Future Ready Schools

We are denying our teachers and students the tools they need to be successful.
That is educationally unsound and morally unacceptable
(Duncan, 2013, p. 7).
Technology is a quickly developing field that is proving to have major benefits to the
education of our students. From having access and exposure to instant learning to
collaboration, technology can provide students an engaging and authentic learning experience,
improving the traditional methods of teaching. Taking a step back and observing the world
around us, technology is practically built into our daily lives in and out of schools. We may be
using laptops, projectors, and/or SMART Boards in schools, but technologies, such as our
smartphones, coffee machines, and/or door alarms surround us. With technologies needed,
funding is needed as well with the hope of increasing the opportunities for all schools,
classrooms, teachers, and students the access and experiences with digital connectivity and
technological tools to succeed. As a result, how can we ensure that schools are future ready?
Getting High-Speed Internet to Schools
Getting High-Speed Internet to Schools looks more in depth between four different paths
schools can take to connect to the Internet. First, we need to understand the two types of
Internet connections: Wired and Wireless. Wired Internet connects through the use of fiber or
cables, creating faster and more reliable high-speed Internet because of fewer interferences.
Wireless Internet can connect through Fixed Wireless, Mobile Broadband, or Satellite Internet,
providing high-speed Internet over greater distances.
After examining the four approaches schools can use to connect to the Internet, various
factors must be considered in order to determine which approach is appropriate. With numerous
factors considered, the cost charged to schools providing high-speed Internet varies. Factors
include the following: number of devices connecting (new and existing), capacity and age of the
existing physical infrastructure, the type of area the school is located (urban, suburban, rural)
and geographic challenges, level of security needed, chosen Internet path, human capital costs,
and ongoing need for network monitoring and maintenance (Duncan & Culatta, 2014, pp. 3132).
As previously stated, the cost of the path established will vary. All four approaches for
connecting schools have their pros and cons, but one approach seems to demonstrate a higher
chance for positive outcomes, assuming the path is being established in schools with enough
funding for technologies: Schools Connect Through District to Commercial ISP (Internet Service
Provider).

Future Ready Schools

As the diagram above displays, the district/WAN (Wide Area Network) establishes a middle mile,
which is a centralized district connection to a backbone created by the Commercial ISP. This
approach to connect schools/LANs (Local Area Network) directly through the district/WAN to
access the Internet is beneficial in saving money because districts can negotiate lower costs by
purchasing Internet access on behalf of all schools in the district, resulting in large schools
being able to share the total cost and small schools affording cheaper rates. In addition, districts
have the power to purchase more bandwidth when needed. Another pro is the agreement on a
longer contract may result in the Commercial ISP supporting and funding the development of
the infrastructure (Duncan & Culatta, 2014, pp. 26-27). However, there are cons as well. Just
like any product that adds direct connection and convenience, costs can increase. In addition,
districts should highly consider paying for the establishment of multiple ISPs in order to help
reroute Internet traffic and issues is one ISP malfunctions, as well as a strong LAN to be able to
connect devices to the Internet through the school.
Before finalizing the list of products/services to purchase and the budgets, there should
be an alternative approach to connect schools to the Internet. Although just introduced and still
developing, connecting devices directly to ISPs may work. The approach discussed in the
previous section may not work for all schools, simply because they do not have the funds to
purchase that type of connection or the schools are located in areas that are geographically
challenging for Internet connection to reach. Therefore, directly connecting devices to ISPs
should be considered. This approach also supports the Federal Communications Commissions
(FCC) goal to close the Wi-Fi gap. From personal experience as a Summer Teaching Fellow in
local low-income communities in Rochester, New York, funding was very scarce and
technologies were minimal. As stated in Future Ready Schools: Building Technology
Infrastructure for Learning, In a country where we expect free Wi-Fi with our coffee, why
shouldnt we have it in our schools? Why wouldnt we have it available for our childrens

Future Ready Schools

education? (Duncan & Culatta, 2014, p. 8). This alternative approach can provide all students,
especially students who may not have access to the Internet outside of school the opportunities
to continue learning and exploring on the web in and out of school. If accessible, while students
are in school the devices they use will connect to the schools LAN. If not, students can connect
compatible devices to the Internet through an ISP using a mobile broadband in school and
importantly, outside of school. With this option, districts are not responsible for the costs of
maintaining a WAN or LAN. Solutions may not always be easy to determine, but solutions to
finding the best approach to providing students their right to experience and learn with Internet
access should be at the forefront of schools hopes and goals.
Getting High-Speed Internet Throughout Schools
High-speed Internet in your district becomes useful when it is available in all places
where teaching and learning are taking place (Duncan & Culatta, 2014, p. 35). We are aware
that having a wired connection to the Internet is more reliable and faster than wireless access.
However, wireless access throughout all learning spaces enables students and staff to have
the mobility and flexibility when engaging with learning devices, such as tablets, laptops, and
smartphones (Duncan & Culatta, 2014, p. 35). It is important to know that the establishment of
wireless access to high-speed Internet does not always run smoothly throughout schools. Even
with schools are able to get the speed they need for the Internet connection, they may face
challenges including, the internal wiring needs, the network requirements for phone usage,
configuring and managing networks, prioritizing traffic, and managing threats (Duncan &
Culatta, 2014, pp. 37-42).
The following explanations are based on my current school and the three most
significant challenges it may face if it was able to get the speed it needs for the Internet. The
first challenge my school may face would be determining the wiring needs. In order for students
and school personnel to connect to the established high-speed Internet, the internal cabling
must be working properly in order for there to be sufficient Internet signals. In addition to
inspecting the cabling, the material originally used to build the school is important. This school
was built in the 1920s and during this time, many buildings were constructed using mostly
concrete for its durability, lower cost, and lower maintenance level. Therefore, there may be
issues of determining where existing cables or new cables should be, as well as the possibility
of wireless signals being obstructed by concrete walls. This can be resolved with two solutions.
Acquire the original floor plan to see where cabling should be located and assistance from a
licensed electrical or telecommunications contractor would be needed because if the signal
must travel more than 300 feet, you will need to use fiber or add repeaters to strengthen the
signal. Cables designed to be run through drop ceilings (known as plenum cables) are subject
to special fire-safety standards for flammability and smoke density (Duncan & Culatta, 2014, p.
37). The second solution would be to determine how many wireless access points (AP) are
needed, where they should be installed, and how many devices will connect to each AP.
Another challenge in this school would be prioritizing traffic as there are school devices
and personal devices used on the network. In addition to the issues with the Internet connection
throughout the basement, the network can be overloaded with simultaneous requests and
information from numerous devices as well. Hence, a network should be segmented for security
and prioritizing access for different populations in the school. When using school-provided
devices, all students, teachers, administration, and other school personnel are connected to the
same network access, resulting in high traffic and slower Internet responses. Students and
teachers can be connecting to the same network access as they are constantly using the
Internet for instruction and learning. Administration should connect to another network access

Future Ready Schools

point allowing teachers and students prioritized access. Many school personnel and visitors may
connect their personal devices to the network and students are also allowed to bring and use
their own devices in school. Fortunately, there already is a Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)
network in place for personal devices to be connected to.
The third challenge my school may face is managing threats pursued by cyber thieves
and hackers. School networks can store valuable information and permissions, such as
personal data and paid for/licensed software that cybercriminals are interested in. With students
in a Kindergarten through twelfth grade school, school personnel, and guests accessing the
Internet, there is always a chance for threats. Segmenting the wireless network as suggested
above, can strengthen security in addition to investing in a strong and trustworthy network
security system. According to Duncan and Culatta, Helping everyone in your district understand
the basic cybersecurity practices will reduce risky behavior where data are concerned (2014, p.
42).

Getting Devices to Students and Teachers

School-funded 1:1, family-funded BYOD, or dual-funded BYOD programs are helping to
increase the incorporation of technologies in students learning today. The school-funded 1:1
program provides each student with a device to use in school, while the family-funded BYOD
requires students to bring in their own device, not paid for by schools. Best Buy Education
recently introduced the dual-funded BYOD splitting the cost of devices between schools and
families. Schools research and provide a list of approved and appropriate devices to families, still
giving students the autonomy to choose which device they want to not only purchase, but to use
and keep. Devices that must be shared by many students or accessed only in designated
computer labs limit the ability of students to engage in ongoing collaboration and of teachers to
use high-quality digital learning materials. Students who do not have their own devices may not
have access to the same level of personalized learning that enables students to learn through
practices best suited to their needs and related to their interests and experiences (Duncan &
Culatta, 2014, p. 44). Keeping these factors in mind, which program would your school adopt?
According to Duncan and Culatta, more school districts are adopting web-based
productivity tools and digital content for teaching and learning...decrease paper usage, make
teacher time more efficient, and enable students and teachers to access learning materials at any
time of day (2014, p. 44). My school recently began developing a computer science curriculum,
beginning with coding as part of the required annual curriculum for elementary students. Prior to
some of my experiences and research, I believed that a tablet, such as a Microsoft Surface or
iPad with an attachable keyboard would be the best device to purchase if given a directive to
standardize devices across the school district. When considering tablets for students to learn
with, a focus was placed more on convenience and the simple navigation of the touch screen,
rather than evaluating these devices on how responsive and usable devices and software are in
helping students and teachers complete various tasks (Duncan & Culatta, 2014, p. 45). After
further research and thought, tablets may not be the most effective standardized devices because
many applications accessible on laptops/computers are not yet compatible for tablets. Many
tablets also cannot download programs, such as Flash, which is needed to run and view various
programs and videos.
After these considerations and factoring in the cost and functionality of devices, the
device that would be best to purchase for students is a Chromebook. Chromebooks are not only
portable, have a battery life of nine to eleven hours, and have an established security software,
but they have a built-in keyboard and are able to access Android applications, G-Suite, Google

Future Ready Schools

Chrome applications, extensions, and add-ons, which many schools are beginning to teach and
expose their students to. The availability of assistive applications found in the Google Chrome
Store make engagement, participation, and learning for all students more accessible.
Chromebooks are also more affordable starting at just under $300 each with an easier process to
either repair or replace if necessary. However, a primary downside of having Chromebooks is
that they are primarily web-based. This means that users cannot work offline, as when they are
working on Mac or Windows. All applications downloaded are kept in Chrome and work
completed is saved in the Google Cloud. As a result for work to be saved and for the majority of
applications to work properly, the Chromebooks must be connected to an Internet connection,
which limits where users can work and the types of programs and applications they can use on
their Chromebooks.
Based on research and personal experiences and beliefs, a 1-to-1 initiative should be
implemented over a BYOD program. A 1-to-1 initiative places all students on an equal playing
field by learning with and using the same devices. Whereas, a BYOD program requires students
to bring their own devices. This presents a possible issue of noticing students who may not have
the financial access to their own device outside of school. Educators would also have to adapt
their instructions for all different devices if students need assistance, which can cause more
confusion and a waste of instructional time. However, comparing the 1-to-1 initiative to the
BYOD program, the 1-to-1 initiative does not offer students the autonomy to select which device
they want to explore and use to learn with. This may deter students interest and engagement if
the chosen devices are not effective, age-appropriate, updated, etc.
Responsible Use, Privacy, and Other Considerations

Rankings

Essential
Considerations

Reasoning

Protecting Privacy

The right to privacy is a Constitutional Amendment. Personal data

is constantly collected over the network, including contact
information, progress reports, and track record of the websites
they are accessing. Without the establishment of laws protecting
our privacy, our autonomy and individuality could possibly be
compromised.

Responsible Use &

Digital Citizenship

Teaching students how to be responsible and safe while using the

Internet can prevent them from possible harm. Teaching students
beginning in school can prepare students to safely surf the web
without 24/7 adult supervision. Understanding how to be a
responsible digital citizen can reduce the chances of a
cybercriminal invading students privacy.

Device
Management

In order for devices to continue working properly, their software,

security, and settings must be up-to-date. Managing devices not
only keeps them running healthily, but can prevent students from
exploring inappropriate sites and keep them safe. However, it must
be determined when too much management of devices and the

(1=Most
Important)

Future Ready Schools

6
network interferes with students freedom to explore and
customize their experiences.

Safeguarding
Against
Inappropriate
Content

Through filtering and blocking, schools can protect students from

exposure to inappropriate content. However, valuable educational
sites may be simultaneously blocked by accident. Just like
teaching students the value of being digital citizens, teaching them
to be responsible Internet users helps students learn how to make
responsible judgments.

Policies for Lost or

Damaged Devices

Policies developed for this area are still significant, but the least
important out of the rest. The expectation of students caring,
respecting, and being responsible with their devices must be
discussed. These expectations should be least important to
emphasize because students should treat all their belongings and
individuals around them with the same respect, care, and
responsible behaviors as they should with their devices.

Reflection
After reading and reflecting on the reading and my own comprehension, I found the
section titled Getting High-Speed Internet to Schools was most educational because of the
specific terms and acronyms explained. I spent most of my time reading this section because of
the suttle, yet major differences between how Internet networks are connected and accessed. I
was able to learn how each of the four approaches worked and what types of school districts they
may work best for, in addition to reflecting on which approach would be most appropriate for my
current school. I do want to note that Getting Devices to Students and Teachers was beneficial to
my understanding as a student and teacher as well because the educational tools revolved around
the students. The needs of the students were considered before I reflected on whether the 1-to-1
initiative or the BYOD program was more beneficial. The hope is for not just students in school
districts with sufficient funding to have access to the Internet and educational technologies, but
for all students in all corners of the world to have access.

Nicholas Wang