BYOT vs 1:1- Will there always be a divide?

    While much discussion has been generated about BYOT creating a haves vs. have-nots situation in schools, hasn't there always been one when it comes to the tools students bring to school? Some students have easy access to new reams of paper, fancy writing utensils, index cards, poster boards, construction paper, etc. and there are plenty of students whose access to these supplies is limited. I cannot tell you the number of times I've had students who have shown up to class without basic supplies. Personally, I gave up on requiring students to create poster board presentations long ago when I realized it was not easy for all students to get a board from the office supply store or pharmacy. So when I hear arguments about mobile devices in the classroom creating a divide among the students, I cannot help but think that the divide has always been there, it's just that the technology is making it more apparent. Students also bring their own cultural capital, home lives, and other experiences to class with them, all of which are unequal, which means there is another divide in education that I'm not sure school will ever be able to bridge. It would be wonderful if schools could help equalize all those formative experiences for all students, but that is not possible. And while these various divides (supply divide, cultural capital divide, digital divide) certainly are the source of much frustration for teachers, it's certainly not a new frustration. The divides have been there all along, haven't they?

    How have teachers dealt with these divides? Well, they've found ways to make-do with the resources that are available. Looking on with a neighbor's textbook, sharing a pencil eraser, borrowing a pen- these are all daily occurrences in classrooms. Teachers design activities so students can submit projects in the form that works best for them. They also work to be understanding and create student groups that have a variety of strengths and weaknesses in them. I imagine they will continue to do these things in the classrooms of the future with digital devices, regardless of the model that becomes best practice. They have to, right? I mean, do we really think that technology can make life so equal in the classroom that teachers will be able to stop being flexible, accommodating, and resourceful? That notion seems farfetched to me.

    Here's where I run out of answers and just keep asking questions. I'm not going to take sides on 1:1 vs. BYOT. I see them both as difficult but worthwhile endeavors. But if divides have always been present in our classrooms regardless of whether our students' tools are digital or not, I wonder, is it the job of the school to work within the system of inequalities to ensure that all students learn (as a BYOT situation might suggest) OR, is it the job of schools to supply students with a single tool that will ensure all students have an equal playing field for success (as a decision to go 1:1 might suggest)? I don't know the answer to that question. Perhaps it is up to each school community to decide for itself. But if the latter is the truth (1:1), that all students should be given the same digital tool, what was it that stopped schools from supplying students with notebooks and pens (which are significantly less expensive than the kinds of digital devices deployed on a broad scale in 1:1 programs) all along? Why are so many schools so willing to spend all the money now to ensure equality of tools and they were not willing to do it before? 

    Furthermore, haven't BYO and 1:1 always been in conflict in education? It's generally accepted that students are supposed to bring their own disposables- supplies, paper, folders, binders, etc- and that the school is supposed to supply 1:1 access to textbooks. Has having 1:1 access to textbooks done anything to bridge the divides that have been long standing in education? Would those same inequalities persist if we required students to find and bring their own textbooks? Has requiring students to bring their own supplies done anything to exacerbate the divides in our classrooms? Would there still be divides if the school supplied all students with notebooks, paper, and pens? What is it about digital devices that brings these questions -of what schools should supply vs. what students should bring- to the surface now? Shouldn't we have been asking these questions all along?

    On the one hand, 1:1 represents a major opportunity to intervene and ensure true equality among students, at least from the standpoint of material goods. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that a student body equipped with the same device is going to all know how to use that device to the same level. I imagine there are plenty of students who struggle to use their 1:1 devices, and others who are experts with them. Is this not a major inequality between students that needs to be addressed?

   As for BYOT, are digital tools so powerful that some students will be at a complete disadvantage in our school system if they do not have a device or if they have a device that is less-than-stellar? Don't get me wrong, I believe in technology and feel it has tremendous power to transform our schools. But are schools doing wrong by students if they don't supply them all with equal learning tools? Arguably, they have not been giving equal learning tools for a long time, which is why I find some of these fears that BYOT will create some sort of new, digital divide, to be overstated. 

    I'm not really sure where to go with the rest of this post. I think the point I'm trying to make is that if we look at education solely through the lens of the tools students use and where they come from, we will forever struggle to find answers. While it is important to have access to digital tools so students can learn how to use such devices, we must remember that devices are not the reason we send children to school.