- 2003.10.09
I am not a Mac fanatic.
I prefer Macs. For many of the tasks I do, they suit me just fine. I
must use a PC for some tasks, because there is no Mac alternative. I
have no problem with that. Using the right tool for the job is logical
and prudent.
Of course, I've written many advocacy
articles about using Macs, which you can access here at Low End
Mac. I have my suspicions about the motivations of Michael Dell and
Bill Gates; but I have misgivings about Steve Jobs, too - none of whom
I've met personally, of course, or for that matter even seen at a
distance.
People who prefer Macs are often marginalized as "fanatics" who
cannot act for the common good because they are blinded by brand
loyalty, swayed by ad propaganda or outdated myths of Mac superiority,
and so on.
If I'm not a fanatic for Macs per se, why do I expend all this
effort? Why do the events in Pinellas
County make me disappointed and angry - and wonder if my own
district is moving in exactly the same direction? (At the moment we are
in a Mac-purchases-are-not-being-approved mode.)
There are exactly two reasons why I am a Mac advocate for
schools, and they are both necessary and sufficient to keep me that
way. Neither is sufficient to brand me to be a fanatic.
Diversity
Reason #1. Ever hear the phrase "Don't put all your eggs in one
basket?" There's a reason why people use this expression. If you put
all your eggs in one basket, you risk breaking them all at once.
If every computer ran Windows - every single one without exception -
then the right worm or virus or Trojan could bring them all to a halt.
Raise your hand if you were inconvenienced by the recent spate of
attacks.
Homogenous networks of computers are easier to compromise, because
if a flaw is found, they all share it, and it is unlikely that they can
all be patched or fixed before they are compromised. (As an aside I
think a similar argument can be used to advocate for colonizing other
planets post haste - just in case.)
I really believe computer operating systems are almost evolutionary
(in the biological sense). In a predator-prey simulation, if one group
becomes too numerous, other factors come into play such as disease or
starvation or lack of food, and eventually balance is restored. If the
world were all Macs, some flaw would cripple the world's networks and
by necessity drive the development of something like Windows. If all
but a few systems are Windows, then the very thing that makes Microsoft
successful - its ability to leverage its monopoly power - will create
the Achilles heel that provides opportunities for other operating
systems (such as Apple's or for the various flavors of Linux and Unix)
to succeed.
The monopoly chokes itself because, once established, it becomes
more expensive to deploy (Hello! That's
What A Monopoly Is For!) and maintain and eventually drives people
away for economic reasons. A monoculture of computers - even in a
school district - becomes more vulnerable to attack from a single
source. Innovation begins to slow down or cease in a monopoly because
the monopolist no longer needs to compete. They may innovate all day,
but when profit's at stake, creativity fades and bulk purchases rule -
else Michael Dell's life's work has been in vain.
I say this to you in all sincerity: Nothing less than the future
of computing is at stake.
We must support multiple platforms for the health of the industry as
a whole. We must.
For a robust computing-based economy, there must be competition or
the monopoly will die suddenly, like the dinosaurs did. A new version
of Linux will burst forth from India or China or the Netherlands or
somewhere in the U.S., and its user friendliness and robust nature and
low price will grow a market fast enough to make application
development profitable.
Our monolithic support of Windows will be our (Americans') undoing
if we are not careful; if we import our operating systems as well as
our hardware, what will there be left for our undereducated populace to
do?
Speaking of education....
Solutions
Reason #2. Dealing with schools specifically, there has never been
enough support for technology for most teachers to feel comfortable
using it in the myriad ways that are possible. The teacher is the first
line of defense for computer problems; the teacher must be the one who
decides how to use the software in the classroom; therefore the teacher
should assume the responsibility for the choice of tools to be used in
the classroom.
Forcing a particular platform, choice of software, or even a
textbook should not be done lightly or capriciously, as it was done in
Pinellas County. There should be input from all the stakeholders.
Despite the Superintendent's assumption that a change in platform
cannot be decided by committee and must be ordered in a sudden, top
down way (as was done in that unfortunate circumstance), there is more
at stake than just the financial state of the school or the convenience
to the IT department.
- I'm sorry if your efficiency and underfunding-obsessed budgetary
brain can't wrap itself around this concept, but it's true nonetheless.
I would rather have one Mac than three PCs in my classroom; that's a
cost savings for you. If you're really interested in savings you'll
take that one and run with it.
Now for a little parable that happens to be true.
When I was in college, I was involved in exactly one sit-in protest.
During this protest students attracted the attention of the local
press. News reporters from newspapers and television visited our campus
and interviewed the protesters. As editor of the college paper, I was
interviewed as well. I was asked if the students were sincere in their
complaint.
The complaint? Believe it or not, the complaint that prompted this
sit-in was triggered by a sudden reduction of library hours on Sunday
evenings.
Hard to believe, eh? But it was true. I told the reporters then that
the entire protest was not really about the library hours. The protest
was about students being removed from the decision-making process and
being made to feel as if their opinions were so unimportant that they
didn't even bear listening to.
Students felt as if the administrative decision was made without any
regard to the hardest working students who used every minute of time to
get work done on the weekend. The ones who put forth the greatest
effort were the ones who would be penalized the most (sort of like the
Mac fanatics in the PC school), and they were not only not asked, they
were told their opinion was irrelevant as the decision was a done
deal.
The decisions of administration have a direct impact on morale, on
the sense of a community of learners, that weighs heavily on our minds
no matter how trivial the issue seems from the top.
Sound familiar?
In district after district, individual administrators are making
these sorts of abrupt decisions and assuming that the Mac using staff
will simply give up, accepting the change as they accept the extra five
students they had compared to last year's class because the school is
overcrowded; as they accept the necessity of attending meetings beyond
contracted hours; as they accept relenting to pressure from
squeaky-wheel parents to magically make certain strategic students'
academic problems go away.
This is not the way to build an inspiring, mission-oriented school
environment. This is a way to add one more straw to the rickety camel's
back.
I don't know how I can say it any plainer than this.
The choice of computer platform and its associated software is a
curricular decision. Administration should not meddle any more than is
absolutely necessary with these decisions. I am not interested in being
convenient, conformist, or cheap. I am interested in doing the best job
I know how to do.
As I told one school board member, the administration's and the IT
department's job is to assist me. I do not assist them. It seems that
in some cases, administration (Mr. Pinellas County Superintendent, I'm
talking to you here) has forgotten that.
They can either help me, or they should get out of my way. Any other
point of view represents misplaced priorities.
Having said that, let me make myself quite clear.
- I am not a Mac fanatic.
- I am not a Mac fanatic.
- I am not a Mac fanatic.
I am an advocate of choice, of curriculum-driven,
teacher-controlled learning environments.
I decorate my classroom. I decide to use metrics and not English
units. I assign which problems to do for homework. Why should I want,
allow, or even tolerate someone telling me how to run my classroom
computing environment?
One last point.
I am not a Mac fanatic.
I am persuadable. I am, really. I've used Macs, PCs, and even
God-help-me Atari STs in the classroom. Given the choice of a room full
of PC hardware or nothing, I'd choose PCs.
So far, however, no one (no one) has presented me with a
compelling argument for me to switch from Macs to PCs. No one has even
tried. Is that because they believe I am so vested in my reputation
that I can't be persuaded, or because (insert ominous music here) my
opinion is simply irrelevant to the decision making process?
There may be plenty of reasons for the district to switch; some of
those may be legitimate. Some might not, such as the so-called savings from supporting one
platform (nobody has yet responded to the challenge to demonstrate
any cost savings from going Windows) or the ability to fire all the Mac
technicians and rely on existing staff to work on the increased numbers
of PCs. (Has that ever happened either?)
It could be I might even become an advocate for going all PC (Can
you believe such a thing? Heresy on a Mac site! Heresy I say!)
if and only if someone can convince me that these
districtwide reasons are more important than the curricular reasons
that drive my decisions. It's unlikely, but it's possible.
I call upon all the PC-using teachers and all so-called Mac fanatics
in every district - even if you have PCs at home or own Apple stock -
to consider your position carefully. You may claim that Apple computers
are easier to use; that may or may not be as true as it used to be, as
my own (now dated) analysis of the two
platforms began to show two years ago.
You may take the party line that students should use Windows at
school because that's what they'll use in business; but do you really
believe Windows will stay enough the same that the training they get in
school will be relevant in the slightest? I hardly think so, not with
the breakneck pace of innovation flowing from Redmond. Wouldn't you
rather have a student who was more versatile rather than a student who
only knows one way to do things?
Choice
I call upon all of you to consider this question: Do you want to
be a single-platform advocate or an advocate of teacher-driven
choice?
Sooner or later, someone downtown is going to make you make that
decision.
If I am not a Mac fanatic, what am I?
I am a choice fanatic. My choice is Mac. Your choice is
whatever it is, and more power to you. And from now on, every time
someone snickers at me when they sheepishly admit to my face they
prefer PCs, I'm going to point that out to them.
And now, one last question: What are you?
is a longtime Mac user. He was using digital sensors on Apple II computers in the 1980's and has networked computers in his classroom since before the internet existed. In 2006 he was selected at the California Computer Using Educator's teacher of the year. His students have used NASA space probes and regularly participate in piloting new materials for NASA. He is the author of two books and numerous articles and scientific papers. He currently teaches astronomy and physics in California, where he lives with his twin sons, Jony and Ben.< And there's still a Mac G3 in his classroom which finds occasional use.
