Slashdot Mirror
Digital Enhancements or Expensive Distractions?
markmcb writes "Berkeley and USC have teamed up to launch a $3.3 million study over 3 years that hopes to shed some light on how today's kids are interacting with technology and the effects that it is having on education. The study aims to determine if digital devices such as computers and cell phones are shaping the way that teenagers obtain and process information. But given the price tag and the goals of the project, how much can this project actually help education? Has anyone out there in the high school level education field seen digital systems improve the classroom to the point that students actually learn more, or do they just tend to be fascinating distractions that detract from the classroom?"
What we really need is for someone (Bill Gates - you listening?) to set up two identical schools close to one another. Students then get randomized to one school or the other. You could then use this as an experimental system to test which educational programs actually enhance learning. (Note that these are not medical experiments - no need to start getting upset about "experimenting with kids.") I don't think there is any other way we will be able to obtain real data with which improve our education system. If you made sure that these schools had plenty of resources (ie more so than the average surrounding school), then I am sure plenty of parents would agree to allow their kids to participate.
This certainly isn't the first time that computer technology use in schools has been studied, so I'm a bit at a loss to see what the fuss is about. Certainly my research group (see www.ikit.org) has been researching just this for 25 years. In general, there are two types of software for education: computer assisted instruction (CAI) which has been found to not have lived up to the hype (yet); and what Jonassen calls thinking tools, software designed to augment human cognitive abilities. The latter have been working very well in the classroom, and students using such systems have shown good results. However, teachers can't just be thrown the system and told to go to work-they need to be trained as to how to use them, something that school boards have been reluctant to do as it costs money.