The Los Angeles School iPad Scandal - Case Study Example

Case Study Process Analysis (Name) (Date) Executive Summary The Los Angeles Unified School District’s rollout of iPads to every student in 2013 was one of the most ambitious technology rollout projects. The plan was to buy hundreds of thousands of iPads for both teachers and students. These devices would come loaded with learning software that would improve the learning process for both teachers and students. Barely a year later, superintendent of the LA Unified School District announced that the project was to be cancelled and the bidding process restarted. This came soon after allegations of irregularities emerged in the press regarding the original bidding process. The truth, though, is that the procurement process was just a part of what was wrong with the project. The project had been problematic from the beginning; accusations of being too rushed, and the technology would have glitches both in terms of direct use and assimilation into the district’s infrastructure. Contents Executive Summary 2 1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 Methodology 4 3.0 Results 5 3.1 The Rollout of the Project 5 3.2 The Cancellation 6 3.3 Technical Issues 7 4.0 Recommendations and Conclusions 7 4.1 Preparation 7 4.2 Testing 8 4.3 Procurement 8 6.0 References 9 7.0 Appendix 10 7.1 Flow chart as-is 10 7.2 Macro Level Flow Chart 11 7.3 Flow Chart Redefined Process 12 Case Study Process Analysis 1.0 Introduction Almost all of man’s achievements, from the building of the pyramids to going to the moon began as projects. Amounts spent in projects have increased steadily over the past few decades (Larson & Gray, 2014). However, this also means that project failures have resulted in huge losses. Volkswagen, involved in one of the biggest project failures, posted losses for the first time in 15 years of up to 1.84 billion (Ewing, 2015).Another project that failed so publicly is the Los Angeles Unified School District’s rollout of iPads to teachers and students. This paper will look at the circumstances surrounding the cancellation of the project by the LAUSD superintendent. First, the methodology will be described. The methodology section will include a description of the various sources of information and elements of the project. Next, the results section will be written. The results section is a synthesis of the information gathered in the methodology section. It is an analysis of the reasons for the failure of the project. The final section will be the recommendations and conclusions section. This will follow from the results section, with suggestions on how best to avoid such mistakes in future. 2.0 Methodology Information gathered on the Los Angeles Unified School District iPad project came mainly from media reports on the developing case, the subsequent investigations and the responses by the various stakeholders in the case. There are three important information gathering stages in the LAUSD iPad case. The three stages followed the lines of the general progression of the saga. The first information gathering stage covered the initial stages of the case. This included the rationale for the introduction of the case and the events that preceded the rolling out of the program. The second information gathering process covered the events that led to the cancellation of the project. Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent John Deasy announced the cancellation of the project and a restarting of the bidding process almost a year later in August 2014. The events that led to this cancellation will form the bulk of the information gathered in this section. The final section involved a review of the circumstances around the LAUSD’s case against Apple and software publisher Pearson. 3.0 Results 3.1 The Rollout of the Project Even though it was an ambitious plan, the rollout of the project leaves a lot to be desired. The original plan was that teachers and students receive up to 700,000 iPads. These tablets from Apple would come loaded with learning software, including learning software from publisher Pearson. The plan was ambitious, to have every one of the students in the second largest school district in the country with a tablet. The combined price tag for the equipment, software and the Wi-Fi upgrades was an estimated 1.3 billion dollars (Gilbertson, 2014). One of the missteps of the project was the fact that there was not nearly enough testing. According to some of the contractors involved in the project, the timeline was rushed. The iPad scandal started with a 17 million dollar spending proposal in the district. Even though there was a pilot testing program in the spring, it was admittedly not enough to rollout a project of such magnitude (Kamenetz, 2013). The second issue with the rollout process was the lack of training. Again, even though there was preliminary training, it was not nearly enough for the teachers especially. Representatives from the district trained teachers on the basics and English teachers received some minutes of training, mostly because they were charged with giving the devices out. However, there was no training on the device management systems. One of the complaints was that students bypassed security protocols and accessed non-academic sites like Facebook and YouTube. This can largely be attributed to the fact that teachers did not understand the nuances of the devices. The third issue in the rollout process was the lack of consideration for implications of carrying the devices home. During the rollout, issues arose that were largely ignored. Checking the devices in and out at the beginning and end of the date up a lot of class time. While taking them home was justified, it was not clear who would take responsibility for losses at home (Kamenetz, 2013). The fourth issue regarding then rollout process was the justification for choosing the iPad as the device of choice. Even with the educational software, the iPads were still much more expensive than budget laptops. IPads are not necessarily durable educational machines and do not have keyboards, which are essential. In fact, a few weeks into the project, the district reported needing additional expenditure on wireless keyboards. Many schools across the country are switching to laptops, over concerns about the suitability of the iPad for classwork. In Hillsborough, for instance, students saw the iPad as a fun, gaming piece of equipment. The Chromebook, on the other hand, was seen as a serious alternative (Murphy, 2014). 3.2 The Cancellation The announcement of the cancellation of the original iPad project came in the wake of reports of irregularities in the procurement process. Emails were released which seemed to suggest that the vendors for the devices and the educational software were given preferential treatment by the committee in charge. The emails showed that John Deasy and his deputies had communicated details of pricing, training and technical support to Pearson. These details were in the request for proposals by the district, which were later won by Pearson. These allegations later became the subject of an FBI investigation (Gilbertson, 2014). 3.3 Technical Issues This spring, the Los Angeles Unified School District reportedly sent a letter to Apple, demanding a refund. This was after technical issues emerged that made it impossible for teachers to teach. Apparently, there is a possibility of legal action if there is no agreement reached with Apple. Pearson also took part of the blame, providing an incomplete curriculum without much of what was promised in the deal. The director of the initiative, Bernadette Lucas, wrote that only five per cent of students had constant access due to tech issues. In some cases, students had no access for several months. As of March, there were only two schools still using the Pearson curriculum in its entirety (Lapowsky, 2015). 4.0 Recommendations and Conclusions While the tech rollout process in LA was disastrous, this does not mean the end for the use of tech in education. Here are some possible recommendations and lessons from the LA case. 4.1 Preparation The tech rollout for schools in Los Angeles was a good idea. It was, however, driven by the technology in education frenzy. The program was rolled out in a hurry, without necessarily thinking about the need for the technology in the first place. LA was a manifestation of a countrywide trend in the US, where districts concentrated on the technology first without asking themselves what problems they were trying to solve. 4.2 Testing Going into the future, projects of such importance and magnitude must have an elaborate testing process. The testing process must be allowed enough time to work (or not), and the problems that arise during the testing must be solved comprehensively. For instance, with enough time for testing, the issues surrounding compatibility of Apple’s systems and the problematic Pearson curriculum would have been solved. 4.3 Procurement There must always be an above board procurement process in any such project. In this case, the revelation of pricing details a year before the actual bidding process began (Lapowsky, 2015).The competition that comes with a strong bidding process results in high-quality bids and high quality products. The choice of purchasing options would have given the district options and the chance for a cost-effective supplier of both tech and software. Especially in scenarios where taxpayer money is involved, competitive bidding processes ensure the public interest is served. They often result in minimization of expenditure and the maximization quality. Officials in Los Angeles still maintain they want technology adopted in schools. However, a new rollout will require new tests and adequate time allowed for the rollout of the technology. Further, there must be a completely new approach to the bidding and purchase of gadgets, supporting technology and software. 6.0 References Ewing, J. (2015, October 28). Volkswagen, Hit by Emissions Scandal, Posts Its First Loss in Years. Retrieved from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/29/business/international/volkswagen-earnings-q3.html?_r=0 Gilbertson, A. (2014, August 28). The LA School iPad Scandal: What You Need To Know. Retrieved from NPR : http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/08/27/343549939/the-l-a-school-ipad-scandal-what-you-need-to-know Kamenetz, A. (2013, September 30). The inside story on LA schools’ iPad rollout: “a colossal disaster”. Retrieved from Herchinger Report: http://digital.hechingerreport.org/content/the-inside-story-on-la-schools-ipad-rollout-a-colossal-disaster_914/ Lapowsky, I. (2015, August 5). What Schools Must Learn From LA's IPAD Debacle. Retrieved from WIRED: http://www.wired.com/2015/05/los-angeles-edtech/ Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2014). Project Management: The Managerial Process. McGraw Hill: New York. Murphy, M. E. (2014, August 5). Why Some Schools Are Selling All Their iPads. Retrieved from The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/08/whats-the-best-device-for-interactive-learning/375567/ 7.0 Appendix 7.1 Flow chart as-is 7.2 Macro Level Flow Chart 7.3 Flow Chart Redefined Process Read More