1|Page
Monday, December 29, 2008
Virtualization Technology? K-12 Is Still in the 19th Century
Cathleen Norris & Elliot Soloway
Virtualization technologies are an innovation on fire; their effective use can save K-12 education serious
dollars. And there is no shortage of challenges to which those “found” funds can be applied!
A use of virtualization technologies that is particularly germane to K-12 is the creation of low-cost
“virtual student computers.” For example, a school can take its older desktop (or laptop) computers
that are only powerful enough to run say Windows 98, and actually run Windows Vista on them –
virtually. That is, an instance of Vista is actually running on a server that is connected to the older
desktop via the school’s local area network (LAN). To a student, he or she thinks that the older desktop
is running Vista “locally” but in reality, Vista (and the associated modern applications) is running
remotely on the server. In techie parlance, the older desktop is a “thin-client” that appears to have the
functionality of a “rich-client” – a new, powerful and, of course, expensive personal computer.
Using virtual student computers a school extends the life of older equipment – thereby saving money,
and it doesn’t need to buy “rich-clients” – it can buy new, but thin-client devices. But wait, there’s more!
By centralizing the computing at one location, tech support calls – and costs – are reduced since thinclients require less maintenance than rich-clients. ClassLink, Inc., NComputing, Inc., HP, Inc. provide
virtualization technologies to create virtual student computers that address the unique needs of K-12.
Virtualization technologies can be used to save money by turning physical servers into virtual services,
running many virtual services on one physical server, and in so doing eliminate many physical servers
and their associated power, space, maintenance, etc., requirements. ” (See http://www03.ibm.com/industries/education/doc/content/bin/virtualization_education.pdf for more details about
virtualization in K-12.)
But there is a little secret that underlies the use of virtualization technologies: to support virtualization,
a district typically needs to increase the bandwidth on its LAN (e.g., to support the back and forth
communication of the thin-clients with the backend server) and increase the reliability of its network. If
one physical server running multiple virtual services goes down, many, many applications are now
stopped dead. And, all those thin-clients that depend on the backend servers to do the heavy-lifting –
they just blink 12:00 when the network no longer networks.
Indeed, that little support secret poses a big challenge to K-12. Consider these basic facts:
 In business, the ratio of employees to IT staff is 11:1 – 11 users to 1 IT person – while in a K-12
district, the average is typically 800:1 – 800 students, teachers, administrators to 1 IT person.
These ratios are averages and while the actual numbers will vary from business to business,
school to school, the humongous differential is what is important.
 The starting salary of a Network Technician I at a school is approximately $28,000 while the
same position in a company is approximately $42,000. Business IT folks make approximately
50% more than their counterparts in K-12. Again, the actual numbers will vary, but again, it is
the gaping magnitude of the difference that is important.
A district we work with had an email outage recently. If the IT department can’t keep an email server
running – a technology that is mature and well-understood, will it be able to adopt virtualization
technologies that are just now emerging and still have many rough edges?
2|Page
Monday, December 29, 2008
Why is there such a big difference between IT in K-12 and IT in business? For a stock broker or a call
center, or a retail store, for example, the core business so relies on computing that it is willing to pay the
piper to increase the bandwidth and increase the reliability. But K-12 does not believe that technology is
at its core. Schools do not feel that computing technology is important to its educational mission and
thus, by and large, do not provide appropriate support for their technological infrastructure.
Please, spare us your letters to the editor. Yes, your child’s school does value technology and has
modern computers, robust networks, and provides substantial support. However, schools like your
child’s are in the vast minority; you should be thankful that your community is willing to spend serious
cash for computing technology. But, go to an urban school or a rural school and, more likely than not,
you will find technology that is outdated and ill-supported.
And why don’t most schools feel that technology is central to its core mission? Because, the curriculum
that is being taught today in America’s schools was defined in the 19th century. In 1892, at Harvard
College, the Committee of Ten promulgated a curriculum that American schools needed to enact in
order to prepare students to attend Harvard College. While changes have been made in the curriculum’s
content since 1892 – thank goodness – America’s K-12 schools are still living with the basic organization
and pedagogy of that 1892 curriculum. (See Roger Schank’s excellent analysis of America’s educational
system in his book, Making Minds Less Well Educated Than Our Own, LEA Publishers, 2004.)
As it was in 1892, direct instruction and drill-and-practice are still the dominant instructional strategies
that underlie our classrooms practices. Consider this “Who is buried in Grant’s Tomb” type of question
from a popular high school science textbook (Glencoe, Earth Science, 2005)
 “What is a passive margin?” Question from the Section Assessment on page 604.
 “…when there is no tectonic activity along a margin, it is called a passive margin.” Text from
page 601-602.
If that sort of information is what students are supposed to learn then the venerable flash card is an
effective instructional strategy. Clicker technology (a.k.a. “response pads) enables students in a
classroom to play Jeopardy and add a bit of fun to the rote learning of factual information. But, 21st
century technological tools add precious little for this sort of instruction.
Outside of schools, however, these same children use all manner of 21st century, mobile, networked
technologies – MP3 players, still and video cameras, handheld gaming devices, smartphones –
successfully and continuously to communicate textually, verbally, and visually, to create and remix
voice, images, text, drawings, music, video, to organize their busy social lives, to track their friends’
comings and goings, etc. Why do we ban their technology from the classroom? In fact, why are we not
embracing it – leveraging it to reduce costs, and increase motivation and achievement?
Indeed, the bans will fall and these 21st century technologies will see action in America’s K-12
classrooms! Over the past 24 months the call for teaching 21st century skills and content in K-12 has
gained considerable momentum and acceptance. Problem solving, communication, and teamwork are
examples of 21st century skills; developing a deep, integrated model of key science processes, for
example, is 21st century content. To learn such 21st century content and skills, students must use 21st
century technology. And, coming full circle, virtualization technologies will be the key to enabling the
thin, mobile-clients that are virtually glued into students’ palms to apparently possess powerful, richclient functionality.
3|Page
Monday, December 29, 2008
After World War II, drawing on the massive re-education effort funded by the federally-sponsored GI Bill
and the re-invigorated manufacturing technologies, America embarked on an unprecedented spurt of
productivity unmatched anywhere in the world. Education and technology; catalysts for change then
and catalysts for change now. Virtualization technologies, and the benefits they afford, will only be
adopted on a significant scale in K-12 education when K-12 education adopts all manner of technology
as a core element in its business. That realization is late in coming. But, for the sake of America’s future
and the future of all its citizens – better late than never.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Tom Greaves for his thoughtful comments on an earlier draft of this article.
And, we wish to thank Deborah Bracken for Internet searching assistance.
Cathleen Norris
Regents Professor
Department of Learning Technologies
College of Information, Library Science, and Technology
P.O. Box 310530
University of North Texas
Denton, TX. 76203
Norris@unt.edu
Dr. Norris' efforts in research, teaching and service all have a common focus: integrate learning
technologies more effectively into classrooms, in K-12 as well as post-secondary education. She has
served as President of both NECA and ISTE. Norris is a co-founder and Chief Education Architect at
GoKnow, Inc. (Ann Arbor, MI), a provider of educational resources for mobile computing in K-12.
Elliot Soloway
Arthur F. Thurnau Professor
Dept of Computer Science & Engineering
College of Engineering, School of Information, School of Education
2260 Hayward, Room 3629, CSE Building
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Mobile: 734-355-4098
soloway@Umich.edu
Over the past 25 years, Dr. Soloway has explored ways to use emerging technologies to empower
children to enjoy learning. At the University of Michigan, in 2001, the undergraduates at the University
of Michigan selected him to receive the “Golden Apple Award” as the Outstanding Teacher of the Year.
He is a co-founder and Chief Strategy Officer of GoKnow, Inc. (Ann Arbor, MI), a provider of educational
resources for mobile computing in K-12.