To the Editor:
In March, 2010, Governor Rell, having seen Connecticut lose in quick succession several major federal grants and confronting a hurting state economy, resurrected the UConn proposal to renovate Dempsey Hospital and upgrade the Medical School. But in doing so, she scaled back the proposal from its original $475 investment to $342 million and made it hostage to federal funding — that $100 million to come from the federal government. In doing so, Rell sacrificed a significant share of the economic impact of the initiative and made it hostage to external money. But Ohio State, with a stronger medical school and a $1 billion expansion plan already in place — not contingent on getting those federal dollars — got the money instead.
Connecticut doesn’t need the federal dollars. The original $475 million proposal, without external funding, generated far more economic benefits than the Rell proposal — 18,200 jobs vs. only 6,800, delivering nearly $1.5 billion in net new tax revenue, after covering the entire cost of the initiative, vs. a paltry $232 million. An investment of $475 million would thus deliver almost three times more jobs and six times more fiscal benefit than the $342 investment.
The simple fact is that Rell’s timid proposal, even with the federal money, would have served Connecticut poorly; the bold proposal that the university original laid before the governor and the Legislature would, and still can, deliver dramatically more and better jobs and a much higher return on the investment.
Prof. Fred V. Carstensen Director, Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis University of Connecticut
Connecticut Drops Educational Technology
To the Editor:
Concerned parents take note: the Connecticut State Department of Education has omitted educational technology as a requirement in its revised regulations for teacher preparation programs.
As a consequence, your child’s teacher may have no formal training in engaging and effective uses of technology in education. This is significant, as other states have had well developed standards, academic requirements, and corresponding certifications in place for teachers for over a decade. To see how neighboring state initiatives compare, just Google the words “Educational Technology” for Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island. Then try the same exercise for Connecticut, which though purporting to subscribe to the National Educational Technology Standards (ISTE-NETS), does not list them, nor assessments for demonstrating student mastery, nor teacher certifications in the specialty.
In 1998, Connecticut ratified General Statute 10-145a(e), requiring students in collegiate teacher preparation programs to take at least one course falling under the catch-all term “educational technology.” This was a step in the right direction, but compared to other states in the last 10 years little progress was made in integrating technology in the curricula of Connecticut K-12 schools.
Today’s students are digital natives. Generation WWW has a comfort level with technology, having grown-up with the Internet, social media, HD TV, iPods, and cell phones, to name a few. They require and expect multimodal forms of instructional delivery. That is why the omission in the new regulations is absolutely a step in the wrong direction.
If this upsets you, and it should, contact members of the Connecticut State Board of Education, the commissioner of education, the state regulatory board, the attorney general, and the newly elected governor. Request that they restore educational technology to its rightful place in the curriculum, and then expand upon it as other states have done. Visit http://techregs.org for further information.
Jerald D. Cole
Educational Technologist
New Haven
