Which expensive obsolete technologies?
Yeah, that’s pretty much what I took 5 paragraphs to say.
The thing is, in order to make schools look like what we all seem to be talking about (that is, using technology in a focused way where it will really do a better job, and using it well, as opposed to just throwing a bunch of computers all over the place), we would need to reinvent teacher training and re-train 98% of the teachers in the country. Most teachers are not really computer whizzes, even the younger ones. We’d need to restructure the way computers get put into schools. We’d also need a lot of people to take a really hard look at what schools actually need, and when it’s appropriate to bring tech in, and that is very very hard to come by.
For example, my 5yo niece, in kindergarten, has a Smartboard in her room. Her mom is enthusiastic about it, because you can do so many neat things with it. Well, maybe kindergarteners really do better if their teacher has a Smartboard, I don’t know–but those things cost thousands of dollars each. (My husband, who owns a small software company, would love one, but doesn’t think it would be a good use of funds.) Is the return really worth the investment? Do 5yos really need Smartboards, or would they learn just as well with paper and crayons and some playdough? Because we’re talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars per small city, just for Smartboards for kindergarteners, and it’s possible that the money might be better spent on something else. Like, say, music programs for the kids, which is proven to have real, solid benefits for every child.
I don’t. While I stuffed the original post with sarcasm, I really feel that the problems are fundamental to computers, and not just the result of immature kids with short attention spans. In fact, there’s good research into how people experience the process of reading online. The findings are:
-
People reading an online article are less likely to read the entire thing, and more likely to skip around, then people reading the same article in print.
-
Our memory is more likely to retain text from print than from a screen.
-
Online material is generally written at a lower intellectual level than print material and it’s getting lower. Online material has less advanced vocabulary and sentence structures and less sophisticated organization overall.
This is not just someone’s impression; it’s backed by real research. (I get this from Mark Bauerlein’s book The Dumbest Generation, where he’s quoting from a research firm that consults for corporate web pages. This isn’t some anti-technology rant, but rather facts as reported by people who design web pages for a living.)
I don’t want to eliminate computers from school completely. I just think we should be more realistic about what they can and can’t accomplish.
I don’t think that’s necessarily bad, and it seems to me there is one big advantage to reading articles online, which is that you can respond and debate the article with other people who have read it.
Again, I don’t think this is necessarily bad.
But anyway, I do agree with your original point that computers are overrated. It seems to me that it’s basically a cargo cult approach to education. There are certain schools which are pretty lousy as measured by student performance and people are always coming up with some schmaltzy New Idea to fix them.
I attend a private school where everyone from seventh grade through twelfth grade has a standardized tablet PC, and it is working relatively well. We just switched over at the start of last semester, and though there have been a few problems (like the internet connection being strained to the limit), I think the educational experience has been improved. Yes, some people use it to distract themselves (but not nearly as many as I had expected), but those people just make bad grades, the same as they would have anyway. The teachers vary in how much they make use of the computers (a lot more in History than in Algebra II (not at all) and Latin), but the best (in my opinion) teacher, the only one who actually has a Phd. in History, uses the laptops exclusively. It’s just so much easier to access primary sources and such.
That said, I wouldn’t recommend it as the way for troubled schools to bail themselves out. They just don’t work like that. I’m not sure what to do about it practically, but I think 99% of the problems with education could be solved by expelling the people who don’t want to learn. (It actually reminds me of a post I read elsewhere about someone’s experiences in military prison—amazingly better than civilian prison because it had only those people who signed up for service in the first place.)
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
ITT Champbion, that really echoes my observation. Computers really do encourage a sort of ADD when reading. I guess it’s that we’ve adapted ourselves for skimming and wading through crap, but when a really good perspective or thought comes along, we can’t readjust and give it full methodical attention. Like when reading a thread on these boards. Plus Alt+Tab is so damn close.
That’s not fair. You should keep them, fail them, and not dumb down the lesson to suit them. This is a big problem. Teachers get so upset that they have to fail people, that everyone feels the only option for a rigorous learning experience is to not let anyone who can’t handle it in. That is NOT the solution.
But the problem is that society has decided to educate (for example) poor urban children. If we fail every single one, we haven’t really gotten anywhere.
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
I think this will change as new teachers come into the profession and older ones retire. I know older teachers who are OK with technology, but they don’t know how to use it to its fullest potential. Most new teachers are comfortable using technology, and the ones I know wouldn’t know how to function in a classroom without it.
One issue that hasn’t been raised in this discussion is that school districts often get grant money to buy stuff, and there is a lot of grant money that is restricted to technology purchases. Of course, the problem then shifts from “we don’t have this” to “now that we have it, what do we do with it?”
That being said, I wouldn’t say that smart boards are the greatest thing since sliced bread, but they’re a major improvement over the traditional chalkboard. The biggest advantage is that it’s a convenience to the teacher. For example, my son’s teacher uses it to teach math and reading; the smart board allows her to manipulate the images on the board by touch, so she can show how addition works. She’s also used it for other things like social studies; she’ll project a map on the board and use a marker to trace a route. She could do those things with low-tech materials, but the board’s integration with her computer means she doesn’t have to, which means less time and expense to her. She can also find information on the Internet and show it to the class immediately, which she intends to do for the Inauguration on Tuesday. Instead of going through the hassle of finding a TV and getting that set up, she can find a website, set up the stream, and show it to the class.
There are other benefits, as well. Schools (and teachers) don’t have to buy chalk or dry-erase markers, and there’s no chalk dust or sniffable chemicals in the classroom, so there are supposed health and environmental benefits.
For the record, the sprog’s school does have music, art and PE, so no one’s being shortchanged.
Robin
Anyway, if we’re speaking about the ideal of computerized learning, what are we really talking about?
Strassia gives a good, compelling, practical vision. Yet what will it accomplish? It might streamline things 20%, give a nice boost overall, but it’s hardly revolutionary. Message boards and chatrooms are great, but so are class discussion. (MBs and chat rooms are great for us dispersed in our homes who don’t have the option of gathering together and having a mediated discussion where we all raise our hands to talk one at a time. So it’s great for us, but not earth shattering vs the extremely effective techniques in schools.) Digital textbooks are great, but so are the paper ones (one can be searched, the other flipped through). This is NOT a great leap in education.
What can we do that will substantially move things forward?
Sure, it’s possible to invent software that teaches you as you use it. We should keep pursuing this direction, and not be afraid to admit that there hasn’t been progress yet.
We can also apply computerization to libraries. A Google for books and other methodically thought-out writing. That would be a big leap forward as well.
Message boards could also be reinvented, where there is a more coherent exchange of feedback and opinion. (Not just people posting messages, but voting on ideas, claims, and views in other ways.) Message boards can improve a lot in this regard, and eventually be far superior to old-fashioned talking.
What I mean is these black kids should be exposed to the full-on intellectual challenge. You don’t dumb things down if they don’t pay attention, and you certainly don’t just kick em out.
If you have to fail all of them for not paying attention, then that is what you do. If you’re upset with that, then try to rethink the very system of reward and punishment by which education incentivizes.
But you do not dumb the lesson down. To dumb down the lesson in the face of kids who don’t learn simply because they don’t listen (not because they try hard but just can’t understand), is a completely retarded approach, and unfortunately the one that is loved in America. Not just in urban schools, but everywhere. With young kids, with kids who grow up, with adults, everywhere.
I can also speak to this. A lot of the time, schools discourage students from printing materials out to save paper, and students themselves won’t print it at home for the same reason. Most journal articles aren’t formatted properly for the Internet, so they’re a pain in the ass to read online, but the same article on paper would be much easier to read thoroughly, plus you can highlight and make notes on it.
In fact, I’m trying to wade through an article online and it’s taking me a lot more time and discipline to do so, but I don’t care enough about it to print it. C’est la vie, I suppose.
Robin
And to finish my thought: The only alternative to dumbing down that is agreed upon in America is to not let the kids who aren’t going to succeed into the classroom.
So there you have American education system’s problem in a nutshell. It has no direct answer to a lack of discipline or attention. It either dumbs down to the lowest denominators, or it doesn’t let the lowest denominators in.
Exactly, printing is the solution. What I do to save paper and make things more convenient is I use Adobe Reader’s booklet printing function. I LOVE it. I even have a special stapler and heavy cotton paper to use for covers.
I had bought a Sony eBook, but printed booklets are much better than it.
As was touched on by others in this thread computers and technology are tools, no more special than hammers or pencils. Using pencils in class is good for learning, because children can write and erase their work. Using hammers in class is not good for anything but learning how to use a hammer.
At this point, computers are more hammer than pencil, and there is a high likelihood that when kids graduate, the computer skills they learned in 5th grade will not be of much use, technology changes that fast. If computer skills are what you’re interested in teaching, give some rudimentary instruction in early grades, and ramp it up in 11th and 12th grade, when you can teach skills that are immediately applicable. If you’re interested in improving education overall, I don’t think computers are where your focus should be.
Two points: Online reading encourages skimming and less attention because of the over abundance of material. I think it is a mistake to have unfettered internet access on a learning computer at all times. If you have access to your text books and whatever research sources the teachers deems appropriate for that subject, both properly formatted for screen reading, you should improvements.
Second, no one has brought up the back end benefits. If integrated correctly this type of technology can give teachers and counselors the ability to see what is happening with the students. If a student is having problems in history class, the teacher can check his/her logs and see how much time is actually being spent on studying and homework. Does the student need more tutoring? Are they really trying or blowing off the assignments? MB and chat rooms don’t replace the class room, but they not only offer a way to easily find a study help, but they can show who is really trying and who isn’t.
Jonathan
It disappoints me when people younger than me have little understanding of how a computer works. It disappointed me how much I had to do to understand computers, and how few people older than me have managed to understand the computer, which is downright ubiquitous now.
Perhaps technology in schools is overrated, but from the workplace perspective, people are still not savvy enough IMO. We hired a recent high school grad who was a whiz with his cell phone but didn’t understand the basics of operating a computer, nevermind how to use standard office packages. He didn’t even know how to type well.
ETA: what I mean is that I don’t give a hoot whether it elevates test scores. Technology is ubiquitous in modern society. Test scores are not.
Something that hasn’t been mentioned here is the benefit to research. The ability to download papers right off the internet wherever you are is an enormous advantage. Tuition is only one way universities make money. Most universities will recieve millions of dollars in grant money for research projects every year. It’s true that learning is left up to the students. They can screw it up all they want on their own. The school gets tuition no matter what, but the school gets grants depending on how well their research programs work. If you don’t have a “wired” school, no decent grad student is going to join your school. American science graduate students are in extreme short supply.
As for the undergrads, they can do whatever they like. They have amazing recources being given to them. They can use their time productively, or they can play GTA all day. They give you the recources, but they can’t hold your hand the whole way.
I’ve spent a lot of time in schools and a lot of time dealing with Erate stuff.
The problem is the problem you always get with ‘free’ money: People spend it. They don’t have a plan for it, but they’re gonna spend it.
If you’re going to spend money on some equipment, you need to have a plan beyond “Buy this equipment”.
You want kids on the internet but they spend their time fucking off and playing games? How about the TEACHER watches the students? Too lazy? Fine, there’s software you can run on your machine that will show you the screen of every machine in that lab.
Bah.
-Joe
My brother used to work for a group that advised school districts in how to handle their technology better - he still consults with them a good bit.
Most of their recommendations are commonsense and cost-effective - things like using podcast technology, investing in smartboards and using them effectively, and using presentations effectively - this means placing very few memorable points into the PowerPoint slide and not the whole lecture.
He’ll also do things like tell school districts to stop paying word processing license fees - just install Open Office and spend that money on other stuff. This is for the word processing classes, where kids just have to learn how to handle the software in general - the concepts will be the same no matter what platform they go to in the future.
Textbooks mainly.