6 ms·

Unfortunately there are still people with children of schooling age that can't use computers that well or don't have email. I know several. I also know some peo

Unfortunately there are still people with children of schooling age that can't use computers that well or don't have email. I know several. I also know some people without internet access at home. I don't think we're too far off being able to replace paper with email in this case though (5-10 years max).

icebraining 13y ago
Why not just provide both options, and letting people choose? It's not a terrible administrative effort to just send some via email and print out others.
- adestefan 13y ago
  Because it's simpler to do it one way and the lowest common denominator wins in this case. Honestly, I prefer the paper version since it's less likely I'll ignore it.
  - diminoten 13y ago
    The argument here is that while it may be simpler to do it one way or the other, there might actually be savings to be had if enough people opt for the digital method. It's not like these documents don't already exist in a digital format. The "challenge" would be maintaining the mailing list.
- pbhjpbhj 13y ago
  I've put my mind to this question for a few hours over the past couple of years and, yes, I do think the administrative effort is "too much" [for Primary School children, 4-11). There would need to be some further incentive for schools to try it. For the school the costs are probably greater in producing the letter - if any printing is required then the personnel costs are going to be approximately equal up to the point of direct distribution. Instead of sending 32 letters to each class (all classes are <32 in my kids school) then they will need to count the letters in to bundles and label for the class they are to be received by. The teacher/assistant will then need to consult a list to ensure the right students receive the letter, a potentially changing list, rather than simply give all students a letter to take. Initially up take is likely to be low IMO. There will also be a lot of issues with parents not reading all letters or having technical problems. The letter-in-bag is very hard not to deliver for primary-age children and the school can look in the bag to see if it's gone - getting notice of email letters having been seen is possible but less robust IMO. Currently my kid's school don't de-duplicate for siblings. They could do that and, I estimate, save may be ~10% of material costs immediately. I think the administration of that is similar to how you'd have to administer who isn't receiving letters by email. Schools face another option - allow advertising on letters (which I generally disprove of FWIW). That way income is likely to dwarf the theoretical savings via reduced toner use.
- rtkwe 13y ago
  Then they have to track WHO to give papers too and who not to. And also sending a kid home with info doesn't require parents to be tech adept or to check their email often which a good number of people don't.
  - icebraining 13y ago
    Then they have to track WHO to give papers too and who not to. So what? They already must have profiles on the kids, it's just an extra mark somewhere. And also sending a kid home with info doesn't require parents to be tech adept or to check their email often which a good number of people don't. Hence the choice...?
    - rtkwe 13y ago
      Yes they have a profiles some where but the hassle comes when it's time to hand out bulk info to the kids, teachers or whoever has to go check the list then make sure that every kid on that list gets one. Way simpler to just and them out to everyone.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
smileysteve 13y ago
An email address is required for healthcare.gov now. Internet access at home isn't mandatory as long as the Federal government funds local libraries.

icebraining 13y ago

Why not just provide both options, and letting people choose? It's not a terrible administrative effort to just send some via email and print out others.

adestefan 13y ago
Because it's simpler to do it one way and the lowest common denominator wins in this case. Honestly, I prefer the paper version since it's less likely I'll ignore it.
- diminoten 13y ago
  The argument here is that while it may be simpler to do it one way or the other, there might actually be savings to be had if enough people opt for the digital method. It's not like these documents don't already exist in a digital format. The "challenge" would be maintaining the mailing list.
pbhjpbhj 13y ago
I've put my mind to this question for a few hours over the past couple of years and, yes, I do think the administrative effort is "too much" [for Primary School children, 4-11). There would need to be some further incentive for schools to try it. For the school the costs are probably greater in producing the letter - if any printing is required then the personnel costs are going to be approximately equal up to the point of direct distribution. Instead of sending 32 letters to each class (all classes are <32 in my kids school) then they will need to count the letters in to bundles and label for the class they are to be received by. The teacher/assistant will then need to consult a list to ensure the right students receive the letter, a potentially changing list, rather than simply give all students a letter to take. Initially up take is likely to be low IMO. There will also be a lot of issues with parents not reading all letters or having technical problems. The letter-in-bag is very hard not to deliver for primary-age children and the school can look in the bag to see if it's gone - getting notice of email letters having been seen is possible but less robust IMO. Currently my kid's school don't de-duplicate for siblings. They could do that and, I estimate, save may be ~10% of material costs immediately. I think the administration of that is similar to how you'd have to administer who isn't receiving letters by email. Schools face another option - allow advertising on letters (which I generally disprove of FWIW). That way income is likely to dwarf the theoretical savings via reduced toner use.
rtkwe 13y ago
Then they have to track WHO to give papers too and who not to. And also sending a kid home with info doesn't require parents to be tech adept or to check their email often which a good number of people don't.
- icebraining 13y ago
  Then they have to track WHO to give papers too and who not to. So what? They already must have profiles on the kids, it's just an extra mark somewhere. And also sending a kid home with info doesn't require parents to be tech adept or to check their email often which a good number of people don't. Hence the choice...?
  - rtkwe 13y ago
    Yes they have a profiles some where but the hassle comes when it's time to hand out bulk info to the kids, teachers or whoever has to go check the list then make sure that every kid on that list gets one. Way simpler to just and them out to everyone.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

smileysteve 13y ago

An email address is required for healthcare.gov now. Internet access at home isn't mandatory as long as the Federal government funds local libraries.