I think it was my 7th or 8th grade history teacher who bestowed upon me an aphorism that will probably be passed down from social studies teachers to students for generations:
“Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it.”
Well, it seems that someone didn’t do his research. In a book excerpt I found
online, David Walker (1984), an educational researcher, was quoted as saying this:
“The potential of computers for improving education is greater than that of any prior invention, including books and writing.”
Now compare that with what Thomas Edison said in 1922:
“(T)he motion picture is destined to revolutionize our educational system and that in a few years it will supplant largely, if not entirely, the use of textbooks.” (qtd by Peerless, Feldman, and German, 2001).
Sound familiar? In between I’m sure many other new technologies have had their fair share of people saying how they would “revolutionize” education. I wonder if overhead transparencies were met with such fanfare?
The excerpt I found went on to discuss the fervor surrounding computer-based educational technologies. It has gotten to the point that many proponents have gone as far as positing the merits of using computers with children in pre-school. Whatever happened to giving kids an empty box to play with? I can’t help but wonder if we are doing more harm than good at the neurological level. If children are not allowed to create their own ideas, how, then, can they be able to test their infantile theories against those of their peers? A computer cannot discuss the flavor of white paste versus that of colored varieties.
For all that it offers, technology will never be able to replicate the intricacies of face-to-face interpersonal communication. And verbal communication is the basis for all that follows; if we do not allow – or greatly reduce the opportunities for – language to be built naturally from interactions with humans and instead place a greater emphasis at a younger age on learning from technology, writing skills are bound to suffer. All great writers and rhetoricians, from Abraham Lincoln to Karl Marx, from Voltaire to Martin Luther King Jr., honed their skills by talking and listening to real people, not interactive Dora the Explorer games from Hasbro.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Hi Richard, this is Joe (TA)
I have enjoyed reading your blog. It is entertaining and I am particularly interested in your topic.
"I wonder if overhead transparencies were met with such fanfare?"
I'm not sure if they did get fanfare, but the overhead certainly deserves celebration, more so than many other technologies. This technology fundamentally changed how a teacher interacts with a class. Instead of standing with her back to the class, the math teacher can now face her class while working out a problem. It is far easier to take a quick peak to gauge comprehension in students' eyes from this vantage point. Of, behavior problems are less of an issue when the teacher is always facing students. The teacher can also now prepare examples ahead of time instead of drawing them on the board, so instructional time is saved.
Richard-
You pose some of the same questions from our original readings for the course. Interestingly enough, I just finished reading Laptops and Literacy by Mark Warschauer (I have mentioned this several times already and will probably continue to reference it...great read...great ideas..very inspiring!) Mr. Warschauer concludes the book by making this point:
"For much of the last century, educators have been seeking to reform schools through inputs of technology and have largely failed. Earlier technologies such as radio, film, and television remained marginal to the educational process, in spite of the exaggerated promises of their promoters (Cuban 1986), Computers will not suffer the same fate; anybody who thinks computers of some form will not become ubiquitous in schools, both in their presence and use, is misreading social, economic, technological and educational trends. At the same time, ubiquity does not imply reform."
He goes on to sum up his ideas on achieving meaningful educational reform to arm students with 21st century skills.
I thought this excerpt seemed to suit your blog topic to a "t"...
Ann
I understand your viewpoint, but I am not entirely sure I agree. Of course, we are allowed. :)I just hope my ideas are more welcome than a skunk at a lawn party.
I do agree that face-to-face communication can never be replaced, but I feel that computers come in at a close second. I can sit in the comfort of my home--in my underwear if I so choose--and complete coursework for a highly accredited Master's program. I have had more communication with students in my online classes than I ever had in my regular college classes. (I merely mean in the class...not on a personal level). My instructors give back more feedback on assignments, etc.
Also, with the usage of webcams and voice conferencing, computers are helping to "re-create" the face-to-face communication we all desire.
Also, I have seen great improvements from those interactive games you speak of. Students in our schools started using Leappads and their writing and reading skills (including fluency and comprehension) have increased. Of course, we've done no definitive studies to conclude that this is why, but it just seemed to happen after they started using them.
And...Dora has taught my daughter, whose not even two, her alphabet. She skips "MNO" but pretty much has the rest of it. She's chunked it up into groups of letters, but for the most part, she's got it. Yes, I have said the alphabet to her time and time again, but she didn't start repeating it until she heard Dora saying it. Again, I have no definitive proof...but....LOL. (I should also mention that she wouldn't use her potty seat until I bought a Dora one. She loves that character. I suppose this goes back to her environmental print.)
All that said, I really enjoy your blogging, Richard. Your zeal and intelligence are a welcome addition to a sometimes bleak and dreary day.
Richard,
Have you written any books? I think you should, considering your wit and ability to tie almost anything to modern day culture.
I especially enjoyed this post and agreed with you on many points. Face-to-face communication does seem irreplaceable, however when I read Crystal's dissent, I couldn't help but nod when she mentioned the fact that this online program has provided more opportunities for personal communication than any regular college classes. In fact, when I tell people about this program, they often say "I could never do that. I don't manage my time that well and I like to deal with people face-to-face." I respond by telling them that the flexibility of the program is uncomparable and that communication is an essential (not to mention required) element. In four online classes, I feel like I have delved into the minds of more people than in all of college! This open communication has taught me much more than facts or how to write papers. When I communicate with you, whether it's as part of a group or individually, I'm not only considering our particular assignment, but I'm noting your thought-process, writing styles, methods of solving problems, and even communication skills. These are more valuable to me than showing up, listening to a professor, taking notes, and going home. Learning from one another has broadened my horizons.
As I've stated before, it's a balancing act. Too much of anything makes you sick. I think parents want their kids to be well-rounded, and that means exposing them to as much as possible and then letting them follow a path that hopefully satisfies.
Post a Comment