This was accomplished without federal intervention, although Chapman is correct that Title I monies had much to do with the purchase of computers by schools serving poor children. Chapman offers an excellent summary of current federal efforts, but I wish he had cast a more critical eye on how these programs are administered within the federal bureaucracy. Take the issue of fragmentation. Ten federal programs are described, several housed within the Office of Educational Technology in the Department of Education. Programs are also run by the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, the Federal Communications Commission, and the National Science Foundation.
Questions pertaining to federalism are equally important.
Simply identifying a good idea for educational funding is not enough to warrant federal action. ESEA channels funds to communities lacking the resources to acquire technology on their own, which makes sense. A big federal technology program is not necessary for redistribution to occur, however. I program would accomplish the same objective. It is a different matter, however, for the federal government to get involved in deciding how schools use technology.