Skin in the Game

In a previous post I discussed ways to take advantage of student ownership.  A recent online discussion covered some of these ideas, in particular how to get some “Skin in the Game”.  This is a monetary investment that can help both with budgetary challenges and improving personal student investment when implementing a take-home one-to-one program.  While other processes will be more effective when building intrinsic and social motivation to take care of devices, a “skin in the game” process can help build support from the community, particularly during the initial ramp-up of a take-home device program.

“Skin in the Game” can help build community support…

A typical implementation will have the parent/guardian and student sign-off on expectations or rules, and ask for a small initial deposit ($25), or about 10% of the cost of the device.  When the student graduates or moves, the device is returned in exchange for the deposit. Other states may have laws that allow families to be charged a fee for educational materials instead of a deposit.  While Vermont law does allow for the recovery of damages to devices (16 V.S.A. § 556) it states that the district “shall provide, at the expense of the district... all text books, learning materials, equipment, and supplies.” 16 V.S.A. § 563(14), so be clear that this is not a fee.

Another part of “skin in the game” is a fee for damage and repair.  While there are several ways to cover damage costs, be mindful of the overall cost of the process you choose.  Having the parent/guardian purchase insurance is expensive, has compliance challenges, may not align with Vermont law, and does not increase intrinsic motivation in the student.  Similarly, having an internal sliding scale for different types of damage or loss will require staff management time, may result in challenges from parents/guardians to decisions, and can set parents/guardians at odds against IT staff or school administrators trying to enforce the charges.  It doesn’t take long to accrue management time equal to the cost of a Chromebook. The simplest process will result in the least time spent by school personnel. One district accrues a $25 repair fee for every damage claim, and that allows the administrative staff to focus on student issues instead of collection challenges.

Be mindful of the cost of the process you choose…

There are other challenges with the “skin in the game” process.  It is not a money-maker. Districts and schools will need to develop processes to ensure that there are sufficient devices to cover damage and loss.  Also, the deposit and damage payment may be a financial challenge to the student who most needs access. Withholding educational tools is not a forward thinking solution...so consider systems for scholarships and restorative practices as options to implement.  

…a small price to pay for the overall investment…

Finally, districts will get their greatest return on investment if they concentrate on ways to increase student investment in their own device.  Consider allowing the student to purchase the device when they graduate, or move from a middle school to a high school. After 3 or 4 years, the depreciated value of a well-cared for chromebook is not worth the negative perception of downstreaming it to lower grades or new students.  One district offers it for $50 ($25 plus the original deposit) and over 90% of the students purchase the devices. That is a small price to pay for the overall investment in the students and community.