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?"
Instead of just seeing how kids interact with technology, why not just study where in the class, or even school, that they use technology, what types of it, and the percentage of students who actually use technology.
Debugging? Klingons do not debug. Bugs are good for building character in the user.
Seriously, I'm all about technology (I read slashdot) but most technology in elementary and middle school levels is just all flash and no bang. Sure there are programs that help students (Word, Number Munchers) but having all the technology in the world isn't going to help if reading comprehention and memorized math skills are none.
I happen to be, at this very time, reading High-tech Heretic by Cliff Stoll. Much of the book gives a compelling case as to why computers in the class and libraries are sucking vital time, energy, and financial resources. Recommended reading.
In a band? Use WheresTheGig for free.
I live in a very well off area in Vancouver, Canada. Technology in my high school is a waste of time. Classes exist so people can learn to use MS Word. We run on Windows 2000. The programming classes learn what a variable is. And the machines available for homework are used mostly for games. All the history/socials/humanities rooms in my high schol have gigantic television screens that are *never* used. And guess what? Somehow, we manage to be short 300 math textbooks because there isn't enough money to buy them. Wow. I'm a geek, but seriously, get the technology OUT of my damn school!
The Cryptography Forum is new and needs help
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.
Our school district is replacing over 400 computers next school year. This includes several elementary school labs, computers used for a few simple learning games, word processing, and internet browsing.
Our school board now want to make cuts to the high school music program and eliminate seventh grade athletics. Education priorities need to get into order. We need more teachers over more computers.
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.
d00d, c0mpu73rs t33ch u 411 u n33d 2 kn0w! 411 teh sm4r73s7 h4x0rs use c0mpu73rs!!!!!
--Mike Boos
A 10-key calculator? Is it binary, does it read your mind, or does it just not do any operations on the numbers you input?
Grad students will do all the work. Profs will take all the credit and most of the money.
The result will be whatever the bias of the profs is. A prof who believes that technology is overused will prove just that. A prof who feels that more tech is good will prove just that.
If you doubt this, I suggest you get into grad school and work as a research assistant kissing your thesis advisors butt for 2 to 6 years, just so you can get your damn degree and get out.
Oh, ya, I've been there and done that.
"Research" Grants are a business and way of life like any other. You survive by getting big grants as often as neccesary, and you provide the answers your sponsers want to hear.
Walmart is practically Mother Teresa by comparison.