Hmm. I'm not sure that's a great idea for two reasons: * It means that kids are going to get an inconsistent experience throughout the school. * It means that

Hmm. I'm not sure that's a great idea for two reasons: * It means that kids are going to get an inconsistent experience throughout the school. * It means that a teacher's personal finances affect their job performance and the benefit to their kids. Since when was the precedent to be full-time employed AND have to fork out for your resources out of personal pocket. That isn't really acceptable. Both of these are grossly unfair, in my opinion - both to teachers who may not be as well off, and to kids who happen to have those teachers selected and thus don't get the benefit. There's also the factor of whether the inconsistency across a school of having each teacher with different bits of software is going to negatively impact things. I do agree with the sentiment of allowing teachers to decide what is purchased based on it being actually useful - I see a lot of "edugeeks" trying to pitch software they claim will revolutionise teaching to school boards and heads of IT, when in reality it's fucking useless for teachers, and irritating to students.