BASIS is tech lite. Most MS work is done on paper.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I would worry that the tech-free school would have no differentiation. I am aware that screen-free differentiation is possible, but it is harder without more resources (specifically, additional teachers/coaches/support staff), almost never happens and screens definitely make it much easier. As a result, I think a tech-free school would end up losing high achieving kids once their parents realized what was happening (1st/2nd).

100% agree. Screen-free is a cute fantasy of preschool mommies who haven't thought it through.

“Differentiation by computerized curriculum” is a grift perpetuated by ed tech companies. Just wait til your kid gets to MS.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I would worry that the tech-free school would have no differentiation. I am aware that screen-free differentiation is possible, but it is harder without more resources (specifically, additional teachers/coaches/support staff), almost never happens and screens definitely make it much easier. As a result, I think a tech-free school would end up losing high achieving kids once their parents realized what was happening (1st/2nd).

And that would be a poor choice. I’d rather have my kid “undifferentiated” than stuck in front of a computer. Plus there are ways to differentiate without computers.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I would worry that the tech-free school would have no differentiation. I am aware that screen-free differentiation is possible, but it is harder without more resources (specifically, additional teachers/coaches/support staff), almost never happens and screens definitely make it much easier. As a result, I think a tech-free school would end up losing high achieving kids once their parents realized what was happening (1st/2nd).

100% agree. Screen-free is a cute fantasy of preschool mommies who haven't thought it through.

^^ This comment is referring to a charter or DCPS; obviously St. Anslem's is in an entirely different position resources-wise and I wouldn't be concerned that they couldn't differentiate (although actually many privates do surprisingly little by choice).

Honestly, I would worry that the tech-free school would have no differentiation. I am aware that screen-free differentiation is possible, but it is harder without more resources (specifically, additional teachers/coaches/support staff), almost never happens and screens definitely make it much easier. As a result, I think a tech-free school would end up losing high achieving kids once their parents realized what was happening (1st/2nd).

From what I gathered, they can type up their essays on the computer, but all the teaching is done without screens and with actual textbooks. Not sure about research - they might have a computer lab or something. I was too excited to ask!

Anonymous wrote:It's one of the reasons we are considering St Anselm's middle school - they are totally tech free! I love that idea but instead of just one low-tech school, i'd vote for completely tech free PreK classes (not counting an occasional movie shown on big screen to the whole class), and extremely low tech for all grades up to 8.

They don’t even use computers for word processing or research? I don’t think schools need to be tech free but I would enroll my kid in a school that does not use computer apps for teaching or school work (other than the actual writing) in a second.

Anonymous wrote:I'm actually shocked that there isn't a tech-free or tech-lite charter already, outside of the Montessori schools. I agree that this seems like an obvious niche.

Feels like a lot of parents would love a school where there was a computer lab and no other screens. Kids in PK3-1st never go there, 2nd graders go for 30 mins once a week, and 3-5th graders go regularly, but less than an hour a day MAX would be awesome. Some access for typing/test prep, but nothing in the actual classroom.

It's not an obvious niche, because a lot of preschools are already low screen enough for most parents. And some parents are fine with screens and some want their children to be adept.

DC public schools are required to do testing on computers. That makes this idea unideal for them. They are judged heavily by these test results.

The charter school board is primarily concerned with managing the decline and closure of its low-performing and/or financially failing schools. Or concealing those issues by not publishing things. They haven't wanted to open any new schools in a long time.

I think you'll find many parents care less about that than you do. As your kids get older you may care less too. Not that it isn't important, but there are a lot of other very important concerns and reasons to choose a school. People's choice of ES/MS is heavily driven by academic performance and feeder pattern (and obviously those things are linked), and behavior and their own commute. People who care about low screen don't necessarily care enough to compromise the other factors.

Maybe you're thinking EOTP DCPS wants to attract more high income crunchy people who fret about this kind of thing. But you need to question that assumption.

It's one of the reasons we are considering St Anselm's middle school - they are totally tech free! I love that idea but instead of just one low-tech school, i'd vote for completely tech free PreK classes (not counting an occasional movie shown on big screen to the whole class), and extremely low tech for all grades up to 8.

I'm actually shocked that there isn't a tech-free or tech-lite charter already, outside of the Montessori schools. I agree that this seems like an obvious niche.

Feels like a lot of parents would love a school where there was a computer lab and no other screens. Kids in PK3-1st never go there, 2nd graders go for 30 mins once a week, and 3-5th graders go regularly, but less than an hour a day MAX would be awesome. Some access for typing/test prep, but nothing in the actual classroom.

I'm hearing from more and more parents that their ES or MS-age students are spending upward of 2 hours a day on 1:1 ed tech apps or some other form of (maybe less academic) screentime like watching videos. This isn't to say that there is no place for personalized/blended learning, learning how to type, learning how to code, etc. But outside of the Montessori elementaries, it seems like there are not good options anywhere in the city for parents who prefer less screentime, per an earlier thread on this topic.

I am not posting this to have a debate about screens/tech use in schools, but more to say that if we are a city that values choice and different models, I could see a real market for a PK-8 school or an ES or MS that is low-tech/tech-lite by design. Screens might be great for some kids, but not for others. This would in particular be my advice for DCPS trying to increase enrollment at an EOTP education campus, ES or MS in a racially diverse neighborhood.

Thoughts? Pipe dream? Or maybe if hard for DCPS to execute something like this, an existing charter stand-alone or network should try it.