| The December 6 1996, trial ruling by the Superior Court against the school districts | Page 33 |
 |
| Allenstown Elementary School computer on a cart |
The Superior Court cited to "prior inconsistent" statements contained in an Allenstown Annual Report that the state had introduced during its cross-examination. Statements such as, "Allenstown's faculty continue to integrate and expand technology use wherever possible," describe a goal they are striving for. They are not stating that the technology is actually available to the students.
The Superior Court stated that such "prior inconsistent statements" confused the picture it was presented concerning the worth of the technology that actually exists in the petitioner school districts.
Finally, the Superior Court held that there was no evidence presented that the Minimum Standards do not provide for adequacy in the area of technology. "Therefore, to the extent the petitioner schools meet Minimum Standards for school approval with respect to technology, the petitioners have not demonstrated that students in the petitioner districts have constitutionally inadequate technological access."
The Minimum Standards pertaining to technology do not give a definition of adequacy. The Superior Court overlooked the fact that the Minimum Standards regarding technology are so minimal that the petitioner districts could have even less technology and still be in compliance.
For an elementary school to be in compliance with the Minimum Standards, one computer loaded onto a cart and wheeled from classroom to classroom meets the standard just as well as Moultonborough's banks of up-to-date, networked computers.
 |
The Minimum Standards are insufficient to meet the state's own Curriculum Frameworks upon which the state's Assessment Tests are based. The Math Curriculum Framework requires all students to develop the ability to use the appropriate technology to solve mathematical problems.
The Minimum Standards only require that the computer education program be designed to enable students to demonstrate the ability to log on, load a program and save work. Students must only "become familiar" with software.
All the evidence the school districts presented, demonstrating that the technology the petitioner school districts have is constitutionally inadequate, was in effect an attack on the Minimum Standards.
 |
Back | Next |  |