AN entry in any search engine should bring up information on the tablet called ‘Ecstasy’ — described as one which creates hallucinations, delusion, and a sense of euphoria. What an excellent metaphor for Minister Phillip Paulwell’s populist impending issuance of some 30,000 tablet computers, through the Ministry of Education, to students of the island’s 10 worst-performing high and primary schools.

I think Minister Paulwell’s portfolio should have been better designated as Minister of Grand (Un-thought-out) Announcements.

And he should, of course, be pleased that this new titling is equally as long as that of his present portfolio. Seriously, though, I am near certain that no due study has been done to determine whether use of these handy computers is the most effective method to ensure what is acknowledged as a genuine need for remedial action for students in these schools.

I can offer no professional opinion on the educational process, but strongly suspect that if the major reasons for underperformance in these schools is a basic weakness in these students’ reading and comprehension skills, then I must query how are they to be able to take productive advantage of the educational purports of these computers.

The current nonperforming students will no doubt develop dexterity in the use of the tablets themselves. But the issue really relates to application of these devices as teaching tools for basic subject areas.

For example, are the systems going to be speech-interactive in real time so that teachers can explain and assist these students individually in understanding the material being taught and to guide the learning process and provide reinforcement, which I believe is the proven course of remedial learning.

Individual attention must be crucial, especially with these short attention span children over whom teachers will have little management control outside the classroom hours to keep them focused.

Just how will these already overburdened tutors be able to apply this individual attention, even within the expanded “cyber” time space, especially to these mainly language-deficient students? And on the presumption that the programmes or applications will be essentially “generic”, then most of the educational material available from downloads, etc, will be in standard English.

Are we going to voice-over all the lessons into patois for these students to grasp what is supposedly being skilfully taught using such technology platforms? If the fundamental corrective need is for better rote, or alternative teaching techniques, then with no disrespect, there are enough less-expensive electronic gadgets and download apparatus, public TV, and school computer labs that should do the job through guidance and the forging of personal responsibility.

The latter is often the difference between the accomplishment standards of students, whether in the performing or non-performing schools. Frankly, if these tablets are to be distributed at all, then why not provide them as merit rewards to the high performers who can better utilise them.

What about their needs and the likely better bang for the buck, while we apply more tested remedial methods to accomplish the upgrades in the lowerperforming schools.

The fallacy (and imagery) that a student with a tablet computer will invariably equate to a performance upgrade is the same ‘ecstasy’ delusion as that of the earlier wholesale upgrade of junior secondary schools to high schools, or that of a ‘ductor with a uniform and badge. Kindly note that that assertion is not bigotry, it’s a fact.

Concern has also been expressed elsewhere regarding teacher-readiness to deal with the new hi-tech environment. The requisite training processes are bound to slow an already labouring curriculum delivery. Added to that is frequent equipment failure.

Plus, those with an inkling of the psychology of today’s children will also recognise that teachers who do not become proficient in the use of the device itself will get “dissed” by these youngsters, irrespective of how well they, as tutors, know the material being delivered.

This will invariably add to teachers’ gradual lessening of influence and authority over these students within the modern “autonomous” educational environment, similar to how TVs, computers, Internet, etc, took ‘parental control’ of our kids away from us. Some other medium will thus dictate to our impressionable young minds.

Then there is, of course, the issue of personal safety from criminal elements for the students in possession of these tablets to which the minister and other public officials have credibly given attention.

We’ll see. Next is the matter of the safeguards in terms of restricting the students’ use regarding access to undesirable material. I commute by public transportation, and I am a frequent user of the public library for Internet access.

From these two vantages, I have witnessed the excessive misuse of these hi-tech devices (phones, iPods included) by these youngsters, often with complete disregard to those around them.

Pen, pencils and books are being replaced by miniature hi-tech devices. And, like cybercrime, the control and punitive processes have lagged behind the actions of the perpetrators.

Currently, there is no system in place in the schools to allow for teachers/administrators to vet students’ thumb drives, flash cards, phone downloads, etc, as part of disciplinary procedure, so as to ensure that these students are not using such devices to access “child inappropriate” material and engage misconduct.

Is the purported blocking system capable enough to prevent these abuses, or will they be vulnerable to means of “hacking” and bypass? Adding these tablets, wholesale, is just another case of puss to butter, and horse before cart.

The minister and the general public must ensure, no, insist that the professed “blocking” technology can actually work before even one of these “ecstasy” tablets is distributed.

One final concern is that, as a regular user of the library, I have observed and questioned the high level of equipment turnover in these libraries.

Although well aware of the rate of equipment failure and the need to stay abreast with technology, I have also contemplated somewhat cynically, whether there are any undue beneficiaries to these frequent changeovers.

The Contractor General’s office and other oversight and prosecutorial agencies must, therefore, carefully investigate the supply and service contracts associated with the $1.2-billion provision for these tablets. With my concerns now expressed, I wish good luck to the Minister of Grand Announcements, given that he doesn’t first slip in the butter or trip over the cart. docwraythinktankup@gmail.com