Slashdot Log In
Computers Not Working In Education
Posted by
Hemos
on Mon Dec 30, 2002 08:45 AM
from the similar-data-elsewhere dept.
from the similar-data-elsewhere dept.
salimfadhley writes "BBC Radio 4's current affairs program 'Analysis' is reporting [realaudio] [txt transcript] on emerging evidence that computers have harmed, rather than helped educational progress. There is still much debate among even the most enthusiastic supporters of schools technology about how computers should best be used.
Despite record investment in computers in the USA and UK, recent studies (not the ones funded by educational software companies) have shown a significant drop in core subjects (Math, English) in schools that place strong emphasis on Information Technology.
Evidence also suggests that whilst information technology has great potential in the classroom, teachers have not yet found better use for computers than as a big library. Very few schools have been able to use the new technology for cultural exchange, or to build practical educational networks with other schools.
Teachers do not know whether computers should be seen as an exciting but peripheral educational 'accessory', or if computers can actually be used to solve the most pressing problems of literacy and numeracy - the sorts of things that get kids through exams." The Economist had a similar article a month or two back, about Israeli schools that had similar results, along with an interesting comparison between how people see computers now, and how people in the early 20th century saw film strips in the classroom.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Certainly hasn't had any effect on spelling... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Certainly hasn't had any effect on spelling... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously though, I think that in the 80s a huge importance was placed upon computer education. The common notion was that everyone will need to know how to operate a computer later in life.
Well, they were partially right. Everyone should know how to operate a computer, but for practical purposes in High School education, that's a 2 hour class with perhaps a semester course in typing.
A computer will do much of the work for you. It will do your math, check your grammar, and allow you to do research from your home. The problems here are obvious. There is little need to do things for yourself. I've found that most children do not have the discipline to willingly learn advanced math and grammar on their own. The problem is two-fold here though because many parents don't have the discipline to discipline their kids.
As for research, I'll be quite blunt. The net is a poor tool for younger students. There is too much opinion and just plain bull shit on the web to be of great use. It takes a more seasoned approach and a level head to be able to filter out the crap, and I don't think the majority of high school kids benefit by using it to do their research work.
It's not a one-size fits all situation however, and it's difficult to administer a solution. If I were in charge though, I'd have one guideline: If your kid has ADD or some other modern learning disability that requires he get special attention in school, his computer access should be limited. Afterall, the kid's problem is distraction, so a computer (with web access is even worse) is definitely going to be a greater distraction than a learning tool.
Parent
You dont know what you are talking about (Score:4, Insightful)
I've never met a kid with "ADD" who cant pay attention to the television, or the video games, or books when they want to read them.
ADD in school is just a petty excuse teachers make for students who rebel, they dont just want to admit that they suck as teachers, their classes are boring as hell and their students arent learning.
In a class where a kid is not learning a damn thing or a class thats boring as h ell, suddenly the symptoms of ADD appear.
I think if a kid really does have ADD the best way to deal with it is to let them use the computer, and let them learn in their own way.
Also when a kid is on the computer, if they do have ADD even if they are distracted they still learn something, even if they go drift off into other websites as long as the school has things setup so the kid is always learning no matter where they go on the net, it can work.
Dont allow any games, perhaps you shouldnt allow someone with ADD to go into a chatroom, but if they have a problem paying attention and the goal is for them to gather as much knowledge as possible perhaps the best way is to let them direct their own learning. Not everyone learns in a structured way, and the solution is not to blame the ADD, but to teach them in a way which they accept, even people with ADD know alot about certain things.
Parent
Good lord (Score:2)
Wish I could comment more on this, but not sure where company intellectual property on stratedgies start.
Re:Good lord (Score:5, Insightful)
Reports like this are a step in the right direction, showing teachers that Math, English and even fine arts are so much more needed skills than calculators, word processors, and MS Paint.
*rant* Now if we could just get school boards across the nation to get their heads out of their collective
Back on topic
My two cents.
Parent
Re:Good lord (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Good lord (Score:3, Interesting)
The most important educational software I ever used was:
Logo taught me about controlling the computer and doing fun stuff with it that didn't come prepackaged. Oregon Trail taught me to enjoy working with the computer and in groups with other kids in solving basic problems (e.g., whether to float or ford the river, etc.).
We didn't use these in the classroom, though, but in the computer lab. I don't see how they can be reasonably integrated into the classroom with class sizes as small as they are (small compared to college lectures, e.g., where a laptop with diagrams and whatnot the prof is looking at can be a helpful aid).
-l
Not suprised (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not suprised (Score:5, Interesting)
True dat. But only because they teach computer "science" (how to use particular applications, etc.) rather than computer science (creating and analyzing computable algorithms). When I was in 3rd grade (yes, 3rd grade), I was in a Montessori school that had a great computer lab (well, great for 1983). We had a class in computer programming for all the third graders as part of the math class. We programmed in Logo. The first week we got to play with the computers and learned to make squares and stuff (repeat 4: fd 50 rt 90). For the next 2 months we didn't touch the computers; we wrote out algorithms on paper. The next semester was the same way, but with Forth instead of Logo.
The end result? I still design applicative programs, no matter what language I use. I still debug by proving the flaws in my algorithms rather than by examining memory. I still program with pencil and paper before I touch a keyboard. I like programming that way, though it doesn't always go over well with the "we need e-business solutions to leverage our key synergies" crowd.
Who was it that said "Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes"? Computers can be good tools to supplement pencil-and-paper analysis of algorithms; I haven't seen a school since that used them that way, though. They mostly teach how to research on the Internet (a useful skill, I admit) and how to make pretty slideshows.
Parent
Re:Not suprised (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, I can't help you there. It's a surprisingly powerful functional/applicative language; most people only know about using it to draw little pictures because that's one of the easiest ways to teach kids.
I was 8, like most people in the 3rd grade.
Basic isn't a functional language. It forms bad habits; too many side effects, and not enough distinction between functions and subroutines.
Well, first off, this was long before the days of Visual Basic (thank God). Secondly, VB would probably be the worst language to teach someone algorithmic analysis except maybe for Smalltalk. As for C, I did learn that in Middle School, and the teacher was surprised that I used recursion when most people would use iteration (thanks to Logo and Forth), which tended to simplify my programs.
Ummm... yeah. Replace "algebra" with "discrete mathematics" and you're basically repeating what I said
Well, we disagree then. I don't think you can learn math very well if you start out using calculators or computers or any "black box" that gives you answers when you give it questions. Kids should develop mathematical discipline first.
Parent
Re:Not suprised (Score:4, Informative)
Actually Logo is a quite powerful language. It's much better for teaching about structured programming and mathematics. Turtle graphics, which everyone starts with, is just a small part of Logo.
Check out StarLogo [mit.edu] for some really cool massively parallel programming.
Parent
Re:Not suprised (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe if we started teaching C at the 3rd grade level, we would finally have a pool of C programmers talented enough to avoid buffer overflows. In fact, I think that a child who writes an exploitable security bug in their C application should be subjected to corporal punishment. Nobody should pass the 5th grade unless they can write a solid FTP server.
In the long run, this strategy is the only way to improve the quality of software development in this country. We need to teach children at the earliest possible age to have proper respect for the power of pointer arithmetic.
Re:Not suprised (Score:3, Informative)
I think that an advanced year long programming course could work well if you spent a semester on C and a semester on asm, but learning one without the other is fairly uninformative.
To bring up a point I think you can recognize, teaching children in C is like making them take a class in MS Word. They're both extremely complex and used in the business world. That doesn't make them appropriate.
Re:Not suprised (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you considered that although the language is largely useless for building applications, it's a pretty useful tool for teaching children about how computers work? Logo is good at encouraging modular programming concepts, and is reasonably interactive -- perfect for 3rd graders. And it sounds like they did some stuff that a 3rd grader would find interesting, like creating shapes on the screen.
I'd teach someone at that age Basic not Logo. In Middle School I'd move on to Visual Basic and or C.
This plan isn't going to work for the masses. Yes, there are kids that can learn to program effectively in C during the Middle School years. But many of them cannot grasp it. Of those that are capable, many of them wouldn't be interested in programming -- they'd rather play games. There's a reason why advanced mathematical logic and proofs isn't usually taught until high school. It's because there are some significant changes during adolescence in the prefrontal cortex, frontal lobes and parietal lobes of the brain. The result of these changes is sharper focus and attentiveness, improved executive function and planning, and better spatial processing. Therefore, schools tend to avoid teaching subjects that require these skills until after most of the students are ready.
This would be computer science and they'd learn a few concepts which might help them in understanding algebra
While this is true, I believe it might be better for them to learn the concepts of algebra without the aid of a computer. I've found that among high school students, those that struggled the most to learn how to program had a weak background in algebra. However, let me point out that my evidence in this area is merely anecdotal. IANAEBIKMOT (I am not an educator, but I know many of them). :-)
Computers should be used as a tool to teach math, not as a tool to teach Computers.
I cannot disagree more. Students should be learning the foundations of math without interference from devices that help them perform the math. For the same reason, calculators were normally banned during my school years until students started doing trigonometry and calculus. This was intended to force them to learn the concepts of the math rather than relying on a machine. Want to see what happens when students start using calculators? Take a look at today's teenagers working a cash register who can't even count change back to you properly. I don't see computers as improving this situation at all.
Teachers today treat Computers like they are mysterious
I agree with you here. I think that perhaps the single biggest problem is that the teachers themselves are not familiar enough with computers.
A web connected Tablet connected to everyones desk would be far more efficient than notebooks and the current tools, and a smartboard is far more efficient than a chalk board
I agree with you here. This would be a tremendous advance in classrooms.
you can learn math just fine with just a calculator, you can learn math with a computer
As I said before, I disagree with this. Today's teens are evidence enough. Most of the teenagers I know are using calculators in their math classes and couldn't do math properly to save their lives.
And before some fool comes and says "You dont know math if you use a calculator, you dont know math is you use a computer"
The danger isn't in using a calculator or computer. The danger is in using one before you've developed efficient skills at doing it yourself. The best way to improve your math skills is to practice.
Theres a difference between knowing math, and knowing how to work with numbers, number crunching is not knowing math.
Although this is somewhat true, exercising your brain on some number crunching greatly improves your understanding and efficiency in mathematics. When I was in college, I received a dramatic lesson in this. One of my professors put up a problem that required calculus to solve. The specifics of the problem were dictated by the students, but we were left as a class to solve the problem. All of us had calculators except the professor, who was using a slide rule. He was able to solve the problem accurately on his slide rule before any of us could even finish typing in the numbers to the first part on our calculators. Even those of us with calculators that performed integration were no match for him. Why? Because he did large portions of the math in his head, only employing the slide rule where necessary. After witnessing that demonstration, I stopped using my calculator for all but the most difficult tasks. When I go to a grocery store, I make it a point to add up the prices of what I'm buying in my head -- just to keep my brain working.
So, where do I think we need to see computers? We're already seeing them in use as a library of information. This is a good start. Being connected with people all over the world helps to break down cultural barriers, but I believe this kind of use happens best outside of school. Learning to program is an excellent idea, as most people will use it in one form or another in the business world. How about taking and grading tests? Also, computers are great for self-paced learning, and as such could be the key for allowing students with a wide range of capabilities to learn to the best of their ability.
Parent
I was a victim of technology!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Then I got to college
Now keep in mind, I was a pretty good math student (scored perfect on the SATs in Math
I took my first college Calc II exam, and of course, used my calculator for it. In all fairness, it was a difficult exam, but a fair exam. I thought I would be "joe slick" and finish quickly by using the latest and greatest graphing calc. available
Needless to say, that was the last time I used that calculator for anything but to check answers (or to get answers and reverse engineer them)
My prof was right though
It is an evil world we live in
It looks like technology is like women
Just my 2 cents
Re:I was a victim of technology!!! (Score:3, Interesting)
When I was in first grade, my teacher used flash cards to teach us the simple stuff: adding and subtracting numbers under 20. We later learned how to extend those skills to include more complex operations; it seems once you learn the simple stuff, you can build on it and apply it to the complex math. So, I'm starting my daughter on flash cards at home. It's not high tech, but it's effective.
Re:I was a victim of technology!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to teach high school Math (Algebra, Geometry, Algebra II, General Math). I made it clear to the students from the beginning how important it was to show their work. On a 5 point question, if the student gave me an answer without work, they'd get 1 point (maybe 2 if I was feeling generous). If they showed their work, and it was mostly right (maybe they missed a + or - or one small mistake), they'd get 4 out of 5. For high school students that is often hard to understand -- all they can think about is the answer. For Algebra I, for the first half of the year, they still can't understand why they can't just do it in their head.
Each day I'd collect the homework and grade it on participation. If the work was there, they'd get a 2, if it was poorly done, or only 1/3 to 2/3 or so done, it'd get a 1. I'd add these up at the end of the year and get a percentage of how much of the homework each student did that term. That would count 20% of the semester grade. I even added a homework line -- a 2nd phone line w/ caller ID and an answering maching so students could call and get their assignment or leave a message for help on an assignment and I'd call back as soon as I could. (The administration HATED this and told me to disconnect it ASAP. -- I didn't -- could you see me telling the class, "The homework line has been stopped, per order of the administration." ??) There were several calls to check assignments, but in about 3/4 of a school year, only 1 call for help. It stopped the "I couldn't do it because I didn't understand it" or "I forgot what it was" excuses!
As a teacher, I needed to know the process to get the answer. Especially in Algebra I, where they didn't want to show it. I needed to know they were learning the tools they would need in the 2nd half of the year or for Algebra II.
True, there's graphing calcs and such, but if you don't understand HOW to get the answer, you're just listening to a machine. That's no better than the Borg. (Remember Isaac Asimov's story about someone who realizes 1+1=2 always -- and stuns the world that you don't need calculators to do math?)
There's also the other side note. If you give me just an answer on a test, how do I know if you "did it in your head" or copied it off someone else?
In Math, especially, a student needs to know the tools to get the answer. That's what they're learning in Algebra I & II and Geometry. If they don't show their work, you don't know if they're using those tools.
Parent
Well, duh (Score:2, Interesting)
You don't see architectecture schools talking about how power actuated fasteners are changing how they teach, do you? Of course not, they are just tools that save on labor. Computers are the exact same thing, and the quicker people realize that a computer is just another form of tool, the quicker everyone will realize that there is nothing mystical about them and their operators. Realizing this will help to devalue the artificially high prices of computer "engineers", cut down on overhead drastically, and provide just the shot in the arm our stock market needs to rebound.
I don't mean to bash on our dedicated teachers - they are doing the best they can, given their abilities and environment, but hyping up computers as a replacement to study isn't a good idea. There's a reason we weren't allowed to use calculators until Calculus class when we were in school, and that is why we hand to hand write exams without a dictionary available. It is nice to have technology available, but it should always be as an assistant to aid the individual in his work- it should not direct his work
Reservoirs not processors (Score:4, Interesting)
You have to tread carefully when students start using them as active information _processors_ . Then you start to wonder what the net effect on education is.
Obviously not working... (Score:2)
Despite record investment in computers in the USA and UK, recent studies (not the ones funded by educational software companies) have shown a significant drop in core subjects (Math, English) in schools that plase strong emphasis on Information Technology
They wrote a book about this (Score:3, Informative)
Interesting, but ... (Score:2, Insightful)
These days, computers waste time more than anything. It is too tempting for them to be used for 'messing around' with Windows and the Internet than for teaching kids basic skills. The latest crop of PCs have no software that supplements classroom teaching. What's the use of learning to use a word processor if you can't read or write?
Definitely, but they still are useful (Score:4, Interesting)
An elementary school math tutor for the kids who were behind asked me to make a math tutor computer program that wasn't cartoony etc. Getting exact details on what she wanted was like pulling teeth, but in the end we wound up with a piece of software that was kid-friendly (meaning easy for them to control, some kids have coordination issues when it comes to moving mice) and actually helped improve their math abilities.
One thing that I am quite proud to have worked with is the AR Program (Accelerated Reader). The concept is to have point values and difficulty values for most of the books in the library. Kids check out whatever books they want (they are strongly encouraged to use books of an appropriate difficulty level) and can take computerized quizzes on them. The kids can trade in points they earn for candy and small, cheap toys. It actually works! I would have imagined that the kids would have gotten tired of it quickly, but the teachers take it seriously and the majority of the books in the school library have AR quizes available.
I have volunteered in several elementary schools, but in the one where they emphasized this AR program I regularly saw kids leaving the library with books and actually eager to read them. That is a very big thing; getting kids modivated to learn/read is one of the biggest problems in educational. This computer software is not advanced; it could be made to work on an AppleIIGS, but the fact that it is actually getting kids to read (and to like it!) is profound.
Parent
its not babysitting stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Part of the problem is that many schools are staffed with teachers fresh out of school themselves and put into situations that equate to nothing more than glorified babysitting.
The real issue here, and this applies to whether or not we put computers in classrooms or force them to use old-school slide-rules, we've got to get back to teaching kids how to think, analyze and take some mental initiative.
Unfortunately, this usually starts at home
From the article (Score:2)
I think we have dropped the material onto schools, we haven't provided adequate training for teachers in how to use it, we've assumed it's a good thing that doesn't need justification. And like many other innovations, the danger is that all innovation and change requires a coalition of people in schools to support them.
"Here you are, a nice shiny new computer. What do you do with it? Why, plug it in, of course". About the best learning software I've seen (and admittedly I haven't looked recently) was MathBlaster. Better tools and better training for the teachers is what is really necessary to make computers work in schools.
More information (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.familyhaven.com/parenting/hightechheret ic.html [familyhaven.com]
If you haven't read his book "High Tech Heretic: Why Computers Don't Belong in the Classroom and Other Reflections by a Computer Contrarian" [amazon.com] you really should. It's got some great reading and some things we should think about as we design software.
What can we do as software developers to actually make computers useful in the classroom instead of so distracting? Any thoughts from educators out there?
Re:More information (Score:3, Informative)
Having every kid have their own login is too much of a pain. Getting them set up, then having kids forget their passwords, took too much time. Her kids did not want use a computer logged in as somebody else because they wanted it personalized as "theirs".
Another headache was software licenses. Some programs required a disk be brought around to each computer to activate the session. The school district was (understandably) reluctant to spring for the best rated (but expensive) instructive software. This is an area in which free software would be a boon.
One can easily see how the headaches of computers easily distract from the learning process.
Quite a number of intel employees think so too... (Score:2, Interesting)
Because they are both high tech professionals, Paul's parents say they know firsthand the addictive nature of computers and the Internet.
"They are somewhat addicting, and for young children that don't have all of the faculties that we have as adults, I don't think they can determine how much of something is not good for them," Baldridge said.
Education is no different that other applications, (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, many of the teachers (just like many of the engineers in the corporate world,) said "What? I don't think thats going to work." but the school boards wanted their schools to be considered hi-tech, and it was an easy way to get more money for education.
Now that this stuff has actually been tested in the field, we're seeing it all backfire.
And all jokes aside, while technology teachers tend to know what they're doing, many other teachers were given a manual and direct orders to "teach using these computers!". Obviously, thats going to have a negative effect.
Electronic babysitters. (Score:3, Redundant)
From what I've seen, computers are mostly used in the classroom as electronic babysitters. Small wonder they aren't improving education.
Our society seems to be beset with a mentality that calls for computerizing things because we can, rather than because there's a need.
ps - Get more replies when there's a reply button, eh Taco?
In my day... (Score:4, Funny)
If my family was being held hostage by some mad mathematician who demanded that I solve some equation or my family dies, i'd skip right to the funeral arrangments. Thankfully there arent many homicidal mathematicians.
In other news (Score:3, Insightful)
Ballpoint pens have been found to have no advantage over pencils regarding spelling.
Calculators found to not aid basic understanding and proficiency in mathematics. (Yesterday I saw someone enter 150000 * 1 into a calulator, then write down the answer so they wouldn't forget it)
It's a tool, just because you have it it doesn't mean you know how to use it. Too much emphasis is placed on the hardware in schools, too much money is spent on a fast connection, teach kids (and teachers) how to actually use them for academic purposes and you may see an improvement in some topics.
For subjects such as history and geography, the internet really can help a lot. To teach spelling or mathematical skills, maybe some software can be of assistance, but only if people know how to use it. The computer is not a replacement for a teacher.
True--they don't (Score:5, Insightful)
We need to turn out smarter teachers and give them incentives to perform, like better pay, long before we think about having a computer for every student.
Re:True--they don't (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a friend who used to be a middle school English teacher, one of the best teachers I've ever known, he employed a variety of methods to get kids to learn. He did lots of different "cool" things like after reading a story, having the kids go in the hall and draw the story on huge newsprint scrolls.
He also didn't take any crap from his kids. They acted up, he disiplined them according to school policy (detention, office, etc). If a kid didn't participate or didn't do the homework, he failed them. If the kids at least tryed to learn he did his best to help them (and those kids passed).
The result? He was fired. Why? Because he made the other teachers look bad, and too many of his kids were failing and being disiplined. Why would teachers pass kids that weren't even trying, or refuse to disipline kids that are troublemakers?
Because at least in Texas laws have been passed that give more money to schools that have high rates of students passing and high attendence. If a kid gets disiplined and eventually suspended, the school gets less money. If the students don't make the grade its better to curve them up because then the school gets more money because they passed. Teachers are encouraged to ignore disipline problems and pass failing kids regardless of grades. Good teachers that refuse to follow the system get canned and we're left with people who only care about paycheck and will happily hand out passing grades.
Students figure out this system too and don't make an effort to learn. They don't have to. The troublemakers bully other kids around without thought of consequences, all of which probably helps to foster the rampant school shooting problems as well.
Parent
I am thankfull... (Score:2)
Now I find myself relying on spell checker to fix my spelling errors, a search engine to find information, and a calculator to do math. These are all great tools, but without the basic knowledge behind them, they become a crutch.
and looking at school test scores, they aren't being used as tools.
Google vs. Academics (Score:4, Insightful)
What happens when within 5 minutes I can gain most any knowledge I desire? Well..it kinda breaks down the walls, that is what it does.
The problem with such limitless resources, is not a problem with the resource itself, it's a cultural problem. Our modern education system sucks. Absolutly, positivly sucks. All it does is turn a majority of students completly off of knowledge. It does not encourage the kind of curiosity and logical thought that make for an intelligent person.
Our education system should consist of the basic fundimentals..Math general scientific method, language and grammer, and logical thought are the most important things we can teach. Everything else stems from these base things, and should be taught as such.
Love of knowledge is the most important thing that can be gained at such a young age. We should not throw this away just so we can have good little Christian worker bees.
Re:Google vs. Academics (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh, no. Within 5 minutes, you can google for any facts you desire. Knowledge takes work. Want to find a French dictionary? Easy. Want to speak French? Hard. There are many things beyond the basics that need to be taught rather than simply googled.
But I agree with your basic thesis.
Parent
Computers are only a tool... (Score:3, Insightful)
If you really want a better education for our children we should return focus on the basics... Math - Science - Language/Writing/Reading. Computers can be used when applicable to help teach these lessons, but otherwise are not particularly necessary.
not all bad (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, many of the reading comprehension titles are no better than the workbooks from before -- read a few paragraphs, answer a few questions. In fact, they're often worse because the workbooks allowed the student to respond with a sentence describing the paragraph rather than clicking a multiple choice option.
I do think that computers are useful in post-lecture studies since it allows students to work at their own pace until they understand a topic. THis is especially useful for mathematics.
My son's computer class. (Score:5, Funny)
Because she knows nothing, she dumps 'edutainment' programs onto the machines and has the kids play them continually while she merely maintains classroom discipline.
She spent three weeks (that's 40 minutes per lesson for 10 lessons) having the kids run some kind of 'typing tutor' program. Since all the kids learned to type in 3rd grade (at least as well as a typing tutor program *can* teach), they were all bored to tears with the repetitive exercises.
Fortunately, my son discovered that this stoopid program doesn't disable cut and paste - so he was able to complete all the exercises insanely quickly. Since the teacher allows them to surf the web once they have finished the assignments, he was able to go off and have fun by himself the entire time.
The crowning glory came at the end of the year when the teachers were handing out class prizes - my son was awarded the prize for best EVER score on the typing tutor by the dump computer science teacher - she proudly announced that he'd scored something like 3,000 words per minute with a 0% error rate. Some of the other teachers looked a bit strangely at her - clearly realising that something had gone amok, but perhaps assuming she'd just mis-spoken the results.
This is just one of many gaffes this teacher made. She had the kids "List 10 parts of the Computer". My kid duly wrote stuff like 'CPU', 'ROM', 'Ethernet Ataptor', 'Motherboard' - and the teacher gave him zero on the "test" saying that the correct answer was 'Mouse', 'Keyboard', 'Television' (!), 'Mouse pad', etc. When my kid complained that his computer at home didn't have a mouse pad she told him that this was nonsense and that ALL computers have mouse pads - this dissuaded him from telling her that the monitor is not, in fact, a TV set.
Similarly, she had the kids write down the 10 good things and 10 bad things about computers. My son complained that he couldn't think of 10 bad things. His teacher gave as an example: "They crash a lot" - well, since we only run Linux at home, my son knows that this isn't necessarily true and that it's not the COMPUTER that crashes - it's the SOFTWARE. Inevitably, when he complained he got in trouble.
I've written several letters to the teacher in question (she doesn't appear to read her email - even though it's provided by the school) - with poor results. I wrote and even visited with the Principal to try to get something done - but of course she just says that qualified staff are hard to get - and the State doesn't require that teachers are trained in the subject they are teaching.
So, can we conclude that teaching with computers is "A Bad Thing" ?
No!
Not unless we've carefully checked that the teachers and curriculum are sensibly chosen. Clearly, if my son's school had spent the money that went
into that computer lab in some other way, they'd have gotten more value for money and the kid's grades would have been better...but that doesn't prove that teaching computers are bad - just that they are ineptly managed.
The Economist (Score:5, Informative)
The real link to The Economist is here [economist.com].
Thoughts from a college IT guy... (Score:5, Informative)
The Internet. (Score:4, Informative)
Very Unsurprised (Score:3, Interesting)
I am very unsurprised by this.
Computers are useful if you are teaching subjects which necessarily require them.
Computer Programming, wordprocessing, keyboarding, Drafting/CAD, video editing and photography are all subjects for which I have seen computers effectively used.
What do these have in common?
You don't teach them in elementary school!
I really think that computers in elementary school classrooms has more to do with principals obsessed with whiz-bang technology rather than anything to do with a "need" to "teach" students something they couldn't learn without them, or couldn't learn as quickly or effectively.
I hear arguments about basic computer literacy... but basic computer literacy is difficult to teach, I don't think it can be taught properly in the current classroom environment. That is, kids need lots of time alone with the computer. You can't develop that literacy a little bit at a time with multiple kids to a system interrupted constantly by a teacher who doesn't understand the technology.
To me, the first step in teaching somebody computer literacy, is getting them to overcome the fear of breaking something. Most teachers I've met are still at the stage of "Just click the icons... and hope it doesn't crash."
I can't wait until people realize that computers in elementary school classrooms are a stupid idea.
i am a classroom teacher (Score:3, Interesting)
many teachers(remember i am a public school teacher), lets face it, have a very easy job. having them bang away on a computer for a few days, especially if there's a lab tech in there, makes it a piece of cake.
it's not that technolgoy should not be in schools. i am finishing a masters in instructional technology. it's just that beaurocratic problems and inertia make change damn near impossible. for instance, are district had spent lots of money on an netrworking infrastructure, moving towards, as our former, now retired, (and clueless) tech admin said "fewer, more powerful, servers". this at the time that that the indsutry was moving towards more, smaller, servers, disrtributed computing. so did we change. no, inertia. so, get to your school boards, they are elected you know, and demand accountability.
The REAL problem (Score:4, Interesting)
Computers in the classroom do NOT teach the subject matter to the kids. They only teach the kids how to use a *particular set of desktop applications* (not necessarily even anything about the computer itself).
Second, as only one person pointed out, and as has been largely forgotten by the educational system as it stands today -- after presenting the subject matter, it must be drilled, and the drilling must be done such that the learner has to interact with the drill, if only by writing it down with their own hand (NOT by typing/clicking it -- different neural pathway, so doesn't work to embed the information). Why? Because rote learning is how you make the subject matter STICK in kids' brains. And if it's boring at the time, tough -- do you want them to really remember it or not??
Third, as only one other person touched on, the issue of discipline in the classroom has gone by the wayside, and given how easy it is for most kids to get more interested in bypassing what's allowed on their computers than in the subject matter, computers exacerbate this. Now the object is to keep kids "interested" -- and it's clearly not working. The old method of "you will sit still and learn this like it or not, end of discussion" may not have been "enjoyable" but it WORKED. Make up your minds -- do you want to keep kids entertained, or do you want them to grow up into competent adults? Because you can't have both.
Want to fix the problems generated and exacerbated by computers in the classroom? Easy. Restrict computers and in-school computer use to one place: the classes that are specifically *about* computers.
That won't do anything for the more-basic issues of bad teachers and bad school systems, but at least it will stop masking the problem.
Welcome to the 19th century (Score:3, Interesting)
Second, as only one person pointed out, and as has been largely forgotten by the educational system as it stands today -- after presenting the subject matter, it must be drilled..
"Rote-drills" only work for the small percentage of kids who are wired for that kind of learning. And many of those kids won't focus their attention enough to learn even then.
As a result, bright, precocious, successful kids become more successful. Some truly brilliant kids who are developmentally delayed, who have ADD, who have different intelligences are relegated to "career tracks" where they will not blossom. So when the pathways develop that allow for higher math learning, for example, the kid's already in some vocational program learning to be an MCSE. What a waste!
The old method of "you will sit still and learn this like it or not, end of discussion" may not have been "enjoyable" but it WORKED.
It really didn't work that well. It worked for lots of kids who were in school, who were suited to it. Remember, lots of kids dropped out during the "glory days" of instructivist rote-drills. Lots of kids finished school at 8th grade, then went to work in factories or farms. These are the kids who were wasted on "rote drills." Sure, some of them were just unintelligent. But many of them weren't suited to the 19th century education you advocate. That worked well in the 19th and early 20th centuries. We had lots of laborer jobs. Now we have an information economy. We just don't have that many of those types of jobs anymore.
We shouldn't just throw away kids who don't respond well to rote learning. It's a very narrow view of learning and very elitist.
Want to fix the problems generated and exacerbated by computers in the classroom? Easy. Restrict computers and in-school computer use to one place: the classes that are specifically *about* computers.
I guess that would be the easiest way to do it. It's probably the easiest and quickest way to be eclipsed by Europe and Asia. How about doing more research and figuring out how to make computer assisted learning work?
Now, if you're truly interested in what real educators have learned about the educational process, you can do some googling on the following topics:
Constructivism [google.com]
Multiple Intelligences [google.com]
Ed Tech theory [google.com]
And here begins my rant about Slashdot, and parent poster, please forgive me if I offend. Lord knows I've said and written some incredibly stupid stuff - orders of magnitude worse than what I took offense at in your post.
Why do we tend to write things like "Of COURSE, any IDIOT would know that XXXXX would solve YYYYY problem?" Do we think that the experts in the field are all sitting around with their thumbs up their fannies? We have a huge field of research in this area. It's fine to share your opinion. That's what Slashdot is about. But come on, don't be so arrogant about it - like the solutions are SO OBVIOUS, ANY IDIOT could figure them out. We are working on the solutions while so many others are just whining and griping.
Inform yourself, do some digging, some reading. Problems are almost always more complex than they first appear. Solutions are almost always more difficult to achieve than it seems they should be.
End rant.
Long ago I taught math(s) (Score:4, Interesting)
Expecting underqualified teachers to teach challenging subjects while requiring them to use unfamiliar hardware, someone else's idea of appropriate software, and an unstable environment (email, messaging) when no-one has really thought out the necessary changes to classroom behavior and trained teachers appropriately...well, I think it's a recipe for disaster and I'm extremely relieved that all my children are past school age. With luck the system will have changed by the time any grandchildren are old enough.
A true story. A few years back I briefly considered going back into teaching. To be exact, I considered doing a course that would have qualified me to teach teachers to use IT in the classroom. There were two problems. First, the college turned out not really to know what the course content should be. The person in charge was a pre-IT trained educator, not a computer scientist or an educational psychologist. Oh, and second, he admitted that there was no guarantee that the Government would actually fund these training posts.
In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is looking for the way out.
Good teachers.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, a European associate turned that around: If you can be replaced by a computer, you should be.
I started my undergrad in graphic design, and there is a rightly prevailing attitude in that field that the computer is no more than a tool, and knowing a few graphics program does not make you a designer. The same holds true in education.
We have seen too many educational packages put together by business, marketing, and computer peopl,e and not enough with real instructional theory behind them. Most educators are not capableof that.
Computers are just tools, and if they've failed, it is not the computer's fault, but the people who used them incorrectly.
I for one am using computers to teach lesser-taught foreign languages (Arabic, Swahili, Korean, Chinese, etc.) to people I will never meet, and who do not have the time or resources to attend school. Computers have not failed here because: a) we are getting as good results as in-class equivalents, and b) these students would otherwise be left without this education.
PC in class BAD, PC at home GOOD (Score:3, Interesting)
Like practically all of you, this study comes as no suprise to me either. When I was in K-12 back in the mid 80's to late 90's the only thing I remember using a computer in class for was playing a game. I never wrote a single paper at school using a computer, nor did I ever use it to do research. Having a computer in the classroom meant one thing to students and one thing only... games. And the funny thing is none of the teachers I've ever had discouraged that attitude, or more accurately, encouraged the perception of the pc as a learning tool.
I've always beleieved the pc (like tv) has had minimal impact in my acquisition of knowledge because a pc cannot teach you to think. It is the attitudes and actions of the teachers and parents of students that set the stage for their apporach and attitude towards education.
That being said computers cannot be ignored as a tool for aiding students in becoming educated (internet, online encyclopedias, word processing, desktop publishing, blah, blah). For that reason I think school districts shouldn't spend money in purchasing and maintaining computer labs and should offer incentives to the parents of students by supplying them with vouchers to make purchasing a computer for their home more viable. That way the cost of maintaining/upgrading equipment is transferred from the school to the student who is the actual user of the equipment. After all, if a student has purchased a study guide to help him perform better in math or english and if it requires special software to be installed why shouldn't he be able to do so? Let the use and upkeep of computers be the responsibility of those who use them. A voucher system would also give students the opportunity to purchase a computer they are most comfortable with whether it's a Mac, pc (windows/linux), desktop, or laptop. Why should the student be forced to do his homework a certain way using a specific computer/application when he has a choice?
In my mind, there are a vast number of reasons for schools not to have computers in the classroom and having a voucher system in its place. From my own experience, a voucher system for purchasing a computer would have greatly eased the buying process of my family's first pc and I am absolutely positive that is true for millions of other people out there.