The Future of Technology in Schools 272
citking writes "The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is running parts one and two of a three-part series dealing with the future of technology in America's schools. Part one asks whether technology in schools is merely a fad or, as some may argue, a necessity in today's technology-driven society. It raises some interesting points, such as the contrasting the wide availability of computers in schools to the generally limited use among students. Part two goes in-depth about the technology's cost, citing the dependence of grants that are disappearing and the effects of reducing technology staff. For part three you will have to tune in the the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel tomorrow."
They just buy the wrong computers (Score:4, Informative)
When you pay over $1000 per MS-based machine, that may be true. But as Linspire.com shows, students in Indiana will have their own Linux box at school:
http://www.linspire.com/lindows_news_pressrelease
It's not about the computers (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the reason is very simple: people like to work in private (thus not at school), with things arranged in their own way (thus at home), and with their own software and settings (which school computers often don't allow).
Whether the computers at school run Linux or Windows, and if they cost three hundred or three thousand dollars is completely irrelevant, except, of course, in cas the computers at school have some software that students need but is expensive for them to have at home. And guess what? Those are the cases where you do see students using the computers at school.
Re:It's not about the computers (Score:3, Insightful)
That's actually a good rationale, but you still have to consider that there are a number of homes still without computers, most of whom are low income households. Case in point, I was a collegiate athlete at a university with a computer requirement if you stayed on campus. Out of
It's not about the software either. (Score:5, Insightful)
Teachers must be properly trained to use this technology to its fullest. I'm afraid that won't realistically happen until the next generation of teachers emerges that has grown up all their lives around computers.
Computers should never come at the cost of student-teacher time, nor at the cost of fewer teachers. Nor, should schools compete with each other as to "who has the bigger, faster" setup. If it isn't actually improving education, it is worthless.
Saving schools money is good, as long as those savings are going to improve the educational experience, and not back into the budget for someone's pet project.
I remember my high school trying out computers. We only touched them when we all had to do something, and take turns, etc. The computer was a glorified typewriter, and the students were still required to hand write drafts, for instance. (I cheated, and scribbled on my notebook until a PC opened up.) But, I was patient. I knew most of the kids had never even used a computer. I, and the geeks I hung out with, averaged 2-4 at home. Still, I would have loved a school laptop back then. I finally bought my own in college.
College was different, but not much. I was more of the outsider for having it, as most of my peers had regular pen and paper. Then again, most were asking for printouts of my delicately constructed lecture outlines to compare to. While others left for the library to do a short paper, I was already half done before leaving class. Of course, I was left to my own faculties come test time.
But, that is another problem. A student who doesn't know how to work without a computer may be at a disadvantage at the college level, much as a student who doesn't know how to work with a computer is at a severe disadvantage. I remember the same debate over calculators being introduced into the SAT. Some college professors (not all, or even a majority) do not care what you work best with. They'll plop down a blue pad in front of you, and tell you to put all your fancy gadgets away.
Did computers help me in school? Not really. I didn't really care about education until college, and what mattered there was choosing a smaller school where I had lots of one on one time with professors when I needed it. They could have given away iPods and iBooks, and whatever else colleges are giving away now. Take them in exchange for 100+ student classes? No way!
As a side note, while I think moving some text to computers is good, I think I would be wearing some very thick glasses if I had to have read Anne Frank on a laptop.
Re:It's not about the computers (Score:2)
Back then we actually learned programming languages (basic and fortran) and got a good start on the basics of program development (flow charts were de rigueur).
In my class of approximately 350 there were about 15 of us who took that course - and of that 15 I would guess there are only about 5 of us who made computers their life's work.
I talked my parents into getting me a personal computer for Christmas that year (it was a TI 99A) - and I
It's nessecary. (Score:5, Insightful)
As I don't see technology becoming any less a part of this world, I'd argue that it's entirely relevent to use it in schools. People need to be brought up around technology to be able to readily accept it and take it for grante, otherwise the lurning curve is that much steeper. Just as long as it only remains a part of schools, rather than becoming the schools themselves.
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
Though I do agree that every child should get atleast some experience with computers at school, the current situation in which education as a whole is moving from traditional materials to computers-only is not the one I would support.
It just adds a layer of complexity between the student and t
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
What was your point, exactly?
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
Computers however, are not a required skill in order to do most jobs or life your live.
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
The problem is that using the computer full-time goes to the expense of other, more basic skills, such as using a pen for writing and doing math on paper.
When the focus is the tool you have lost! (Score:2)
Re:When the focus is the tool you have lost! (Score:2)
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Interesting)
I said technology should only be part of schools for a reason - not that it should be the ONLY thing taught in schools.
And yes, there is nothing you can do on a computer on a schooldesk that you cannot do with books, pencils and paper. But what good is it being able to write really good stories, for example, without having been exposed to a word processor in your life?
It's a skill you're pretty much gonna have to learn
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Insightful)
Apart from, y'know, using computers? Learning about modern technology? How about becoming familiar with programming, testing and debugging? Using the internet as a research tool?
I'd go so far as to say that while reading, writing and basic maths are important too, you actually can't learn basic technology use without, y'know, using it.
I firmly believe that, like every student should be abl
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
Using the internet as a research tool?
Why not just teach them how to use research tools in general? That way, whether they find themselves in front of a Google prompt *or* a library card catalog, they'll know how to go about finding the information they seek.
I've seen people try and fail to find what they're looking for on Google,
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
You can't just teach students to use research tools in general. You have to teach them a variety of specific tools, and computers are clearly going to be the most important of those tools in the future.
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
No, they're not. The particulars of the tool differ, but the underlying mental skills remains the same. If you don't know how to categorize or evaluate information, you're not going to be able to use *any* search tool effectively.
You can't just teach students to use research tools in general.
Yes, you damned well can. Or, what, you want them to have a separate class in how to use Ya
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Interesting)
Indeed, why not? I'm with you on that one, and I didn't suggest for a second that that was the only way we could (or should) be doing it.
However, in the absence of a handy desk-sized library for every student, and the hassle of organising orderly c
IT-centric view of world? (Score:2)
If there are enough students interested in a class for specific job skills then go ahead and offer it but to claim that everyone needs them is ridiculous.
Instead of worrying about teaching them how to use a G
Re:IT-centric view of world? (Score:2)
I'd argue it's more like teaching all kids to play sports. Very few will go on to play professionally, but the skills and values (healthy lifestyle, teamwork, strategy, losing gracefully) will help them in whatever they do in the future.
"It is a specific job skill for a specific type of career, not a skill needed for life in general. How many nurses need to know how to use
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Interesting)
There's a difference. Learning to use a word processor (and to type in general) just isn't that hard. A person can and often does learn that on their own. Being able to write really good stories? That is in a class by itself.
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Interesting)
As to the use of word processors, I consider that it is quite important that pupils are introduced to them relatively early on.
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
Try telling that to the current crop of under-25s who reach for calculators to perform trivial mathematical operations.
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
My problem? I used my brain as my scratchpad - so until I got used to writing things down (and taking 2-3x longer to complete a given problem) I got worse grades than my fellow classmates.
It's not about how well you can do something in high school; it's about how well you can appease the teacher in showing that you're doing things the way they want them done
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:4, Insightful)
If the scools were doing their job of turning out people with command of the language, then sure, okay, teach 'em how to use a word processor as well.
But if the schools aren't doing that job to satisfaction, and it's pretty clear that they're not, then buying the school a bunch of Winboxes and Office licenses is worse than useless. What good is a cadre of ignorant mouthbreathers who write in AIM-speak? Sure, they'll know how to use the tool, but they won't know what to *do* with it.
Teach someone proper thinking skills, put him down in front of a computer, and he'll learn how to use Office on his own. Teach him how to use a computer without teaching him how to think, and he's going to be useless for anything other than trained-monkey work.
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Funny)
There is nothing extra you can do with a computer on a schooldesk that you cannot do with books, pencil and paper.
Nonlinear digital video editing?
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
It's usually when the English teacher tries to haphazardly integrate video production into an Englis
Re:It's nessecary. (Score:2)
Pointless (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Insightful)
For now, I'll be sitting in a lecture hall, having a PowerPoint read to me.
Or watching a horrid video on the mating habits of salmon. For the third time in as many years.
Or getting tendonitis from a poorly-designed click-happy interface on a music theory program.
Or spending 20 minutes working through a computer program that demonstrates something incredibly simple that could be more easily and much more effectively learned by actively drawing and working it out ourselves.
Or watching a 45 minute demonstration on how to use a search engine.
Or spending 15 minutes setting up an Excel spreadsheet to add up a few numbers and make it look pretty.
The closest I've come to using "advanced interactive content" in a mainstream (i.e. not college-level computer-related) course was the Quadratic Equation solver on the TI-82. Junior year of high school, it was the teacher's recommended way of solving such equations. Yeah, that came in really handy in college calculus.
There are lots of great ways to expose people to technology. In my experience, the signal-to-noise ratio of teaching standard courses with computers is atrocious.
Also, perhaps if we were to focus on offering kids ways to live well-balanced lives, and encouraging them to use technology for what it is, rather than for "job skills," they might actually enjoy their childhood, perhaps make a real connection with the technology, and not be disgruntled when they discover that they spent 20 years preparing for 40 years in a job just so they can have money to retire and supposedly enjoy the remaining 1/4 of their life, unless cut short by death, illness, depression, etc.
Is Football necessary? (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if these same schools are struggling for a tech budget while sports are funded this way. That would be the first question I'd have for the Racine district (in the article).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against sports in school per se, BUT... I AM against funding non-academic activities over academic ones. What are the priorities for funding here?
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
It's a fad.. (Score:3, Funny)
Technology is schools is another fad, just like them computer things and this new fangled Google-o-web thing. It'll never last.
This will join a long list of fads:
Cars, Computers, Bikes, Medicine, Porn.
We'll soon see them trying something new.
Re:It's a fad.. (Score:2)
Dont forget Equality of Technology in Schools (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Dont forget Equality of Technology in Schools (Score:2)
I like that they are getting tough with schools and doing something to try to make them better, but it's just not good policy to focus your entire curriculum around one test and it's even
The Fad... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Fad... (Score:2)
1: When the teacher writes on the board, it forces him/her to think through the material again, and prompts comments which are often very useful.
2: Writing on the board forces the teacher to pick and choose what information to show rather than just listing bullet after bullet of details.
3: Watching the writing process "build order" as a teacher fleshes out an argument helps to understand the way
Re:The Fad... (Score:2)
1. Writing on the board means the teacher can't cover as much material (even though the material might actually be relevant to the course, but then I suppose most students aren't going to complain about courses having less content) because it takes longer (I've had classes at university where there were powerpoint lectures and board-only lectures).
2. It's also difficult to place it on the we
Re:The Fad... (Score:2)
Thats a bug, not a feature - with Powerpoint its too easy to just pack in the material without regard to how fast students can process it. I've had a professor tr
Re:The Fad... (Score:2)
This isn't something that's intrinsic in powerpoint. I've thankfully not had this problem, and all lectures haven't had an information overload. But content on the board -does- still take longer to convey to the students. It takes longer to write it down, then to display a slide, and speak about the points it raises. Also, lecture slides aren't meant to be covered during the lecture (by a good lecturer anyway IMO). Students shoul
Re:The Fad... (Score:2)
10 In the beginning, you enroll for a course.
20 This course is taught in the traditional manner, i.e. information is thrown at you, you are expected to remember it for a few weeks.
30 That course has a book, which you purchase at the bookstore (supposedly).
40 However, a book alone is not sufficient for you to know the material.
50 So you get a teacher to run the class, because they (supposedly) know all about th
Re:The Fad... (Score:2)
It's because it is so easy to cram so much information into the slides with no explanation or consideration of how people will understand it. The best talks were always those where the speaker ac
Re:The Fad... (Score:2)
That's too bad (although by the sounds of it you've had the occassional good lecturer because you said almost
Most people
quantity != quality (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Humans aren't like a hard drive, that you can just dump megabytes per second into. The human mind has actually very limited bandwidth, as such, but is actually a sort of a pipeline, with buffers behind buffers. Any one overflowing will mean information being discarded.
Wisecracks like "but then I suppose most students aren't going to complain about courses having less conte
Re:quantity != quality (Score:2)
That's actually a good point. Reading the lecture slides beforehand is a good preliminary way to get familiarised with the information, the next step is to attend the lecture and the teacher talk to you, providing content that compliments the lecture notes, rather then going over the same information. The slide merely serves as a way to keep track of where in the lecture you are (and to allow the teacher to go
Re:quantity != quality (Score:2)
And especially to the bad idea that ploughing through 2-3 times more content per hour (e.g., via slide-shows) somehow means you learn more. It might well mean y
If all you are going to do on powerpoints.. (Score:2)
Opportunity for Open Source (Score:2, Insightful)
I honestly believe that if the Open Source community wants to go mainstream it must gain acceptance in schools. Because I learned first on Windows/MS software, I still do, and probably will alway feel more comfortable there. I love the ideals of Linux and the Open Source community in gene
Call me old school (Score:5, Interesting)
I love tech and think it can have a place in schools if a few simple rules are followed. Use tech where it makes sense. Make sure the teachers know how to use the tech FIRST. Make sure there is sufficient and appropriate tech for the audience (skip PowerPoint and Word, geez, use a good text editor, who needs all the formatting whizbang crap anyway?). Try and find an IT support person/group that understands education and can communicate with the staff (nothing worse than a locked down desktop just because the IT dept can't be bothered to understand the teacher's needs).
I think it's more important to have teachers who understand their subject, are enthusiastic about it, and love to share that enthusiasm than to have computers for computer's sake.
I also think it's important that we stop adding course load on kids and trim the subject list back to something that is more human AND make the classes a bit longer (I had 1 hour classes when in high school, my kids were down to 45 minutes - how soon before we get to 1/2 hour of McEd?).
Tech is fine when used sanely with a purpose within a larger designed teaching environment. If something has to go, let it be tech in favor or better teachers.
Re:Call me old school (Score:2)
Nice straw-man argument, but I believe no-one said otherwise (and unless the American education system has become really, really screwed up, those three are core studies required for all students).
language (especially for those of us in the US who think English is the only language)
Americans must be really stupid if there is anyone (who doesn'
Re:Call me old school (Score:2)
On a very slightly related note, I think it's a matter of awareness of different aspects of things. Sure, nobody thinks that English is the only language. There are a good deal of linguistic aspects of the world that the average American (or anyone, for that matter) are likely not aware of.
I've been to over a dozen countries, speak 3 la
Re:Call me old school (Score:3, Insightful)
My wife has a Phd in Childhood Ed.
My wife is a school adminstrator.
All comments below are valid (in my mind) to Kindergarden through 6 grade.
1) Teachers are liberal arts majors and they do not inherently know how to use tech.
2) Recent studies have shown kids pick up computers use methodologies very quickly when they need to, without adult help.
3) Computer labs need constant care, oddly enough viruses run virtually unchecked through schools, computer ones that is. I often call my wife and tell
Re:Call me old school (Score:2)
Elementary school is for teaching a love of reading and learning. High school is for the basic core so everyone is a few steps beyond "functional". College is the "I'll study whatever the fvck I want" reward (within the bounds of offerings and core requirements of the sch
Fries With That? (Score:3, Insightful)
For most students much of learning is a rote exercise. Exams are a regurgatation process, from some the product is as appealing as barf, from others it's a well served up platter where memory is complemented by order, and they can ask, fries with that? There are limitations to the amount of data students who learn by rote can process and having to learn Information Technology as a secondary form of literacy increases the burden.
There is no magic cure for education and the ever increasing demands burgeoning amounts of information makes on students. Reading, Writing and Arithmetic just doesn't cut it anymore.
The stone cold fact is fewer people have the faculties able to assimilate huge amounts of information, recognize patterns in that information and acquire the tools to operate positively on that information.
The best and the brightest are no longer culled from America only, or the west, the best and the brightest are cheery picked from the wide world, because the demands have pushed the requirements to a world set.
Along with ability there must also be the drive to endlessly read and update one's knowledge base.
Strong arguments now suggest our relatively larger brains came about from our more complex social structures, and, for many, maintaining social structures take first place over being a geek. Some people would rather get laid and revel in their place in the tribe. Go figure.
Um... (Score:2)
The best and the brightest are no longer culled from America only
Er...
Forget about "teaching technology" (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to say there is any replacement for a classroom (or good ol' old fashioned repetition) but, as an example, many concepts and theories in math and science can be more effectively demonstrated visually and interactively than they ever could from a static textbook. These topics lend themselves very well to simulation and demonstration. And once a student understands the basics that build into principles, then we can get them to use it in the class. And so on.
A math teacher friend of mine routinely observes that his kids are learning in different ways than how we did. The textbook is falling prey to a massive culture of distraction. IM, web, games, television, cellphones... the ubiquitous pull becomes even worse when the last thing a student wants to do is read a boring math text. I'm less inclined to simply blame the student - is it really their fault? Why not have those technologies reach out to them in the same way? Should we risk denying the reality of the world we actually live in (versus how we think it should be)? In other words, adapt to new learning styles. Make learning the game that they play for 4 hours a night (instead of reading math).
So thats exactly what my math teacher friend has started doing [myvirtualtutor.com].
Its in its infancy, but longer term he will be using it for learning augmentation across the board. Its pretty interesting stuff, and possibly helpful for any other Math and science teachers here on /.
Right now i see the whole discourse on schools and technology centre on how much it costs to put computers into classrooms. And how to "teach technology" to our kids. Why? I think we should bury the technology and stop oohing and ahhing over it - and just start actually using it for what its meant for.
Re:Forget about "teaching technology" (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course not. It's the parents' fault. Even today, I know plenty of kids who were raised without video games or (gasp!) television in the home. It is possible.
That said, yes, it's still a virtue to be able to read a "boring" math text. And not just in the abstract, back-in-my-day, walked-uphill-both-ways sense of the word "virtue," either. Some things are hard to learn, and take dedication and study. No amount of pointy-clicky technology magic will change that fact.
I say this as someone who spent two-thirds of last year grading some of the most attrociously-written papers you can imagine from junior and senior undergraduates. By my estimation, only 10 percent of my students were more than functionally literate. As my students will prove to you when you encounter them in the workplace, an extensive knowledge of Microsoft Word doesn't teach you how to write....
Re:Forget about "teaching technology" (Score:2, Insightful)
As for the person that says the not the brightest are from America, Then why are so many coming here for the education. Why should we up the H1B visa limit, then stay in yo
Re:Forget about "teaching technology" (Score:2)
As I said, he's getting started. But there is decent tech in there; you'll see some interesting innovations in the next few months. :-)
Replacing textbooks and paper (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Rugged, reliable, long-life hardware that is too boring to steal
2) eTextBooks to be a lot cheaper than the printed version
Say a textbook lasts 10 years in a school (by school, I'm talking about the UK definition of schools, not university where you buy your own or use the library) - 100 copies of $textbook will cost say £2000. 100 advanced eBook readers would currently cost £20000 and be a lot less convenient in many ways than the text book. Of course, multiply that by 10 courses (assuming the average GCSE student does 10 GCSEs these days) and you get a textbook cost of £20000, or £200/student, or £20/student-year. Aforementioned eBook hardware, assuming 10 year lifespan, would also be £20/student-year. Of course, these eTextBooks would probably be licensed on a per-year basis, say £5 a year. £50 for 10 years, but you will get updates for errata integrated easily. 100 licenses would be £50000 for the 10 years, maybe less with a bulk discount. That's £50/student-year in addition to the £20 for the hardware.
I'm just cynical, but there is a reason these things are being pushed, and it isn't concern about the weight of textbooks in a schoolbag. It is to raise revenue for textbook firms.
However, I don't think much beats using pen and paper for making notes in class. Quieter than a room full of people typing, and I think it gets the point into your head a lot quicker.
But, but! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:But, but! (Score:2)
_If_ you make people work with Linux at school, they will be familiar with it. If they don't also learn Windows, they will insist on Linux just like people now insist on Windows. If they do also learn Windows (more likely), they will be able to make an informed choice - or at least more informed than if they hadn't used Linux at school.
The same thing also goes for Dvorak keyboards. Everybody I know who has typed on Dvorak keyboards l
Used *correctly*... (Score:2, Insightful)
I think schools should focus more of the computer education on the actual *use* of a computer. Teach the students *general principles* of GUI:s, try and teach them how the Internet works, what the difference between an image file and a text file is, etc. - even if it's very brief and in dumbe
It depends on your perspective... (Score:2, Interesting)
For example, with something like this : http://www.moodle.org/ [moodle.org]
there is the potential to create independent 'schools' of various types... imagine a community of parents who home school their children organizing with such a tool to diversify the experience.
With such education por
Technology (Score:5, Insightful)
1a. The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
1b. The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.
2. Electronic or digital products and systems considered as a group: a store specializing in office technology.
3. Anthropology. The body of knowledge available to a society that is of use in fashioning implements, practicing manual arts and skills, and extracting or collecting materials.
To me, technology, like any other -ology, is the knowledge of something, especially using the scientific method. Everybody knows themselves and somebody else and animals, but they are not psychologists. Everybody knows a group of people, but they are not a sociologist. Most everybody has seen a calculator or a computer, but that does not make them a technologist either. Give a computer or a calculator to someone that does not know how to add, and they will not know how to add with the calculator either.
My point being is that there are a number of prerequisites besides hardware for technology to be applied in education. I get annoyed at the concept that technology is something that spontaneously does stuff for people. It doesn't.
Americans are already behind the most of the world in basic education like math, science, and history. I believe that all aspects of education should be reexamined. The feel good, "I'm confident in my ignorance", attitude simply cannot last much longer, unless we start outsourcing that too.
Re:Technology (Score:2)
is it really about technology per se?
firstly, i think it's incorrect to suggest that technology has a lot to do with teaching the "scientific method". empirism can be taught in many ways, hardly any of them having anything to do with computers.
what does matter in this context, in my view, is the way kids take up information. computers, and in particular the net, shape information in a completely
One in Three? (Score:5, Insightful)
One computer for every three students? How did they ever think that many computers would help with the children's education?
Ridiculous quote:
Jena Haggith, one of Hansen's students last school year, said she preferred his use of technology for lessons over textbooks. "When I read from a textbook, I get so bored, so I don't know what they're saying,"
But how much time in lessons is spent reading the textbook? 5%, perhaps 10%. Hardly a justification for spending so much money. Also, the ability to read and comprehend dense factual text is a useful skill - how are these kids going to cope in the real world where everything isn't broken down into bite-size multimedia presentations?
But it gets even funnier:
But, he said, students perk up when technology is involved. "They're into computers, and they're into what computers can do," he said.
No, they're perking up because they know they won't have to do any work for the rest of the lesson because the teacher will be too busy troubleshooting to keep an eye on the kids
Re:One in Three? (Score:2)
technology distracts!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
I still can not imagine e.g. math classes with computers - although numerical methods are somehow important - the true understanding comes from paper and pencil.
I have attended one of the best schools in my city at the time. We had only old craps - not realy computers - x286. There were no computers used in classes apart from "computer science
more learning, less information (Score:2)
I'd say that the days of closed book tests are gone. It's open book tests, and part of the skill of the student is to learn to distill what is relevant from a dizzyinr choice of information sources
I work at a school... (Score:5, Insightful)
The teachers treat lab periods as if they were days off. They sit the kids down, turn on the software, and let the kids zone out. There' no interaction from the teacher; the "Compass" software just does the work.
And what's worse is that the software doesn't teach concepts or methods. It teaches for the TAKS (Texas Assesment of Knowledge and Skills standardized test). The kids go from grade to grade, knowing nothing, learning nothing except how to click the X.
What happened to true educational software, like Number Munchers, Oregon Trail, and Carmen Sandiego? These actually made the kids think, do quick maths in their head (I've not met a kid outside of middle school who can pull this now), and they sure didn't teach for any standardized tests.
Now to the IT side - I manage the school LAN, which is about 250 Windows machines (ranging from Pentiums at 200MHz running Windows 98SE to quad-Xeon boxes running XP for my gaming - gotta be a BOfH) and 100 or so Macs (PPC 603e and up).
School districts, as you know, are massive organizations, easily on par with major corporations, and the different divisions require different outfits - for example, while every machine in the district I work at is loaded with Windows and Office as a base, the different levels get different software. Elementary gets Compass and a bunch of programs funded by grants (Orchard, Type to Learn, Lexia - basically total crap that's a pain both client and server side); middle and high get Plato (a version of Compass for the older kids) and development tools and editors in the labs (Dreamweaver/Fireworks/Photoshop, Codewarrior, a bunch of compilers and apps), and the admins get specialized database software to do attendance, check grades, create "student profile databases," and whatnot.
At my campus, we've got 60 laptops for the kids, in addition to four computer labs (60 Macs, 60 Dells), plus the requisite two student machines per classroom (which are never used). On top of that, we have campuswide wireless-G coverage (and that's impressive, since we're a brick-and-mortar school built in the mid-50s), quad-Xeon machines for me and the resident DBA/lunchroom and bus monitor, and bloody flat panel monitors left and right on dual-head cards. Finally, we're getting 30 more laptops on the Beaumont Grant soon, and we don't know how we're going to fit those in, since the laptops are rarely used as is.
The teachers don't know jack about their software, they surf the Web and get infected left and right since we're not allowed to install Firefox, and we're bogged down with crap software that we have to install. On top of that, the admins took the dedicated LANtech away from the building (I'm a contractor, brought in to work on a grant's machines, and the building principal - my old childhood principal, to boot - extended my contract to cover the rest of the campus, with no extra pay) and they're trying to centralize things at a helpdesk _with no remote management software_, all in the name of saving money.
You can't pull stuff like that when you have over 50 schools to deal with, a shrinking tech services department (they laid off five techs at the end of the last school year - my boss was one of them), and a staff that knows next to nothing about the systems there except how to check their mail.
Schools are losing their direction with technology, and they need to seriously reexamine what they're doing with it - both for the IT staff's sake and the kids.
Re:I work at a school... (Score:2)
Classroom technology needs to be rethought from the perspective of the student. What software exists that can teach something better or add some value to a subject? Good software is the key to technology helping in the classroom. The problem is schools throw $300 per computer at MS Office w
Has to be universal (Score:3, Insightful)
To those who say computers can't be usefull in classes such as lit, history or music etc.... Hell Make a wiki for a lit class dealing with a work and have assignments for differnt students to write various portions and make them all responsible for comming up with a final wiki on the subject and continue to build these through the year. History could work much the same way with students exploring their discussions and building timelines of events and posting and responding to each others thoughts. Music... hell don't just study music theory, break out something like Garage band and some instruments and start putting it to USE as your learning it and record, edit it, produce something and distribute the end result to the rest of the school if it sounds good. Not just trying to make music but to put each theory to work and build a piece of music unique to each classes talents while exploring all of the various elements of theory covered by the class.
To date the focus has been on having computers and that is all wrong. They need to function the same as pen and paper. As a fundamental tool for exploring and learning the subject at hand. All of you who are slashdotoholics who say give it the ole tried and true pen and paper deal tell me that the web isn't the first place you turn when you want to find out some new piece of information. If the info isn't there it will certainly point you in the right direction. Why would this not work for a classroom?
People who say computers can't be better than the way its been done before are the same folks that once said printed words were no substitute for oral tradition and for all I know the ones that said oral tradition was for wussies who couldn't figure it out all on their own.
Computers are better at the collection and sharing of information than older methods. THATS WHY WE USE THEM. This will make them powerful and ESSENTIAL tools for education if people would get their thumbs out of their asses about it. They are not substitutes for teachers and never will be. But as that science teacher so ably demonstrates. They are valuable tools in the right hands.
It is a fad. (Score:3, Insightful)
If we had schools capable of turning out well-educated young adults with a firm grounding in the fundamentals of rational thought and at least a working knowledge of math, language, history, and science, well, the absence of computers in the classroom and whatnot wouldn't be significant.
And if all you have are schools turning out masses of people so ignorant that they actually think "Left Behind" is a good series of books, the presence of computers in the classroom isn't going to matter one good goddamn.
User's Manual (Score:4, Funny)
Okie High Tech (Score:2)
Oklahoma is a lot like a post nuclear society. Pockets of high tech surrounded by wasteland. You have to have an SUV so you can drive on the roads. Yes, you can have that offroad driving experience without ever having leave town.
Best of all, you don't have to send your jobs offshore. Oklahoma is also lik
The Flickering Mind (Score:2)
Todd Oppenheimer's book [amazon.com] should be required reading for anyone interested in this topic. While there is some anecdotal evidence that technology can help students, the statistical research on this has shown that these are either (a) temporary gains from encountering a new teaching style, or (b) dog-and-pony shows devoted to gifted students that could learn just as well from other sources.
The cost-benefit ratio of technology in schools, at least as it is used now, is highly questionable.
word replacement (Score:2)
Computers are not an educational tool (Score:2)
Computers are an END, a topic to learn about in high school to prepare students for a high tech world.
I saw my first computer when I was 13 and I became an expert, writing interpreters in 6502 assembly language among other things, before I graduated high school. I was old enough to benefit from exposure to computers.
In grammar school the computers are used as babysitters
not a fad, but a crutch (Score:2)
Technology In Education (Score:2)
#2. The paradigm of computers has changed. Rather than WWII ideas of giant computational devices, we now see that computers are also a tool that allows us to collect, organize, understand, and make new observations on information. These technology literacy elements of information literacy are absolutely essential for students to learn. We are in an age where as a culture we know so much,
Computers are a tool (Score:2)
Giving a calculator to someone who doesn't understand math doesn't help them. Using this type of logic, giving someone a saw and hammer makes them a master carpenter.
Re:Important omen! beware (Score:2)
Re:inane classes? (Score:2)
or a student who applies themselves. It's possible to go through high school without much experience beyond algebra, but it's possible to see a lot more... so no, you can't make a blanket statement that there's more depth in BE. FYI I was an exchange student my Jr. year in La Louviere and studied sciences-maths-langues. And that would be another facet of it, in the French system one has to pick some sort of track
Re:inane classes? (Score:2)
Re:inane classes? (Score:2)
This is part misconception and part philosophical difference. I've exposure in both the American and Italian systems. This is what I have deduced from my experience:
First, the philsophical difference of having different school systems for students with different future goals would give at least the perception of less depth coming from a more generalized system. However, it's totally up to the student. It's easy to float through with a "general" education, but it's just as easy to get through your Cal
The last sentence says it all. (Score:2)
Re:inane classes? (Score:2)
- student
- parents
- school environment
- teachers
in that order.
I'm not sure what constitutes college Math to you, but i left highschool with 3 semesters of calculus (including multi-variable). My experience is pretty uncommon, from what i gather. It is usually the case that to complete highschool in the US you need only go as far as 1 year of algebra.
I took woodshop in middle school. Apart from the problems with some students behavior, i really like
Re:Rethink needed (Score:5, Interesting)
The essentials of learning, reading (#1), writing (#2), math skills (#3) are still the essentials. Technology is dependent on those skills, not vice versa. Technology can supplement libraries, but must NEVER replace the hard bound word. In my opinion, writing skills are de-emphasized at the altar of tech and speed, with the resultant loss of clear and concise communication and the increase of frustration at communicating thought. Math is an absolute necessity at any level of learning, and most especially at ALL levels of living. Technology, oddly enough, is subverting math skills. How many times have you seen a store clerk struggle with counting change? How many times have you seen a person of average, or even better, intelligence struggle with a simple addition problem when presented with a few numbers and no access to a calculator.
All other modern human activities depend on these three, simple skills. Yet we insist that technology replace, not help to learn, these skills. In elementary school, there should be very little technology presense, other than administrative. In the middle and high school levels (speaking from an American viewpoint), technology should be taught as a tool for research and for recording. It should be until college/university level that technology should become an assistant to the learning process.
Yes, the old "Dick and Jane" readers should be dusted off and used, writing skills with pencil and paper must be exercised, and memory exercises with math tables should be re-emphasised.
The human brain is a marvelous tool, it demands use!
Re:Rethink needed (Score:2, Interesting)
That's just stupid. Being able to do arithmetic in your head isn't a math skill worth having. You're never far from a calculator of some sort, and even if you were (stuck on a desert island and needed to do a caculation to get home), everyone can do the
Re:Rethink needed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Rethink needed (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh yes it is. The most likely failure mode in any machine calculation is user input error. Knowledge of what order of magnitude and first digits to expect let you know if the calculation you just made is even in the right ballpark. It isn't an issue of solving non-homogeneous 2nd order differential equations in your head, this is basics to know when you are just about to make a fool of yourself.
Most certainly, th
Re:Rethink needed (Score:2)
The best technology in the world doesn't have much value when the person can't read how to turn the thing on.
I would remove technology from the lower levels (maybe through 5th or 6th grade?) other than some basic computer literacy like typing and how to work a browser. And odds are, they'd already know that anyway...
These kids need to know how to use their imaginations and not be stuck into the "imaginative" worlds of Everquest, WoW, etc.
Re:Rethink needed (Score:3, Interesting)
So who's paying for the technology? I mean, donated stuff is great, but then there's the software for computers, the upkeep & upgrades, the cost of replacing the broken stuff later (who am I kidding, technology don't break!), then the cost of security and network policing... theft, damage... irresponsible teachers...
Being a former teacher, I have plenty of frustration with the school system that I could soapbox about
Re:Rethink needed (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, the price is outrageous. My little brother's brand new middle school is asking for $350, my school is asking for $150, and my younger little brother's elementary school is asking $120. $620 in donations just to start a school