Technology advances, so do students

[Swimmy]

Technology advances, so do students

While it's good to see schools integrating technology into the classrooms, I sometimes fear that all that technology just distracts the students from learning the subject matter.

[frankcor]

Heh, I don't think it works like "Okay students, put down your arithmetic books, we're going to learn the computer now. Here is the USB port ... ."

The technology is used to help kids learn the material in a number of ways from presenting new material, to drill and practice, and, hopefully, to further challenge exceptional kids who would otherwise be sitting bored while the teacher works with the slower students.

I am reminded of a school board member long ago railing against the use of overhead projectors in classrooms and all the other new-fangled technology. He also complained about the use of whiteboards and markers, telling us all about how great things were when they used chalk and slateboards.

[neveramazed]

When I was a teacher, we moved into a new building and had nice new whiteboards. Some of the old teachers didn't like that and had the district take down the whiteboards and bring their chalk boards from the old building. Not to mention how they fought to keep a computer out of their classrooms because it would provide a distraction.

[frankcor]

sigh ...

When organizations implement new technology, they always seem to budget 50% for hardware and 50% for software.

In actuality, the most successful implementations budget a third for hardware, a third for software, and a third for training. Scrimping on training will ensure all the money spent on hardware and software will be wasted. Sounds like that's the approach used in your example, neveramazed. You end up with teachers who don't know how to use the computers or how to teach with them. I've walked into plenty of classrooms with a computer being used to pile coats and gloves on.

Heh, one teacher even told me she was afraid to use the computer because she knew her paycheck was processed on the BOCES computer and she didn't want to mess it up.

It's a good thing I left my gun in the principal's office.

[losjibaros]

Training??

One of my kids teachers a few years ago flipped a bird when she lost the cap to her usb pen drive.. i gave my son one of my swivel drives to show her (i could insert a link to my site cuz i do sell swivel drives, but i wont) and she called him a smart alec and accused him of bringing it in to make fun of her...

to my amazment, when i went to the school to pick this drive up from the repo box.. the technology teacher was like 90 years old and after a few min of talking to her.... i saw she had no clue what so ever what was going on...

[Ralph]

I don't have a problem with technology advancing, so long as the basics don't get left behind in the process.

My biggest gripe is that there are a lot of kids out there that for whatever reason, don't have the access to the same tools (PC's, etc) that others have. But they are expected to keep up and figure it out on their own anyway.

[strikeslip]

Swimmy -- Very Perceptive!

School Districts are viewed as a big stewpot of $$$ that everyone wants to get their ladle into. Get 'em dependent on the computers and software and every 4 years you can count on everyone buying replacements. And the upgrades in software require retraining, no? It is such a racket.

It IS a distraction -- and a time waster. I would rather have the students drilling good grammar and math skills -- which don't change -- than learning the intricacies of Windows 95 (oops 98 -- oops ME -- oops XP -- oops Vista) or Word (oops . etc etc. . ) Learning computers is learning something that will be obsolete in 5 years. BTW -- did anyone here really learn computers in school? I assume that most of us are older -- and most of us taught ourselves what we needed to know -- because we were good readers.

One of the suburban syracuse school districts last year decided to get rid of the laptops it got all the students a few years earlier. The school discovered that achievement was not really improved.

[Clipper]

You are right strikeslip. I spent half my time when I was in management at Griffiss, either upgrading my desktop, or in class learning to use a new software package. I learned Lotus and Wordstar, then we upgraded from Z-100's to 248's, and we upgraded to the windows 95, 98, and then from enable to using other new spreadsheets and programs. Every time we changed software, I had to redo, every damn spreadsheet I used to track my assets which were scattered around the world. the biggest disaster was when they put in the first LAN and linked our offices all together.

Schools should have a computer lab and teach a course in the present day technology and basic skills that will allow a kid to navigate around a computer and teach himself. Most training now is on disc, and you just pop it in the drive on the comuter and sit down and click your way through the windows driven training program. Don't take a teacher, a few million in PC's and a few thousand every couple of years for upgrades to accomplish that.

[Swimmy]

Strikeslip, you nailed my concern better than I could have explained it.

Sure it's great to brag about how technologically integrated the school system is, but does it really teach the basics? I notice that kids are no more able to employ proper grammar skills today than when I went to grammar school.

Aother dilemma that concerns me is that the younger generation seems limited in its ability to learn, i.e. unless it's in the form of a game, they won't be able to comprehend it. Video games seem to have replaced a day outside and a good book.

[Ralph]

I agree. I started out learning to use Adobe Photoshop 5 when it first came out. It really helps that I understood darkroom developing to begin with, but it is one of the largest most complicated programs there is for photo work.

Not only do you need to know what you are doing and why, but you need a damn fast PC for it to work right. More bucks!!!
You also need to put in a lot of r-e-a-d-i-n-g!!!!

Down the road I went, barely 4 years later and several upgrades and I am into into Photoshop CS2 on a $1500 PC, finally got my ACE certification.

Two months later they come out with CS3. ARRRRGGGGHHHHH!

So when you talk about teaching kids this stuff, I wouldn't even want to go there. What good does it do for them to learn how to use Excel and Word when they don't understand simple reading and math skills?
I watch some of these "wonder kids" in training where I work.
If it wasn't for the computerized cash registers they use, most of these kids couldn't make change for a dollar!

[frankcor]

Maybe you guys are on to something. We should take all the computers and throw them in the dumpster. Think of the money we'd save then! If kids want to learn computers, they can wait until they get to college. Well, we might have to teach them internet so they can go on-line to buy a college degree. Certainly, no accredited college or institution will want them.

Would you object to the use of flight simulators to teach pilots because they're a distraction to learning how to fly a real airplane? Would you object everytime the simulator was upgraded because better instruction was available from the new version?

Even books need to be upgraded. Unless you don't mind kids learning that Bangladesh is still part of India.

[nhcitizen18]

There is no substitute for sound fundamentals and I still believe that a strong liberal arts education in High School (Math, English, Science, History) make one a better person. However, as our society continues to evolve education has to change with it... computers are now an essential part of of a sound basic education.

I'm not sure I agree with your Windows 95 to Windows Vista example Strike. With the exception of the change from MSDOS to Windows 3.1 I have found that if I understood how to use Windows 95 I could easily use Windows 98. If I knew Windows 98 I could get up to speed on Windows ME very easily etc....

The current trend in high school math education is to integrate the calculator as much as possible. The theory is that having students use the calculator allows teachers to focus on higher level concepts instead of rote computation. I have mixed feelings on this.

On the one hand even though I can do things like long division, calculate a square root by hand, multiply large numbers, etc... I find that I almost never use these skills in my daily life because of the ubiquitousness of computers. I find it much easier to use an EXCEL spreadsheet than to calculate equations by hand. Should we really be teaching our students skills that have been replaced by automation?

On the other hand, even though I do not use these skills I can still do them if necessary. Maybe something is lost when you need a computer for everything. I have been to McDonald's and found myself on several occasions having to tell the girl at the counter what the appropriate change is if she entered the wrong number or if the computer was broken. Many students and many adults have lost the ability to do simple math and I often find it annoying.

Hopefully there is a happy medium somewhere.

[Swimmy]

Frankcor,

You're misunderstanding my concern. I'm not advocating that we don't teach kids how to use a computer. All students should know the basics, e.g., typing, Internet browsing, word processing, spreadsheets, research. My concern is that there is so much emphasis on using technology that the core subject matter that is supposed to be taught is not.

I have a problem with the NCLB Act because it emphasizes grades and tests over learning and understanding the material. In the real world, at least it has been my experience, grades don't matter nearly as much as what you know. There's a difference. But this is a conversation for another thread.

Today, colleges don't care about basic computing skills. I don't think they ever did. When I went to college, the school offered Computers 101; it taught computer basics. Colleges only seem to care about extra curricular activities and gpa's these days. As long as the high school student possess strong qualifications in those two categories, I don't see students losing out on college education.

Have a computer lab and dedicate a class to teaching the basics. Use computers in science classes to show simulations of the experiments before they actually conduct them.

And no, I would not be against pilots using flight simulators. They're learning the subject matter, i.e., how to fly! But I don't see kids graduating high school any smarter than me now that they have access to all this technology. Instead, I see the opposite, they can type textspeak like no other person. But they can't write a coherent, comprehensible, grammatically correct paper. They may know every cheat code and finger combinations to use in the latest action-packed video game, but they don't know where Louisiana is.

I'm not sure how else to explain my concerns. If you still think I'm advocating to 18th century teaching styles, you're wrong and we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Swimmy]

nhcitizen18 said:

There is no substitute for sound fundamentals and I still believe that a strong liberal arts education in High School (Math, English, Science, History) make one a better person. However, as our society continues to evolve education has to change with it... computers are now an essential part of of a sound basic education.

But to what extent? As I learned in my legal research and writing classes, sometimes the printed books are easier to conduct research than using electronic databases. When I do legal research, I always start out with the books, as I gather information about my legal issue, I then use the computer to bring up the actual cases. Now, I'm a computer scientist and I can tell you that computers can do many wonderful things. I used to do all my research online. Until law school, I had no idea what sources were in a library.

I'm not sure I agree with your Windows 95 to Windows Vista example Strike. With the exception of the change from MSDOS to Windows 3.1 I have found that if I understood how to use Windows 95 I could easily use Windows 98. If I knew Windows 98 I could get up to speed on Windows ME very easily etc....

nhcitizen18 said:

The current trend in high school math education is to integrate the calculator as much as possible. The theory is that having students use the calculator allows teachers to focus on higher level concepts instead of rote computation.

From my own experience, I thought I knew calculus when I took AP calc. in high school. We used TI-84s and I had all the formulas programmed into the calculator. It wasn't until I had to take calc. again in college (even though I scored a 4, my major wouldn't allow me to opt out of it) that I really learned calculus. We were not allowed to use the calculator and we had to understand the actual concepts. The calculations were simple enough to do in your head. But with out a "deriv()" function on the calculator to do the math for me, I realized how hard calculus really was. I wished my high school teacher made us use our brains instead of a programmable calculator. While I may not use the math I learned in college right now, I certainly have a better grasp and understanding of it. You'd be amazed at how much our lives are influenced by higher math.

nhcitizen18 said:

Should we really be teaching our students skills that have been replaced by automation?

Yes! It is imperative that students understand those skills and how to do them on their own. Automation needs maintenance, what good will a student be if she does not know or understand the underlying skills to repair, replace, or -- more importantly -- improve upon that technology. We set ourselves up for defeat by not teaching them the basics and encouraging them to understand them on their own. You said it yourself, you have had to show the kids at McDonald's how to make change when the computer is broken. That should have answered this question right there.

My fear is that with all the focus on technology, what happens to those basics that the technology is supposed to teach our students? How do we make sure basic math skills, English skills, social skills, etc. are still being taught effectively and in an improved manner?

That's the selling point of technology, isn't it? This computer will be able to better teach your children math, science, reading, and history. Students will learn more than ever before, and be smarter than us by the time they graduate. I think that's what my mother said how the superintendent explained why she needed computers in her classroom to help her teach French. But I have not seen these wonderful results as promised.

Technology should supplement the basics and be used to show how those basics work in the big picture. Use a computer model to show Issac Newton's 3 laws of physics to supplement the lectures and experiments, not to replace them.

[neveramazed]

Take computers out of the classroom? Wow, what a concept (Frankor, I'm assuming your response was sarcasm). Computers are a large part of society. So take 'em away and put more kids further behind the eight ball.

Ralph you said some kids don't have access to all the same tools, how about some kids in the rural poor and inner city schools that
have no computer and the one in school is the only access available. That may give some kids the reason to go to school.

A computer in a classroom is only a distraction if you allow it to be. Try to use it as a bribe or reward; the first person done gets to play solitaire or surf the web on the class computer. Well, hell ya thats a distraction. Who is not going to fly through that assignment to get done first, especially at the end of the day.

Use it correctly and you have perhaps the most versatile and powerful tool you could ever need in a classroom. What other tool can show a power point presentation on Resonance frequencies with embedded clips of the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse, .wav files to demonstrate harmonics. All with out having to use the tape recorder, film projector, and overhaed projector (which all three of those were technology in its day).

It also has to be understood just because you put a computer in your classroom that achievement isn't going to skyrocket because of it. It's just another piece of the puzzle just like a pencil, notebook, ruler, protractor, calculator or a book. Computers in the classrooms are one of the greatest assets for science classrooms ever. You can attach various sensors that take continuous measurements while you are away. Imagine being able to monitor your experiment over the weekend even if you aren't in school. Do you know how easy it is to show images of the nightsky using a computer (and it's free if you use some versions of Linux) astronomy software package. Couple that with an LCD projectoy, Wow, pretty good use of technology there. I was able to do "virtual" labs that would reinforce concepts taught in normal labs. This doesn't even scratch the surface.

But like anything ease of use leads to abuse. It becomes easy to let the computer do the teaching for us, thats where the teacher needs to remain diligent. Just because you can plot speed vs. time in Excel doesn't mean you do them all that way. I would require at least half the graphs be done by hand and half by computer. There has to be a balance.

Upgrades unfortunately are a part of the computer world, but there are ways to protect yourself from this. When you purchase the
computers get the most CPU and RAM you can fit into your budget (this will go a long way to keeping your computer relevant). Avoid the extras; do you really need 15 card media readers and HD-DVD/Blu-ray players on ALL PCs? Recycle keyboards and mice (I haven't bought a keyboard in ten years). But sometimes it's a pissing contest and schools want to have the biggest and the best in the area. Finally, and most importantly, schools (and society for that matter) need to start weaning themselves off of Microsoft products. The software licensing fees for their products are outrageous not to mention confusing to even the most savy IT directors. There are viable alternatives to Windows, like Linux. And the best part it's FREE! Yeah, sure you can purchase support packages from most linux distros, but you can also get them all for free. There are even office alternatives that are once again FREE. Hell you can even use Google's offerings of online word processors and spreadsheets. The best thing about Linux some of the hardest things to get working are most of the things you don't want in school, like mp3s and activeX controls (not impossible but more difficult on Linux than Windows). Plus they are very few viruses and trojans that are aimed at Linux installs. I would shudder to think that schools would find it acceptable to still be using history and science books from the 70's or 80's. I would think even English teachers "upgrade" their book lists.

The other common point I see is that most of us are self taught computer prodigies. Sure some kids will learn it on their own, some won't learn it on their own or at school, but some would only learn it at school. Do you want to trust that a kid is going to go home at night and choose to learn how to make graphs in excel on his own, or just IM his BFFs and play WoW. You were teenagers once, what would you have done (leave the free porn out of this discussion).
Isn't that why we make kids read the classics in school, because most would never read them on their own (maybe they don't own a copy of them or a library card).

In the end you have to recognize the value of computers in school. You have to see that not only computers but technology has become a central part of society. If kids can't learn, or even have the chance to learn these skills in a school then why send them. I'm
not suggesting that we stop teaching good math, spelling and grammar to students in lieu of teaching technology. I'm saying teach it in addition to math, spelling and grammar. It doesn't have to be one or the other. To do otherwise cheats everybody in the end.