BBC NEWS | Programmes | Analysis | Mr Chips or Microchips?
Computers have been hailed as the transformers of education, a dazzling technology that changes the whole nature of learning, reduces the burdens on teachers and equips everyone for the modern economy.
Yet disturbing evidence is emerging that computers may harm, rather than help, educational progress. There is still much debate among even the most enthusiastic supporters of high technology about how computers can best be used.
Interesting story here from the BBC. Thanks to Wade who saw it on slashdot.
The most insightful quote comes from the reporter, Frances Craincross:
After all, girls in Britain
increasingly outshine boys in core subjects such as English. So
might more time at the keyboard improve boys� performance? Or
might it be that girls do well because the use of computers brings
few benefits to most pupils?
That’s a really good question: is there a difference between how boys and girls learn that can be attributed to time spend at the keyboard?
My two younger learners got LeapPads this christmas, and I think these are as appropriate a technology as you can find for kids that young (4 and 5).
It’s a folding plastic shell that holds a paper workbook and a rechargeable cartridge that explains and drills the user based on the page being displayed. Some pages are to be written on (the book is laminated) and other are just used as a touchscreen: there is an attached stylus.
What’s missing from this is an operating system, a keyboard, and a display: in other words, it’s not a computer (though the kids call them computers). It’s expandable: simply add a new paper book and cartridge and work with different or more advance subject matter.
What I like most about them is that they’re engaging enough for kids to like them and as as result the hardest part of learning — drilling and repetition — becomes much mess painful.
And for less than $40, it’s hard to beat.
I second the LeapPad — Sophie really enjoyed hers, and they make several that are like samplers — two stories, a map of the US, a 2-page picture of all the instruments in an orchestra, etc.
Did you read the transcript of the news piece? I thought it was interesting. I’d love to talk about this with whoever keeps buying (most likely subsidized) PCs for our schools. I know it’s just a bid to create a market for products not yet produced, but I’d like to hear someone defend the expense and distraction with some kind of results.
On the other hand, the LeapPad seems entirely appropriate, especially as it can stay with the student until they’re in 5th grade (the sampler we have has 3rd and 4th grade math stuff in it). Unless you’re going to teach programming or something that requires using a computer (and some would argue that you can teach programming with paper and pencil just fine, if not better), why have one?
You’re probably on a computer right now, or web tv. Look up Web Quest, see if you think it is a viable educational tool. This is only one of many that require the use of a computer. In many of these, will be reference to students presenting their findings via Powerpoint presentation, which also requires a computer. I suppose it could be argued that this could all be accomplished by students searching through library books (which probably would be nonexistant if the school didn’t even have computers) and making their presentations on poster boards with crayons and markers, but isn’t it silly not to use what’s available?
I, in fact, do argue that learning to use the library is a Good Thing to learn (I don’t follow how the presence of computers ensures the existence of the library: I think it could argued that computers and book are chasing the same dollars and fear of falling behind makes timeless books secondary to obsolescent computers).
I’m disappointed that *anyone* involved with education would suggest PowerPoint is a useful educational tool: it’s a presentation tool, used by and on behalf of presenters, not educators, not researchers or scientists.
You might find this tongue-in-cheek weblog entry useful ( http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000931 ): still more useful is the pamphlet it’s based on: The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint.
In corporate and government bureaucracies, the standard method for making a presentation is to talk about a list of points organized onto slides projected up on the wall. For many years, overhead projectors lit up transparencies, and slide projectors showed high-resolution 35mm slides. Now “slideware” computer programs for presentations are nearly everywhere. Early in the 21st century, several hundred million copies of Microsoft PowerPoint were turning out trillions of slides each year.
Alas, slideware often reduces the analytical quality of presentations. In particular, the popular PowerPoint templates (ready-made designs) usually weaken verbal and spatial reasoning, and almost always corrupt statistical analysis. What is the problem with PowerPoint? And how can we improve our presentations?
In case you missed it, Professor Tufte has explained how PowerPoint has been colossally misused in both Space Shuttle disasters, demonstrating how inappropriate PowerPoint is for imparting important information.
Given the endless litany of how poorly students are reading and writing, I think posterboard and markers are perfectly suited. Let them choose their own words and learn how to present their information in their own way, rather than being limited by a tool best suited to presenting a marketing presentation.
The *only* reason I can see using computers in the classroom is in the service of some other process, ie, learning to type once they master reading and writing or researching an online library once they have mastered the physical kind. So I’m thinking 3rd or 4th grade for most of this: it’s just a distraction for the younger grades.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I see much of the push for computers in the classroom coming from teachers who somehow forget they learned the basics without them and parents who confuse mastery of applications with the ability to think.