Weigh in on the second draft of the 2016 ISTE Standards for Students. Share your perspective and help by gathering feedback from your students. Contact refresh project manager Sarah Stoeckl, for a student feedback packet. Hurry! Comment period closes March 31.
Statement from ISTE CEO Brian Lewis on release of President Obama’s budget
Urges Congress to increase funding for Every Student Succeeds Act Title IV
Washington, D.C. – February 9, 2016 – Statement from Brian Lewis, CEO of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE®):
“We’re truly disappointed in the White House’s decision to request fiscal year 2017 funding of only $500 million in the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) Title IV flexible block grant that supports, among other things, the effective use of ed tech.
“This figure falls well short – indeed, it’s less than one-third – of the Title IV authorization level Congress passed by an overwhelming majority and the President signed into law just two months ago. It’s particularly puzzling to ISTE, given the administration’s otherwise powerful education technology legacy.
“Title IV of ESSA is designed to encourage school districts to provide technology professional development to teachers, principals and administrators. But it will be of only limited effect with so little money allocated to it. Further, it will decrease the value of other crucial and much-needed investments, including the 2014 increase in the E-Rate program’s annual cap, and the President’s recent call to invest major dollars in a coding and computer science initiative.
“ISTE and its affiliates will work hard to convince Congress of the urgent need to provide greater funding for Title IV in its final FY17 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education Appropriations bill. Our children’s futures, and in fact our collective future, are too valuable to skimp now.”
From: Hilary Goldmann, ISTE Sr. Director Government Relations and Jon Bernstein, ISTE Policy Counsel
It’s good to see all of the interest in the Net Neutrality/Open Internet policy debate. Below is some background information about the current policy status. ISTE staff is working with the ISTE Public Policy and Advocacy Executive Committee to refine our position on this important issue and is not issuing a public statement at this time. Please feel free to share your thoughts and opinions with us as we move forward on crafting ISTE’s messaging, email@example.com . Here is a link to Chairman Wheeler’s most recent blog post on the Open Internet.
Please continue to use the new ISTE Advocacy Network as a resource for information on Net Neutrality and other policy issues, and check-out the Voices Carry blog for the latest information digital learning policy.
ISTE Net Neutrality Backgrounder
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced that on May 15, at its Open Public Meeting, it will consider and vote on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to seek public comment on revised net neutrality rules. These rules would govern the ability of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block transmission of particular online content or prioritize the transmission of particular online content over other content. This new NPRM responds to a 2014 federal court decision that struck down the FCC’s previous approved rules on this topic. The FCC is currently crafting the NPRM and no drafts are available to the public at this time.
Just the announcement of an upcoming NPRM has already stirred great interest and controversy. FCC Chairman Wheeler indicated that he is interested in exploring allowing ISPs to enter into agreements with content providers to provide faster levels of service—or a “fast lane” as long as those agreements are “commercially reasonable.” Supporters of the concept of a free and open Internet, where ISPs cannot favor certain digital content over other digital content, decried this proposal immediately. They claim it will favor large content providers who can afford to pay additional fees for faster speeds, like Google and Netflix, over smaller content providers, thereby disadvantaging smaller content companies and stifling innovation. Chairman Wheeler, for his part, suggests that the establishment of a fast lane that “degrades service…would be shut down.” This suggests that ISPs could not slow existing service speeds for a fast lane but that they might be able to create a fee-based service with speeds in excess of existing service.
In the education realm, it remains unclear how or if the FCC’s approval of “fast lanes” would impact schools. On the one hand, there is the possibility that schools might have to pay more to the large content providers as they pass along costs that arise from the “fast lanes.” Also, schools would likely receive content from smaller providers at speeds slower than content in the “fast lanes.” On the other hand, schools might receive a lot of content faster from large content providers and the additional costs to schools might be negligible or non-existent. It is also worth noting concerns raised that the increase costs of doing business online engendered by the rise of “fast lanes” could cause some small content providers to limit their offerings or close and others to never build new content. On this last point, Chairman Wheeler says: “If we get to a situation where arrival of the ‘next Google’ or the ‘next Amazon’ is being delayed or deterred, we will act as necessary using the full panoply of our authority.”
The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) supports efforts to ensure that the internet remains open as a source of content for schools, students and educators. The use of digital tools in the classroom is the new normal. Educators are incorporating online content to create personalized learning environments and engage students in project-based learning to prepare our students for college and career in the 21st century global—and digital—economy. As the FCC moves forward and considers new net neutrality regulations, it should evaluate the impact on schools and digital learning, including potentially higher costs and reduced digital offerings, of any proposals that it adopts.