Technology in schools: overrated?

Great Debates
1

In America these days, you can’t swing a stunted cat without hitting a politician who’s promising to bring technology into the classroom. “Wired” schools are now the norm. Every school has a computer lab, and most have internet access in every classroom. Laptops for every student seem to be the next logical step. Yet there’s research suggesting that we shouldn’t be so enthusiastic:

[ul]
[li]E-Rate is the federal program that subsidizes internet access for schools. A 2006 study by the University of Chicago concludes E-Rate “had no immediate impact on measured student outcomes.”[/li][li]In 2007 the National Center for Education looked at 132 schools to study the effectiveness of certain software products in the classroom. They concluded that none of the software lead to higher test scores.[/li][li]The Liverpool Central School District in New York started a program that gave laptops to all students in 2000. Seven years later they canceled it because it achieved nothing. The same has happened in several other districts around the country.[/li][li]Perhaps most notably, the U.S. continues to lag behind other countries in education. Countries that kick our butt, such as South Korea and Taiwan, put much less focus on computerized learning.[/li][/ul]

As a teacher, none of this surprises me. People like to gush about all the great things that are available online. We tend to forget that for every person who uses a high-class site (such as the SDMB), there are a hundred chatting, playing games, or watching videos of cats falling in toilets. It is impossible to keep students focused while they’re in front of a computer screen. Unless an adult is leaning over their shoulder, they simply won’t do any work.

I say we forget the computerized classrooms and go back to basics.

2

Textbooks are material wasteful and expensive beyond their value.

3

Exactly right. As a professional software developer and homeschooling dad, I agree emphatically.

I didn’t even touch a computer until I was ten, and I saved up to buy it myself (and it cost more than computers today run).

4

I was in the New York school system, in an elementary school that had “computers in every classroom” and a high school for the gifted that had only a computer lab.

First I’ll say this (on a more big-picture bent): The computer has been, without a doubt, a powerful educational influence throughout my development. The very act of using it makes one smarter, as much as tool use makes any human more intelligent. (And I think that it is ever more sophisticated tool use that explains the Flynn effect.) Yet, every time I return to a book I am impressed with the information it contains and how it is presented. Unfortunately, everything online is in small fragments, and overall it encourages a sort of frustrating ADD. The computer itself does this to you. So, to say nothing about computers in classrooms, computers themselves are a mixed blessing.

The second thing I’ll say is: Computers in classrooms are a failure, because everyone thinks about the potential they bring, and not the specifics of how it’s all implemented. I’ll throw out a few general observations. For one thing, there is a desire among adults to dumb down computers for children. They think they’re helping the situation. Case in point: the OS designed for One Laptop Per Child. That is fucking retarded. It destroys the most beneficial influence of computers on children. (And in the end it is adults who are projecting their own concerns onto kids… who everyone knows pick up computers much more easily, at least when they follow the “intuitive” self-learning GUI paradigm espoused by Microsoft and Apple. (ie, not linux)). Another important point is, more generally, the educational software. It is lacking, and when it exists it misses the goals. Sure, there could be an alternate universe where computers run amazing software that teaches kids subjects, judge how they’re coming along, and is better than personal tutors. This is not that universe. (Rosetta Stone, which I am fairly familiar with, is perhaps the closes glimpse at the eventual potential. Yet it is oh, so imperfect. And has no competitors who might innovate. In general, the softare industry has abandoned education, and the specialist software houses who try to fill the niche are crap. Government contractors, in the full sense of the word.)

Now, about my experience. In my elementary school, the 4 computers per classroom did nothing. Absolutely wasteful. They were sometimes used as rewards. We often played games on them like Oregon Trail, which I remember fondly but it was overall pointless. In elementary school we did make good use of computers at home, to type up bookreports and do research. (Overall, computers outside the classroom I think everyone will agree help a lot.) In high school we used the computers, again, to do homework. (Right before class.) This was rather helpful, for us, but not what proponents have in mind.

Overall, what bothers is that no one ever tried to teach us actual computer skills. Teach us advanced use of software, like the Word we always used. Didn’t teach us graphics or CAD packages that are very difficult to learn “intuitively.” No one helped us to do the most practical thing. Forget pipe dreams about computers that teach. We should all have been better taught how to use these tools as tools.

5

In my experience as a substitute teacher, computers are hugely distracting and way over-rated. The schools may attempt to block inappropriate or frivolous websites, but the students are always ten steps ahead of them and inevitably find a way around the blocks. While we’re at it, the much-vaunted “smart boards” (where you can project a computer image and draw with digital markers) are just frustrating and not worth the costs.

I wouldn’t want kids to go through school without learning the basics of computing, and, if they’re interested, even a bit of programming. But I think they tend to be more trouble than they’re worth for subjects such as English, math, history, etc. (I can imagine that science might have some better uses for them…)

6

IME screens are distracting for most kids–most people, really, including me. The computer experience can easily overwhelm the intended learning. And we all get more than enough screen time as it is. Most of us need more real-world interacting with real things.

There are a lot of really amazing things you can do with technology in the classroom, it’s true, but I think that the problems and costs nearly always outweigh the benefits. Using technology really well, and limiting it to where it truly is going to work better than anything else, is very rare compared to the overwhelming numbers of teachers using it not well at all. Incredible amounts of money are spent in order to allow kids to waste a lot of classroom time fooling around on computers.

There are lots of grants available for technology in schools–money pours in for computers. Manipulatives and books aren’t sexy and don’t get much funding. And you get teachers trying to think up ways to use, say, the I-touch in the classroom, because there are grants for that. Is that the best way to plan lessons–see who will give you money and build around the grant?

I would like to see people really think about the best tools for a given situation, and all the implications of technology use in education. Right now, I think everything looks like a nail, and computers are the hammer that will answer every question. But using computers effectively requires a whole host of skills that we ignore or shove to the side in the rush to bring technology into the classroom. On the whole, I would plan to use the simplest tools that will do a given job. Every added layer of complexity makes the job more complicated (heh); so I’d want to know if that complexity is really necessary.
I don’t know if this is really on-topic, but it reminds me of a blog post I read recently on Internet Homework, in which the author points out that usually, teachers assign homework to be done on the internet without first doing the very time-consuming work of teaching kids how to use the internet at all. The result is not pretty. I sent the piece to my mom, a public librarian, and she actually wrote a short essay of her own in response. I’ll post it if anyone wants to read it.

7

That they don’t contribute to test scores isn’t much of a surprise, as many standardized tests mainly test how well students take that standardized test.

I’ve seen, first hand with my own students, that laptops for every child can and does help with note taking and especially with research. No, simply plopping computers into the hands of students who aren’t motivated or coached effectively will simply lead to uninterested students with computers. But in right situation they can be and are a hugely important tool. Like any other tool they need to be used properly; a hammer can be used to build a house or a smash glass.

I’ve seen, just off the top of my head, an amazing quality and speed of research and preparation for persuasive writing and Lincoln Douglas debates that would have simply been impossible with local library materials.
Full disclosure: at a high SES level private school.

8

I think screens are a great idea. In high school teachers would use old fashioned projecters and write on the slides. In other areas people use powerpoint+digital projectors all the time. Combine the two and you get good things, right? But the effect you speak of–“the gee-wizness overwhelming the purpose”–is definately there. Why?!? Because people try things once, and don’t stick with them long enough to become comfortable and proficient. Till, at the very fn least, it’s not new and gee-wiz. Oftentimes the (old) teachers don’t realize there’s a learning curve for them too, and they need to stick with new technology for a while before passing judgement.

Same for other tools, like BlackBoard. (Part of which is a message board for teachers and students. A message board! Amazing invention and an immensely useful medium of group discussion. Right? Right?!) Yet the teachers aren’t taught. Aren’t forced to use it for months and years till they don’t think there’s anything special with it.

9

I was pretty impressed with the educational games which are available for children nowadays.

Anyway, what discussion about technology and education would be complete without a link to Zimi’s story

10

The problem (at least IMHO) isn’t with computers, it’s with teachers who don’t know how to teach using computers. You wouldn’t turn to a Science class with two dozen bottles of assorted chemicals and just tell the kids to get on with it. Same with computers. If the teachers don’t have training in how use them, and the curriculum that they teach doesn’t make good use of them, then the computer (or any other tool) is worthless.

11

I was a teacher for 10 years, and very much involved in technology.

Computers are just fancy hammers. They’re tools. Like hammers, they can be used appropriately and inappropriately.

A teacher who makes use of technology to enhance his/her teaching - great. Having technology in the classroom just for the sake of it - not so much. Unfortunately, it was often the latter scenario. In my case, projectors and SmartBoards were terrific because they allowed streamlined use of PowerPoint presentations and some other stuff.

But there are times when a clipboard and pencil are better tools. I strenuously tried to point this out when it seemed like getting a new piece of technology was the thing to do. Often, the scenario wasn’t explored enough to find out if a computer was really the correct teaching tool. And sometimes when technology was the right choice, good training for teachers wasn’t provided. When it was, there were always a few curmudgeons who made little effort to learn.

IMHO, we often look to technology inappropriately. Education especially so, because the field is so prone to following fads in research and practice.

Good teachers who realize their stock in trade is continually improving instructional delivery will naturally make good use of appropriate technologies as they are made available (with proper training). Unfortunately, teachers are no longer trusted to make such decisions for the most part because of the bad apples. This means the good ones sometimes get fed up and leave the field because of micromanagement, as I did.

12

I hate Blackboard. The teachers use it sporadically and everyone uses it different. Well, yeah, it’s college, and part of the point is that teachers do things differently. But when you have to watch it slowly load up and the log in and load your classes and then try and hunt through the links for whatever your teacher might possibly have bothered to put in…

It’s not really worth it. I don’t want to deliver my work in electronic format. It causes nothing but trouble and hassle for me.

13

WAY overrated.

I’m quite eager for the fad of computers uber alles to fade away, now that computers are more or less ubiquitous anyway in US homes. Something like an education-oriented kindle might work out, but educational computer games and such are all mostly crud at best, horrendous distracting wastes of time at worst. They also do indeed seem to encourage laziness (on the part of teachers and students both, especially when it comes to research) and a reduced ability to focus on any task that lacks bling bling gizmos and pretty shiny flashing lights and cute dancing cartoons.

I grew up with computers. I’m a member of the generation that’s supposed to feel comfortable with them in every corner of life, and I do for the most part. But as educational tools, computers are very weak. I think they’re mainly an excuse for people “concerned about the state of our educational system” to throw puny amounts of money at the system with the pretense of being oh so helpful and generous, without having to actually learn anything useful about what the system actually needs.

14

That’s true. Blackboard, as a specific piece of software, sucks. This really goes with the general fact that education software sucks, that the companies who make it suck, and that the large instutions who buy it don’t look carefully enough at the details to realize it sucks.

Anyone can go on RentACoder to hire some indian guys and recode a Blackboard clone for a few thousand bucks that has a more streamlined interface and better performance. Seriously. There should be many competitors… but there ain’t. The way big institutions make purchasing decisions just doesn’t allow it.

15

Am I the only one here who thinks this is an argument for better utilization of computers and not an argument for going back toward overly expensive obsolete technologies?

16

My first computer class was in 8th grade. They used Windows 3.1. I recall learning some basic DOS commands and spending the rest of my time playing shareware games.

High school was the first time I had access to the internet, on the library computers. I remember being amazed at search engines and coming home to tell my dad that you could type in the word “poop” and return hundreds of pages related to poop. I’m sure my dad was thrilled.

I got a fine education without much computer use. I think they can be valuable in limited situations. If you had the students do a research paper in the library, and taught them how to use the internet to access information, as well as how to be skeptical and identify bad information, that would be a good use. Instruction on using the Office suite would be useful. A course on the dangers of internet scams would be useful. Giving the kids a computer with no plan on how the computer will supplement and enhance their learning is a waste.

17

I love Blackboard and do not understand the hate. I will admit that I have seen a few professors that do not use it in an effective way, but their are others that use it in a very effective way.
The face that assignment/syllabuses/ any extra stuff the proff wants us to have is up their is amazing and very helpful
The message board is very helpful in networking with ones peers, setting up study groups, or getting answers to questions, from either the professor or other students. I have had professors who checked blackboard every day and answered questions when they came up.

Lastly the fact that we can have classes solely on the internet with communication between students on the message boards is in my opinion amazing.

Does a second grader need a computer? No, probably not. Could a highschool student and teacher, benefit from the use of computers and the internet? Yes Would I have been able to survive college without a laptop? No, but that is because I have atrocious handwriting.

18

I couldn’t agree more.

I think that the education system is stuck in the mindset of the late 1990s: Whatever you can do, you can do better on a computer, and even better than that online.

Luckily the free market (through the dot com bust) learned from its errors. The education system keeps pouring money into failed ideas while continuing to suckle at the public teat.

19

Putting a generic laptop with games and internet connection in front of every student and then expecting them to pay attention to a lecture is doomed to fail. The itself is not the problem, it is the implementation. If I could design a modern school, with no limitations, I think I could come up with great ways to use technology.

  1. Give every student a nearly indestructible tablet laptop with their textbooks loaded on it (with built in indexing and note taking ability), necessary productivity software for the grade level (word processor, spreadsheet, math analysis, etc.), a web browser, and no ability to install new software.

  2. Give each class room a wireless interface controlled by the teacher. Want them to research a paper this period? Give them library and/or web access. Want them to follow along on a lecture? Turn off access. Want them doing labs/demos on their laptops? Give them access only to the room server with the applets.

  3. Setup an infrastructure that supports the technology. Each class room has its own wireless hub, but dead to other wireless sources. Message boards for classes, clubs, and interest groups. Moderated chat rooms for studying. Standardize things like class schedules and site formats, while leaving enough room to change as appropriate (math classes can benefit from having all homework listed for the quarter/semester, while a political science class may have a looser structure). Actually put some thought into how the technology can best benefit the student.

  4. Train the teachers well and force them to use the technology. Use e-books, teach online research, accept papers and projects as soft copies.

The big problem with actually doing this right now is that it requires too many groups to change and it would cost to much in the short run (although you may save money on books and lab materials in the long run). You would need to basically gut a schools network and redo it as well as convincing text book publishers to change their business model from selling books to licensing them.

I could be wrong, but I think this would work better than what we currently see where a schools buy products ad-hoc from software and hardware vendors. I make no claim that this is ideal. Perhaps it would be better to give each student a terminal, rather than a laptop, especially if they all already have computers at home.

Bottom line, as others have already said, computers and software are just tools. Without a good plan all you learn from them is how to use a computer. This is not unique to computers. If every school had noting but huge piles of every kind of random book in every class room, the same argument could be made about writing.

Jonathan

20

EXACTLY this.