Spartz_Matrix1

Matrix 1 – Progress of Schools May Also be Harming Sustainability

 Caption: The top left picture shows how kids listen to adults, top right: books and computers are two items that schools spend lots of money on to stay updated, middle: a kid on a computer just to show that kids are becoming used to technology in schools, bottom left: lots of waste is produced by the educational tools that schools get rid of.

Schools want to show progress to give their students the best education possible and to make their school district more appealing, but sometimes the attempts at progress cause unexpected side effects that will affect the future generations in a bad way. Kids are impressionable and the community can affect how children see the world. Ideally one would want positive reinforcement from schools. Most kids in the U.S. attend public schools (whether chosen or assigned) at 88.7%, but a good percentage of kids (11.3%) go to private schools (NCES 2010). Charter schools, private schools, and other independent schools have other sources of funding that may allow for new technologies to make them seem more appealing (Boland 2012).

Schools spend money upgrading textbooks, computers, and other resources. As of 1998, there were on average 6 students for every computer in schools (Anderson 4).They often attempt to do this to draw in more students into their systems. Urban schools want to keep up but often the proven programs of other schools don’t fit the dynamic of their system so they are doomed to fail (Elias 310). All schools need to adjust for what they need to give the students the education they need (Elias 312). Many schools need to make sure that when they plan for their new changes that everything is accounted for and can still be adjusted when problems arise (Elias 312). If they can’t then the programs become wasteful. Also the plans have to fit into the existing system. “It is both impossible and inappropriate to bring in all new resources” (Elias 313). Schools need to know the resources they have that work and what updates will fit in well to be able to provide students with a beneficial education. My school bought new textbooks every 7 years. They had computers for every 3 students along with 2 specialized computer labs that were only used for one or 2 classes a day. To provide us with the same education, much of that was unnecessary. Educated decisions have to be made so hasty and potentially wasteful situations don’t occur. Where historically schools are slow to make change, with the development of the internet, access to it occurred quite rapidly (within 5 years) (Anderson 10). This is daunting since it shows how quick schools are to jump on the band wagon. It is understandable since schools do need to educate students on how to use a computer since they are so integral to business these days, but caution does still need to exist so that unnecessary jumps won’t happen. It is also important that too many unnecessary jumps don’t occur since computers and books and other materials use valuable resources. The disposed computers can contribute many toxins like lead and mercury into the environment if not recycled carefully (How-to Geek). Overall, there are many concerns that must be carefully considered before projects are taken on.

To make these projects possible, large amounts of money were needed. Schools often generate projects like this to show funders as well as possible future students the potential of the school. It makes the school seem more attractive even if the projects don’t last longer than a couple of years (Elias 313). This can be problematic as it seems to propel wealthy school systems forward and certain other areas fall further behind thereby requiring more money to appear to reach the same level as other schools. High-poverty areas need newer facilities as well as better teachers who are better capable of teaching (Carey 4). Therefore according to Carey, it makes no sense for them to be getting the least amount of funding from the state. State policy makers are the ones who need to work on allocating money since it is clear that locally there is not enough money to do what has to be done (Carey 6). The communities with higher test scores tend to get more money which forces less fortunate communities to appear much worse. The communities that are already doing well demonstrate to students that they need the constant updates to stay on the curve as they get used to always needing the newest things; this doesn’t help the idea of kids becoming more materialistic.

Overall, the need for progress in schools doesn’t help with sustainable thought among future generations nor does it help prevent excessive use of non-renewable resources. Kids may be unintentionally becoming more materialistic as they are seeing that progress isn’t a bad thing so why not? The constant need for updates also contributes to the production of new equipment which uses limited resources which also creates a waste problem.

Works Cited Anderson, Ronald E., Amy Ronnkvist. “The Presence of Computers in American Schools.” Teaching, Learning, Computing: 1998 National Survey. June 1999. Boland, Maureen. “School Types: The difference between public, private, magnet, charter and more.” Babycenter. 2012. <[]>. Carey, Kevin. “The Funding Gap 2004: Many States Still Shortchange Low-Income and Minority Students.” The Education Trust. 2004. Elias, Maurice J., Joeseph E. Zins, Patricia A. Graczyk, Roger P. Weissberg. “Implementation, Sustainability, and Scaling Up of Social Emotional and Academic Innovations in Public Schools.” School Psychology Review 2003 Vol 32 No. 3 pg 303-319. “Fast Facts: Public school choice programs.” National Center for Education Statistics. 2010. < []>. “How to Dispose of Old Computers Responsibly.” How-to Geek. 2012. <[]>.

Matrix 1 Doc with Annotations: