes, computer-generated objects, computer-generated morphing and quick camera switches at great frequency to recapture the viewer’s attention. (Kaufman) With increased viewing comes decreased attention span. Decreased attention span leads to shorter intervals between technical events, which in turn further decreases attention span and so on.

Within a virtual world inundated with technical events through television and now the Internet, teachers are asked, demanded to teach more effectively, being held accountable for an ever-increasing body of knowledge that their charges are supposed to possess. This accountability comes through the incorporation of a technology that in one sense services the shortened time-on-task abilities of learners while at the same time contributing to its ever decreasing interval.
Intention. I write this book in the hopes that others might learn from it, perhaps not making the same mistakes, perhaps improving upon, what a good rural Vermont secondary school has attempted and accomplished. This book is a documentation and discussion of a rural secondary school's journey into the intricacies of adopting a school-wide technology platform. It examines the building of an expandable network, training staff, faculty and students, raising questions and concerns, and reaching appropriate and meaningful conclusions. BBA has accomplished much in its attempts at implementing new instructional facilities and technologies for education. It's goal is to transform and integrate itself into the information age toward technological ubiquity.

That ubiquity presents problems which are at least as important, if not greater, than achieving the goal itself.

Questions. While Marshall McLuhan used the phrase, “the medium is the message”, few educators understand what he meant. Jerry Mander, a former marketing executive and author of Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, tears the “happy face off television” explaining that McLuhan believed “that program content may not be the only problem, or even the principal problem. The mere existence of television, he said, causes society to be organized in new ways.” (Beacham Radio)

This book is open-ended in the sense that it does not take technology and make of it either a saint or a villain. This work is also a catharsis of sorts as it serves as the confession and penance of a developing educational heretic. Written by a long-time cyberphile, I approach technology in the classroom and the world with a skepticism spawned over three decades in education and working in social justice movements . During that time, corporate-induced research has foisted trend upon trend onto education only to return back to the beginning of what over the ages have been traditional education concepts. Is reaching a state of technological ubiquity the next and newest manifestation of more of the same?

Purpose. This book attempts to present some very important questions about a multi-billion dollar fast-growing Internet-driven information industry, born out of the military-industrial-complex whose business is that of attaining excessive and ever-increasing excessive profits and control of information through any means possible.
Linchpin. Communications technology is the newest linchpin of global corporate expansion and the fastest growing contributor toward increased world commerce. Through the process of globalization, everything, including our minds, is fair game. In the late 20^th century, the information technology (IT) industry has successfully attached itself onto education, bringing the corporate mindset ever closer to its dream of reaching everyone, everywhere, from birth through death through the new convergence of media  a New Media of ever-present commercialism. This unrelenting exposure to things commercial cannot help but have an impact on our lives, how we live, work, learn and behave and who we are.

IT's affect upon us is related to how skilled, conscious and free our minds are in processing information input and separating it from the intent for which it is created. These skills are not readily or enthusiastically taught in the nation’s schools and far less so in school environments that expend tremendous resources, time and energy in technology adoption and implementation.

To say that schools fail to produce an informed, critically minded, democratic citizenry is to overlook the fact that schools were never intended for that purpose. Their mission is to turn out loyal subjects who do not challenge the existing corporate-dominated social order. That the school has pretty much fulfilled its system-establishing role is no accident. The educational system is both a purveyor of the dominant political culture and a product of it. (Parenti, History as Mystery p. 22)

While BBA has spent over $7-million implementing its New Media technology platform nothing has been spent on Media Literacy. Media Literacy's goals are to have students ask questions about what they read, hear and watch, for the purpose of disrupting “automatic and uncritical acceptance of factual information presented” and building “awareness of the levels of processing required for the effective comprehension and critical analysis of news and informational programming. ” (Hobbs)

Globalization. One cannot discuss New Media and Media Literacy without taking globalization into account. Globalization is often referred to as the process of extending neo-liberalism world-wide. I found it fascinating that the phrase “neo-liberalism” is seldom used in the United States. None of my colleagues that I have asked understood the meaning of term though few suggested that it had to do with a renewed emergence of the political liberal philosophy in this year 2000 presidential election year.

The term and concept, neo-liberalism, is well known outside North America. It is even more fascinating that this term is not prevalent within our society especially with the access that its citizens have to information. A thinking and inquisitive mind might question why this is so and speculate that there might be political reasons for its lack of use. There are perhaps, powers who benefit from a lack of people’s understanding?

I first came across the term neo-liberalism almost twenty-five years ago while listening to short-wave radio (often called world band) broadcasts from overseas stations. Although few people in the U.S. today are familiar with short-wave broadcasting it remains an inexpensive, independent (from corporate influence) means of alternative distance education (though not surprisingly often tainted by the prejudices of the broadcaster). Short-wave radio broadcasts are an excellent means of achieving distance education. They are free, readily available and interesting, offered from perspectives outside the confluence of domestic special interest groups and the listener's government influence.
Neo-liberalism. Neo-liberalism is an economic policy which has prevailed throughout the 19^th and early 20^th century, that espouses the rule of the market where price controls cease to exist, allowing the unfettered movement of capital, goods and services. Neo-liberalism prefers to cut expenditures for social services, reduce or eliminate government regulation, increase privatization and eliminate the concept of “the public good” or “community” replacing it with “individual responsibility.” (Martinez, Garcia) It is, thus, not surprising that IT and e-commerce have become the focus of intense and unprecedented corporate interest and involvement, with education as its new frontier.

New research, marketing strategies and interactive on-line services are targeting young people “to capture the loyalty and spending power of the 'lucrative cybertot category.' ” Disturbing world-wide practices include “invasion of children's privacy through solicitation of personal information and tracking of online computer use; and exploitation of vulnerable, young computer users through new unfair and deceptive forms of advertising.” (Center for Media Education)

Video images and audio, whether television or Internet, incessantly expose people to ever-decreasing intervals between technical events for the purpose of having us part with our money. It is sad to think that sleep offers the best and often the only respite from the domination of prepackaged corporate images. A new marketing twist is the Freefone.
Freefone is a new and innovative advertising media just hitting the market place. Providing free local telephone calls, Freefone acts as a public courtesy phone. These courtesy phones have the look and feel of pay phones, however, accept no coins. All local telephone calls are free, that’s right, ABSOLUTELY FREE! National and local advertisers sponsor each booth through the purchase of 8"x10", full colored advertisements placed in the interior of the stainless steel Freefone enclosure. (Freephone)
Some European countries offer phone service which is “free” where the catch is that both parties must individually listen to commercials before they can speak to each other. In the end, the consumer may be consumed, even the education consumer, the student, at their most vulnerable, while they are learning.

The globalization machinations of the Internet may create an overexposed populace of voyeurs who see much but can think little. Even sadder, there may come a time where the majority of people cannot imagine a world without ubiquitous information technology. Non-imagining is what ubiquity is all about. Such global ubiquity is today considered a desirable end. Time will tell. There are skeptics and many others who see dangers and raise valid concerns.

Promise of the Internet. For the moment, much expectation is centered around the promise of the Internet. E-ducation is just barely making its presence felt. It would be foolish not to entertain the possibility and prospects of positive outcomes for distance education through communications and information technology. The possibility and prospects are real enough. This book acknowledges as much. I believe that like other technologies before it, the Internet is a tool. Like any tool, its use for construction or destruction, human freedom and democracy or mind control, is determined by those who in the end own it. That need not be a select few, rich and powerful, but all of us.

One can hope that this human invention plays a leading role in helping to ameliorate some of the world’s more pressing problems. Knowing, however, that the Internet is becoming the domain of the rich and powerful should give one pause. Perhaps it is we, the people of a planet too long exploited by the greedy, who have the best hope of using computer technology appropriately through choice predicated on the belief that making the world a better place for people is a worthwhile endeavor.

CHAPTER II.

The Starting Gate
My high school students are incredulous when I tell them that I did not have access to a calculator until my senior year in college (Saint Peter's College, Jersey City, 1969). I tell them that color television was introduced while I was a senior in high school (1964) and not everyone had even black and white sets. I remember my homeroom teacher inquiring of our class whether any parent would be kind enough to loan a television set so that a manned space launch could be seen.
The point is whether they “could” afford them - a lot of folks who “could afford” just didn't want one. Compare that with today, when a TV in the home is an assumed necessity, not really perceived as a choice but as a needed thing. Television and telephones are two examples. Others (for many people, particular subcultures) include cell phones, certain clothes, dishwashers, CD players, etc. (Hand-Boniakowski, JeanneE)

By the time I get around to describing how I built my own personal computer through soldering every single component and device onto dozens of circuit boards, some begin to doubt my sincerity. I tell them that programs written in a crude version of BASIC were saved onto audio cassette tape or punched paper strips. I try to explain that in 1979 the only way anyone could obtain a decent (for the time) reasonably priced (around $600) dumb terminal (monitor) was to build one. Good commercially available monochrome terminals were available for around one-thousand dollars. The homebuilt (homebrew) monitor, when completed, served only as a yellow on black text display with no graphics capability and low resolution. My student's short attention spans further diminishes my “fairy tale” as it begins to dissipate.

“I remember those days well”, I plod on. I tell them about the Heath Company from Saint Joseph, Michigan, who for years produced “affordable” electronic kits (including television sets) for the enlightened and budget-minded consumer. I hear someone say, “Yeah right!” Known as Heathkits, these kits came with excellent construction instructions and educational manuals that earned Heath a reputation for continuing education in the electronic arena. What a novel idea, making the consumer a more educated human being while saving them money. It was, in fact, a very successful form of distance education for which Heath actually offered completion certification. It was non-traditional, learner-directed programmed instruction. It was highly successful in achieving its goal of instructing people to become knowledgeable in analog (DC and AC) and then digital electronics. Unlike today, the finished kit also cost less than a commercially manufactured product. The change in kit marketing philosophy itself is worth noting. Originally intended to teach a lesson, provide a valuable building experience and save money, today, a kit project is apt to be far more expensive than a fully assembled product.
Kits. I built what was to become the world’s most successful computer kit and terminal (of the time). Known as the Heath H8 and H9, the latter, I insistently continue my tale, required that the builder solder a switch for every key on the keyboard onto a circuit board, dozens of them, hundreds of microchips as well. (Appendix A) While I try to elucidate the concept of “homebrewing” (building) one’s computer equipment, the students are mumbling. One of them says, “Soldering. What’s that?” Another says, “You can’t do that. You need a factory to build a computer.” (Similarly, a student even questioned my integrity when I mentioned that a friend made his own beer. “No! You need a brewery for that.”)

My building experience with the Heath H8 and H9 and their excellent in-depth instructional manuals gave me a tremendous head start in 1979 in what we now consider to be the personal computer revolution. Now at the turn of the century I find myself acquiring an advanced alternative degree through Greenwich University’s on-line distance education doctoral program using a PC and small home network. with which I am intimately familiar. Greenwich University is located in Norfolk Island, Australia with U.S. headquarters in Hilo, Hawaii. My mentor and guide is Dr. George Wolford of the EarthNet Institute. He resides in Cotter, Arkansas. My research is done almost exclusively on the World Wide Wed (WWW) with interviews done rarely in person, often through email and occasionally through digitally recording off the telephone lines.

I was originally hired in 1985 to teach computer science at BBA and became the school's first technology coordinator. The reason I mention all of this is to reinforce the potential and success of alternative distance education programs such as Greenwich University, the impact of companies such as Heath, dedicated to personal improvement through independent learning through other than traditional means. I have taken but one formal computer course at an accredited institution of higher learning (that being an assembly language programming course at a New Jersey community college). Most of what I know about technology, my computer talents and skills, etc. have been acquired through personal desire and pursuit. Learning happens continuously and when least expected. It takes place when the student is ready to learn and it profoundly affects us for the rest of our lives.
Schools as Tools by Design. This book is about transforming a rural secondary school into the information age toward ubiquitous computing. Ubiquity turns out to be one of the buzz words heard often during the last months of twentieth century (as measured by those who see January 1, 2000 as the start of the twenty-first). What does the term actually mean? What does it imply? Does ubiquity offer a hidden agenda by those proposing and implementing the concept?

Michael Parenti, in his 1999 book, History as Mystery, documents North American education as “never intended” to “produce an informed, critically minded, democratic society.” History is typically taught through a process and textbook which subjugates the reader “to identify positively with just about everything that has happened in U.S. history”. (Parenti, p 16). Some history textbooks now come with interactive CD-ROM disks. It will not be long before New Media integrates the Internet into the curriculum as written by the corporations. Parenti makes a strong case for how reader subjugation is used to perpetuate a lack of critical thinking skills. With ubiquitous technology comes the attempt at ubiquitous subjugation. One example of particular personal interest typifies such subjugation. Parenti writes,

Along with textbook history we now have at least one CD-ROM disk that provides hours of video clips and audio narratives under the lofty title, “The History of the United States for Young People.” While no worse than many textbooks, the disk can be more insidious: A grisly image of human skulls appears on the screen and we are told of a North Vietnamese Communist advance into South Vietnam. The unproven association is clear. But the skulls quickly disappear when it is announced that President Nixon bombed Communist bases in Cambodia. With slick vision and slanted text, the CD reassures its youthful audiences that Washington warmongers during the Vietnam era were champions of peace and democracy. “Ironically,” writes Norman Solomon, “kids who use the glitzy history disk to learn about the war in Vietnam are encountering the same distortions that many of their parents and grandparents rejected three decades ago.” The disk is marketed by American Heritage magazine, owned by Forbes, Simon & Schuster, a subsidiary of the media giant Viacom, also had a hand in producing it. (Parenti, p 21.)

I clearly remember marching down Kennedy Boulevard from my alma mater, Saint Peter’s College, in the center of Jersey City, protesting the bombing of Cambodia the day before. The march came to a raucous ending when confronted by police. While “The History of the United States for Young People” CD offers its version of events I hardly expect it to place in objective terms the motivation of the demonstrators who saw the military actions in Southeast Asia as evil and who wanted to stop them. It should.

Like Other Schools. BBA is much like other secondary schools. It’s staff have a tendency to avoid controversy. Perhaps this is more true today, after the implementation of its campus-wide technology platform and construction of new communications and science facilities. Major contributors to the project over the past four years are corporate sponsors and CEOs of major corporations.

BBA’S staff is rich in experience on many topics. Yet, the opportunity for inviting in-house staff to guest lecture or team teach is not common. Thus, while BBA has a “Sixties” course, taught by an instructor too young to have participated in the decade of “revolution”, staff who were there are seldom asked to give a talk or presentation on their experience. BBA’s social studies department, like that of other schools, cover world political systems such as Nazism, capitalism, socialism, communism, etc. Instructors who are socialists are not often encouraged to express their knowledge, views or beliefs. The same can be said of staff who have extensive labor and unionizing organizing history, anti-nuclear, pro civil, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender rights activism or who have traveled to countries not within the neo-liberal sphere of influence, such as Cuba.

Many time periods in history lend themselves to inviting guest presenters with first-hand experience of current Cuban reality. Some that come to mind are the Spanish - American War, the impact of the Monroe Doctrine and the concept of Manifest Destiny or the U.S. Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. One would think that an in-house teacher with first-hand Cuba experience would be a sought after commodity.

In the 15 years that I have been at BBA I was invited to speak in other classes three times. The first was when I was asked to speak on the topic of nuclear power and weapons. The invitation came from a teacher whose contract was not being renewed. The second was a class instructed by the then new headmaster, Chuck Scranton, on the topic of Guantanamo Bay where I served in the US Navy during the Vietnam War era. That was before I went to non-occupied Cuba in 1997 with our then 15-year old daughter. The third and final time was when a social studies teacher who was retiring asked me to give a slide presentation and talk on that trip to Cuba.

There are other staff members who have colorful, noteworthy, valuable and often controversial life experience. There are fundamentalists, anarchists, Marxists, experts on Sacco and Vanzetti, local teachers with former intelligence experience, etc., who welcome the opportunity of addressing a class or group of young people. It is as if controversy is to be avoided at all costs. BBA is a private independent school acting in a public school capacity drawing its tuition from numerous town school budgets. This may be a mitigating factor. More likely, BBA teachers are like others across the nation. They are comfortable and wish not to rock the boat.

BBA is considered by the local and state community to be better than most schools. Unlike some schools it does not ban books, (though it does utilize the infamous Cyber Patrol screening software for inappropriate site access.) Commonly banned books include,

…the classic works of literature banned from schools over the years have been Shakespeare's Hamlet, Nathaniel Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter, and Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. An American Civil Liberties Union report lists among the most frequently banned or challenged books of 1997 R.L. Stine's Goosebumps series, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou, and Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger.

Will all the WWW sites pertaining to these books and their authors be banned? The point that I am trying to make is that schools and teachers who ignore quality in-house human scale resources are unlikely to go beyond the standard issue CD-ROM disks, textbooks and Internet websites of acceptable social studies (and other) corporate produced curricula.

Corporate Recognition. Many attempts have been made throughout the past twenty years to commercialize our primary and secondary schools. Up until recently, these attempts have been largely unsuccessful. Corporations gladly offer complimentary teaching aids such as books, book covers, posters, etc., with corporate logos prominently displayed. “For advertisers, high school provides one of the largest captive audiences in the nation.” (Wall).

While teaching seventh grade biological science at the Memorial School in Eatontown, NJ during the 1970s through the mid 80s, I recall receiving a three volume set of books intended to sit on my desk. The books included a dictionary, thesaurus and compilation of famous quotations. The back spine of each book had the letters “I”, “B” and “M” conspicuously facing the students in “appropriate” product logo placement . A little bit of masking tape solved this intrusive bit of free advertising. Unlike professional sports, education has resisted the temptation to cohabit with corporate largesse to the extent of adopting brand names for schools. While there is a Pepsi Arena, there is no Pepsi High School (yet).

A recent example of corporate commercialization of education and the attempt to tap the very lucrative reserves of influential young spenders — the students in the nation’s schools, is Channel One.
Channel One. Channel One is a “news” video program that is specifically targeted to teenagers in order “to improve students’ learning experience in school.” The equipment to receive Channel One is given to the schools for free, a not-so unusual occurrence in an age of ubiquitous product promotion and marketing. After all, it is easy enough to wander through large retail chain stores (and even small ones), peruse magazines and find “free” cellular telephones, pagers and small dish TV systems. The old adage, “If it’s too good to be true it probably is” applies, since such items are only “free” with a contract to use a particular service for a specified amount of time, since such items are only “free” with a contract to use a particular service for a specified amount of time..

Perhaps, ubiquitous technology and serendipity share similar characteristics? In December, 1999, I did research on Channel One. Unrelated, on February 4, 2000, Channel One blitzed the BBA staff with an invitation launching the “largest expansion since our 1990 inception, and the purpose of this letter is invite you to reserve a coveted place in the Network for Burr and Burton Academy today!” (Appendix B, C) The word “seminary” was taken out the school's name, being replaced by “academy” in August, 1999.

Channel One offers a satellite receiver, two video cassette recorders (VCR), and one 19-inch television free of charge to each classroom in a school system 6^th grade and above with a population of 23 students or more per classroom with a school total enrollment of over 300.

The arrangement is that students will watch a 12-minute program broadcast and distributed by satellite daily. There are ten minutes of news in each program with two minutes of advertising in the middle. Out of the 10 minutes, one-to-two minutes are real news while the rest is soft news featuring such topics as how Nike shoes are made. (Commercial Alert) It is highly unlikely that a soft news report Nike shoe manufacture would emphasize or even mention, the union busting sweatshop nature of “how Nike shoes are made. ”

Commercials are disguised as news and often begin as indistinguishable from the few and rare worthy news items. Commercial Alert of Washington DC reports,
Channel One doesn’t belong in schools because it conveys materialism and harmful messages to children, corrupts the integrity of schools and degrades the moral authority of schools and teachers, exploits schools and compulsory attendance laws to coerce schoolchildren to watch ads, and wastes school time and tax money.

Example. An example is the highly successful Channel One Skittles candy commercial. This ad has become the standard indoctrination guideline for reaching young people as they supposedly study. The Skittles commercial begins with a partial line of a newsworthy story and then,
“We interrupt this class for a temporary fun emergency -- for the next 30 seconds, think only fun thoughts.” A series of “fun thoughts” follows, such as, “Students in many foreign countries go to school on Saturday and Sunday -- suckers!”

The pitch is given. Sales of Skittles skyrocket. (Murray)

I asked my colleagues if they were familiar with Channel One. Many were not. Library staff were most likely to know about the company. A few veteran teachers recalled hearing or reading about Channel One. A few staff thought Channel One was an acceptable idea, a way through which hardware could be acquired and used for other purposes. Overall, skepticism generally prevailed.

Students who came from schools where Channel One is shown thought “it was cool.” They did not seem to mind that the purpose of the broadcast service was to get them to purchase things, to become good consumers plugging into the culture of buying.

Hearing. On May 20, 1999, a hearing was held on Channel One by the U.S. Senate Committee on Health Education, Labor and Pensions. The harmful effects of Channel One on children, schools and taxpayers received testimony from,
Ralph Nader, consumer advocate, Common Cause

Sen. Richard C. Shelby, Senator from Alabama

Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum

Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Media Ecology, New York University

and Director of Project on Media Ownership (PROMO)

Michael F. Jacobson, Ph.D., Executive Director, Center for Science in the

Public Interest

Casey M. “Buddy” Smith, Jr., Executive Assistant of American Family

Association

Roy F. Fox, Associate Professor of English Education & Literacy

William Hoynes, Associate Professor of Sociology, Vassar College

Jim Metrock, President, Obligation Inc.

Betsy Taylor, Executive Director, The Center for a New American Dream

Pat Ellis, Education Director, Obligation, Inc.

Henry Labalme, Executive Director of TV-Free America

Evidence for the effectiveness of Channel One in inculcating a materialistic commercialized message comes from the testimony of Ralph Nader citing a December 28, 1999 The New York Times article which reports that a single 30 second commercial on Channel One sells for $200,000. Nader also cites Forbes Magazine: Channel One last year earned $30 million on revenues of $70 million.” (Nader) Ubiquitous advertising masquerades as windfall ubiquitous technology.

On March 2, 2000, a broad coalition of progressive and conservative organizations and scholars launched a campaign to protect school children from Channel One. The goal of the coalition called to cut off advertising revenue and to remove it from the nation’s schools. The coalition uses eight arguments to make its case. They include compulsory attendance laws forcing students to watch advertising, wasting school time, bypassing parents in product approval, wasting tax dollars, harming children’s health, external control determining program content, undermining parental teaching of positive values, corrupting the integrity of public education and diminishing the moral authority of schools and teachers. (Appendix D) The opposition to Channel One is growing. (Commercial Alert) With the convergence of technology into the New Media there is concern that much Internet content may be heading toward a Channel One-like format.
Buy Nothing Day. Each November I suggest to my students and colleagues that they consider participating in Buy Nothing Day. Buy Nothing Day, the day after Thanksgiving is referred to as Black Friday, the biggest shopping day of the year. In response, I received comments such as, “Why would anyone want to do that?” “I can’t stop myself from shopping and buying things.” “What would that do to the economy?” “That is un-American.” Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving is so called because on this day many retail businesses go from being in the “red” to being in the black. It is the biggest shopping day of the year. (Vargas)

The Media Foundations’ magazine, Adbusters, which promotes “Buy Nothing Day”, and produces “uncommercials” such as TV Turnoff, The Product is You, G8 Ecocide, Bull in a China Shop, Autosaurus, and Obsession Fetish, tells it like they see it,

...The average North American consumes five times more than a Mexican, ten times more than a Chinese person, and thirty times more than a person from India…We are the most voracious consumers in the world...a world which could die because of the way we North Americans live...Give it a rest. November 26th is Buy Nothing Day.
Even with the appropriate capital resources, it is highly unlikely that any uncommercial will ever air on Channel One. Is not The Media Foundation’s paid for message at least as socially important as a Skittles ad? In the “free marketplace” of “free flowing information” in the New Media, just as in newspaper publishing, freedom of the press belongs to those who own one. (Leibling) While The New York Times prints, “All the news that’s fit to print”, Granma, the official newspaper of Cuba (to take an opposite extreme) prints “All the news that’s not fit to print.” Corporate commercially generated news hot off the press, TV and computer screens is thrust at learners while alternate and often relevant and important points of view, though readily accessible and available, remain in obscurity. Perhaps there is a powerful and hidden agenda in our nation’s schools?

The above described culture jammer's uncommercial,

…spot was produced by The Media Foundation's social marketing arm, PowerShift. The Media Foundation bought airtime on CNN last year with a potential viewing audience of one million people. However continued attempts to buy airtime on NBC, CBS and ABC have been rejected... (Adbusters)

A Peek. Taking a chance I took a student to the Channel One Homepage located at http://www.channelone.com. There, at the prominent top of the page was a large animated advertisement which switched from, “Be a cooler snacker” to “Don’t let your social life crumble” to “Click here to read cool advice from the Pringles Guide to Social Snacking.” Potato chips and junk food to the rescue from the social anxiety of adolescence.

Interspersed between a few worthy bits of information are links to more of the same marketing. The top link called “News” asks, “Poll: Would you rather shop on-line or at the mall?” Under “Pop Smart”, we find, “Learn music, make stuff, get gift ideas for the holidays – You Do!”. Under “Games and Contest”, there is, “What’s your dream? Tells us and you can win a $25 giftcard.” (ChannelOne.com)

Students who “buy into” Channel One can join the corporate E-club. Just in case you were thinking that Channel One is not successful, consider what their ChannelOne.com chat room homepage states,
ChannelOne.com is part of the Channel One Network, a PRIMEDIA Inc. company. The Channel One Network is a learning community of 12,000 American middle, junior and high schools representing over 8 million students and 400,000 educators.

Incidentally, the top of the ChannelOne.com homepage has another changing ad which flips (at the time of this writing) every second or so from, “Worth every crunch”, to, “Once you POP…Pringles you can’t stop.”

No VHF TV Channel One. In the course of asking colleagues about Channel One many have asked why there is no “real” channel one on television? The question itself offers some hope in a country increasingly uninterested in spending the time researching answers and more inclined in unquestionably believing that which is presented through the video media. Broadcast Channel 1’s absence offers a glimpse into the powerful emergence of the television industry.

At the 1939 World’s Fair in Seattle, Washington, television made its debut. The radio spectrum (which television is a part of) was a resource just beginning to be recognized as prime corporate real estate (even though the airwaves and other natural resources technically belong to the people). The president of the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) at that time, David Sarnoff, was pushing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to hand over enough spectrum space to allow the existence of three major television networks that would reach most of the people.

The chairman of the FCC, James Fly, recognized that television signals took up much more precious radio spectrum space than the typical frequency modulated (FM) voice signals. Being upset with Sarnoff’s insistence on a speedy frequency handover, Fly resisted by giving away a portion of RCA’s cherished television spectrum to FM broadcasters. Thus, RCA’s channel 1 disappeared and became part of the now familiar 88 – 109 MHz radio FM broadcast band. The further demand by both services entangled frequencies. That is why today there are television voice signals below and above the standard FM broadcast band. (Holmes) Perhaps, no other electronic telecommunications product has achieved ubiquity as universally as television. There exist more television sets in the world than telephones. (Peters)

With Channel One (which BBA to its credit does not have), a full-complement of available TV cable and satellite access, the Internet and high speed access providing unlimited video, one would be remiss not to ponder over what future ubiquity variants are being designed, and for what purpose? BBA and other education institutions rush toward ubiquitous computing. Is ubiquitous computing a buzz-phrase, a hand-me down from the corporate world that has another version of the same old agenda? As of BBA as of February, 2000, the phrase “ubiquitous computing” could often be heard when conversing about technology. As chairs of various academic departments have put it, “That is a very popular phrase with the administration.”

What is It?. Ubiquitous computing is sometimes referred to as the third wave of computing. The first wave revolved around many people using large mainframe computers. The second wave may be considered the current state of affairs, that is, many computers on many desktops used by many people in an atmosphere where the machine is seen as something to be mastered.

In the second wave, computers are tucked in a corner, on a desk or otherwise mysteriously and powerfully doing their thing “over there.” Ubiquitous computing is the next step where the technology, like that of the telephone and television, is not noticed, but, rather, just used. Mark Weiser, the creator of ubiquitous computing writes,

Next comes ubiquitous computing, or the age of calm technology, when technology recedes into the background of our lives. Alan Kay of Apple calls this “Third Paradigm” computing.
Ubiquitous computing has as its goal the enhancing computer use by making many computers available throughout the physical environment, but making them effectively invisible to the user. A number of researchers around the world are now working in the ubiquitous computing framework. Their work impacts all areas of computer science, including hardware components (e.g. chips), network protocols, interaction substrates (e.g. software for screens and pens), applications, privacy, and computational methods.

Achieving ubiquity, a reasonable and desirable goal for technology, has an aspect or air of credulity riding along with its projected benevolence and beneficence. The amazement of computing machinery creates a populace, believing and trusting of the visual, with a tendency of skepticism toward other forms of presentation.

Information when presented in video format exploits the authority of one's eyes — vision being a sense that we are wired internally to trust. Vision is a legacy of evolution which has a significant human history of being fooled and exploited; part of the ease with which the fooling can happen is because of the writing we have that gives visual feeds (and I mean biology here) such authority. When we “see” something it is unlikely that we question or test the something. Critical thinking is often counter-intuitive. (Hand-Boniakowski, JeanneE)
I had an experience last year when talking with a student who refused to accept the fact that a friend of mine makes his own beer. “Whaaaaaat! You can’t do that.” Beer is made out there in a brewery, somewhere, but not by people like you and your friend. Beer can be brewed, but, you can't brew it. This young man was completely convinced that I was making the home brewing story up. The final straw came when I told him that my friend mixed the ingredients for his beer in the bathtub.

Learner video credulity without questioning is becoming more and more common. Experience during three decades of teaching suggests that non-video oriented presentation of information has developed a higher likelihood of being questioned. That which is presented through the popular media is more routinely accepted as real or true than that presented by live authority figures such as teachers. “As seen on TV” is a successful strategy. Soon, “as seen on TV” and “as seen on the Internet” will be indistinguishable.

There are many reasons for increased unquestioning visual credulity. Among them are an academic irreverence toward science which started in the 1970s. (Flynt). Other factors include fast action video presentation of information, the advent of docudrama, news as entertainment, and entertainment as reality.
Does a docudrama, where the facticity of the particulars is judged in terms of the realism of the whole, qualify as information? If we use it in an educated way with intelligent minds, does it help us set the social agenda? Does it inform the public order? (Payne)
As schools bring computer and technological ubiquity to fruition at lower and lower education levels, an institutionalized ubiquitous video credulity may become the norm. If, as conversations with my colleagues suggest, there is a problem with students today thinking less for themselves then what will happen when computers become so common, so ingrained everywhere into our society that existing without them no longer even elicits a passing thought. One result of successful computing ubiquity may be akin to the extension of the calculator syndrome. That is, students often trust the answer that a calculator gives without understanding, questioning or reviewing it. Similarly, testing New Media information for reasonableness or sense may become a practice seldom pursued and seen as having little merit.