>>Seriously, why pass over cheap Android tablets that are "not-relavent tech"? It's more likely that these kids will be using iPads in the future, so teaching using the most popular tech will achieve the better results.
It's the same as using Microsoft products. Okay, they're not cheap, but they're relavent where most of the desktop PCs are using this stuff.
That's regressive thinking. As far as non-Apple tablets, there are issues like lower overall cost and flexibility for teachers to teach what they feel is appropriate, not what Apple allows them to. (Apple is a tightly controlled, fee-laden, walled garden where apps and the content they have access to are limited.) Content management is a serious issue when it comes to school-aged kids and I don't think that should be determined by a company like Apple. Public good and social services are not very high on Apple's list of priorities.
Regarding Microsoft software, there are clearly equal or better alternatives. Simply because they were given monopoly status by the U.S. government and it spread like a cancer worldwide does not mean everyone should just give up and let that situation remain that way. And for those of you who have short memories, the computer world was not always dominated solely by MS products. MS Office and Windows may dominate now but I'd be surprised if that holds true in another generation. Kids in grade school now will be seeing a very different IT world as they grow up and get into the workplace, locking them into a path of status quo is short-sided. Plus, while older folk are resistant to change, kids are much more flexible.