Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Is E-Learning a Viable Option?
An anonymous reader writes "My spouse, who is an elementary school science teacher, has had some experience in e-learning, since her school gave iPads to all the students. She found that students used these devices, not for school purposes like note taking, but for gaming, etc. It got to the point that she banned them from her classroom. Do technology aids help, or hinder, education? Is the idea that students can be home-schooled electronically realistic, or absurd?"
This question has been answered MANY times. NO study has shown that students benefit - and many have shown that the diversion of resources hurts them. It's a dead horse. Stop flogging it and move on.
I know 6 families that have home schooled with over half the kids now in college (other half still in high school). From my observations, electronics has very little impact or success or failure. Nearly all the success or failure is based on the parents: how serious they are about educating their kids, how connected they are with home school cooperatives, how much time their willing to invest. The complete failures that I've seen were easily predicable before the home schooling began (poorly educated parents, doing it for the wrong reasons, etc.)).
The kids who need help often have chaotic home environments. They need role models, not electronics. There is no technical fix.
Don't mess with The Phone Company. Piss them off and you'll be using two tin cans and a piece of string.
The problem with many (maybe most?) attempts to put technology in schools and even home learning environments is that people don't think through the implementation. Technology is not magic. You cannot expect to get good results simply by dropping a chunk of technology into a classroom without spending a lot of time and energy rethinking how teaching and learning is going to work in that classroom. For example:
What, exactly, is the technology going to be used for? No hand-waving general answers allowed here (e.g., "enrich content with interactive multimedia presentations" is a useless answer).
In what specific tasks will the technology allow you to do something that would have been cumbersome or impossible without it (e.g., using graphing or numerical methods to approximate solutions to equations that are not amenable to the usual algebraic techniques)?
What more interesting or more engaging problems can you now attempt to solve (that address your learning goals) that you would not have been able to attempt without the technology?
Will you want to change or expand your set of learning goals now that you have this piece of technology? If so, how?
How much instructional time will be needed to get the teacher and students working comfortably with the technology? Is the potential benefit worth that amount of time?
How do you implement the technology in ways that do not detract from the learning you are trying to do (i.e., what are the unintended consequences)? How might you plan ahead for negative unintended uses?
Almost every case I've ever seen or read about where technology was just dropped into an educational setting without painstaking planning and thought about curriculum and implementation, not to mention extensive training of teachers and staff, resulted in mixed results at best, and failure and rejection at worst. To answer the original questions directly, technology aids can help or hinder education- it's all in the amount of time, thought, sweat and tears that get put into the implementation. I won't comment more on the home schooling part of the question, as I really have no experience there (aside from supplementing my own kids' educations).
I am perplexed by equating "e-learning" with "give every kid an iPad". If you give a kid a screen and make it under their control they will find the games. If someone is unaware of this, they probably dont have kids. But this is not unique to electronics. If you give them a stack of text books and no supervision, they'll make paper airplanes. Education requires supervision at that age. Putting an e- in front of things doesn't change human nature.
Apache guy, Open Source enthusiast, runner
Ohio has always been ahead of the game in terms of online charter schools. I was traditionally homeschooled for the better half of my academic career. My brother went through junior high and highschool using various online solutions. From my understanding, no one was a big fan of ECOT. They provided severely underpowered machines, which were in fact locked down too much. At the time, their bureaucratic setup was confusing and stifled learning. It may have gotten better in the years since, but I can't recommend it based on what I've seen.
Following up on that, my brother also did two years with OHDELA. They had their act together much better than ECOT, but again, issued terrible hardware. This time however, it was a crummy iMac locked down even tighter than the Compaq mini towers ECOT gave out. Furthermore, OHDELA relied far too much on trying to simulate a traditional classroom. Mandatory chatrooms and timed virtual blackboards just got in the way of the original promise of working at your own pace. It may have benefited those that needed the help, but making it compulsory did more to slow my brother's progress than anything.
His final time was spent with an organization called Buckeye Online. They provided a fairly decent laptop computer (completely open!) and relied more on bookwork. This was exactly what my brother had wanted all along. He wasn't chained to a desk or required to participate in some simulated blackboard environment. All he had to do was read the chapter in his text book and then submit the corresponding lesson electronically. He blew through the material and graduated one year earlier than he would have otherwise.
Now again, a lot has probably changed since I watched my family work with these different organizations. Some may be better or worse than they were. Some of the points of contention that my brother had may be the exact thing that your child would prefer. The point is to study up on them before just blindly signing up. Most of them do offer seminars leading up to the traditional start of the school year. Go and listen, ask questions, discuss your concerns. It has been my experience that you'll usually have the ear of some of the more important people within the organization.
So can students be home-schooled electronically? Absolutely. I would say that the benefits far outweigh any negatives. Most of the perceived problems that people have with homeschooling can be quickly and easily remedied if you're not a lazy parent. Having an online support system, as provided by these institutions, definitely makes things easier. It's still not something you can just throw and your child and expect to happen. It's a framework for the parents to work within, to help out, to expand upon, and to monitor. Of course, any parent who takes their job seriously would be doing that anyway, even if their child went to a physical school.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
I can only speak for myself, but I am enrolled on a distance-learning taught masters degree, which is taught solely over the Internet, and, on the whole, it has been a great experience.
Without physical classes, I've been able to study whenever I have wanted - the term has a structure, with deadlines to be met, but, around those, I can work during times which suit me. Lectures are delivered in the form of podcasts, in 30 minute slots. These I tend to listen to when I am driving or ironing - sufficient to get the gist of the topic. I avoid taking notes, since I just want to soak up what is being said.
The text book is delivered as a Word document, but quickly and easily converted to .pdf; other reading comes in whatever form in which it was originally provided (could be a link to a web page, or a .pdf download and so on) - again, all easily converted to pdf. These I read on my iPad (in iAnnotate) and mark them up accordingly; all synchronised back to my computers, to become searchable when it comes to thinking, and writing essays.
Essays are written - unsurprisingly - on a computer, and are submitted electronically; I tend to use .pdf, but I am not sure what others use. These are all run through TurnItIn software - I'm undecided whether I think that this is a good practice or not, but, since I have no say in the matter (short of quitting the course), I can live with it.
On the whole, a very positive experience indeed - I've studied on trains, planes as well as sitting at home, and have written essays in four different countries. The flexibility is great.
There are some downsides, though - particularly around student camaraderie and discussion. Despite there being some great tools available, I don't feel that we've quite cracked the discussion / debate side of things yet. I've chatted with some of the students around the world via Skype, which has been very interesting, but, having encouraged mailing lists, real-time text chat, and now blog posts / responses and (*shudder*) a Facebook wall, nothing seems to have attracted critical mass which, for me, is a real shame - I value the ability to discuss and debate very highly, and I don't feel we've got this quite right yet.
(It may, of course, be that few of the students actually want to discuss, and the distance-learning nature means that people can studying without feeling a pressure to discuss - if this is the case, the course is probably suiting them very well, and I could indeed see the value of this form of study for those who do not want to be in a classroom environment, or required to make conversation. Personally, I think that discussing and critiquing of ideas amongst peers is very valuable, but I appreciate that others may think differently.)
On the whole, though, it works very well for me - I find it easy to be motivated to study something I enjoy, in an environment which suits me.
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
We seem to have done a pretty good job educating people in the last century or two. In most developed countries, most people are educated to the limits of human capacity.
All the innovative devices may have a role in education, but they should be considered carefully. Education systems are under attack right now. They're being pressured by the neoliberal shitheads to sharply lower costs and by corporations (usually the same guys) that want to make big money selling expensive toys to governments.
Blackboard and textbooks have worked for long, why such a rush to replace them? IMHO, the ability of a country to educate its population depends more in factors outside the school. like:
If a kid wants to learn and has a competent teacher, blackboard and textbook is more than enough.
Actually, one could make a case that public education started its downward spiral as a result of the Women's Liberation movement. Not blaming, just saying that the system was built on bright capable women working at low wages in a field where their participation was acceptable. When the best and brightest noticed the greener pastures, and the system did not compensate by offering competitive wages and status, well, you see what we got.
taking that a step further, you can argue that the decline in middle class wages is a bigger part of that. Women can't afford to work for low wages as school teachers because their husbands no longer bring home enough money to maintain a middle class standard of living.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I could not agree more with the importance of the "other factors" you listed. I think they are more important than technology. Technology is simply a tool - and like any tool it can be used well or abused. Consider the work of Salman Kahn of Kahn Academy. He started tutoring his cousins in math. Because he was doing this long distance, he started making you-tube videos. He reports that his cousins preferred the videos to "live sessions" because they could pause them and fit them into their own schedule. His work has grown into Kahn Academy that many schools are using effectively. At a higher level, I would point to the on-line machine Leaning class by Prof. Andrew Ng of Stanford. This uses technology very effectively but requires a self-directed and self-disciplined student. These same tools are abused by those who make poor choices.
At the elementary and secondary level, I view education like a three leg stool - where the parents, teachers, and administration are the three legs supporting the student (the seat.) If any part fails to perform, the whole system suffers. Parents must value education and require respectful, disciplined behavior from their children at all times; teachers must use all the tools at their disposal to create instruction plans that effectively communicate the material to the student. Technology is only one of many tools. The administration must make sure that teachers have the needed tools and help enforce discipline. When rowdy, disrespectful, and non-performing students are kept in the classroom, it ruins the environment for everyone. if the state must educate these problem students, they need to be segregated to a boot-camp like school that deals with their special needs. At some point, you cut your losses. It is a question of return on investment. The ultimate objective is to turn the student into a self-directed, life-long learner who takes responsibility for their own education. We now have unprecedented access to information - more than at any other time in history. Ignorance is the result of a string of bad choices and the individual bears significant responsibility.
I worked for a number of years in a K-8 school. My opinion. Computers aren't useless, but for the current state of things, there are plenty of things for which they are not an answer. First of all, the teachers need computers as do the administrators. As a practical matter, teachers are tied to their classrooms for much of the day. They need a networked computer and a printer.
Students? Computers are somewhat of a challenge to kids who do not know their alphabet and can not read. OTOH computers can be very useful in 2nd-4th grade. There are a gazillion little programs (Many of which are MSDOS or Windows 3 based and will not run on "Modern Computer Hardware" without an incredible amount of tinkering) that teach basic stuff like arithmetic, English grammar, some basic science, some history. Allowing students to spend part of their day exploring this stuff at their own pace is probably a good idea.
Older students? With rare exceptions, the only thing computers provide is word processing, spell checking, and a refuge from reality. Nothing wrong with any of that -- within limits.
And for the one student in 10 or 20 with exceptional skills/interest in some specific area -- computers, chemistry, physics, art, literature ... anything but playground skills -- computers can be (but often aren't) a gateway to knowledge. That's especially true I think in schools systems with large class sizes and limited resources. I don't think this is being adequately explored.
But handing everyone an ipad or kindle or whatever and expecting technology to work miracles. That's ludicrous.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Popular culture in the 1950s showed very clearly the value of education - you got good grades, got a good job and were successful. In the late 1960s and 1970s the popular culture turned and hasn't turned back. Today the idea of getting good grades in school marks you as a "nerd" and a social outcast. The value of education today is far, far lower than it was 60 years ago and the estimation of that value is purely from popular culture.
It doesn't matter how much is spent on educating children if the children view the entire process as a waste of their time. They want to get out and play video games and chat on the Internet. You might think that textual communication would reinforce good grammer and spelling - but no, modern text communication eschews all grammer and spelling in favor of "new rules". The end result is that if they can string some words together it is good enough.
The other problem is that to a certain extent the children today are right. There are no high paying jobs waiting for them all if they get good grades. They have college to look forward to at either a massively overcrowded state school that is simply interested in processing them in and out or a private school where they (or their parents) will likely never pay off the massive loans. If they are accepted, which isn't a given. The state schools are still tossing out 25-35% of the student body during the first year because they can't function in a college environment. There is no sure guarantee of employment even if you are successful in college.
But the worse tragedy is the students that get suckered into the "knowledge economy" when they are mentally incapable of dealing with high levels of abstraction. You know that somewhere around 40-50% of people really do require something to hold in their hands, right? That for them trying to deal with abstract concepts is the same as most Westerners trying to learn Chinese. We used to have good paying factory jobs and skilled tradesmen. Today there are few factories and the idea of someone trying to learn to be a sheet metal worker, a plumber or an electrician is almost a cruel joke. Schools aren't set up to teach these people, even the US President thinks everyone should go to college and be a "knowledge worker", and where there were programs for leaning to be a skilled tradesman today there is ... nothing.
We have tried to remake society in an image that is a false reflection of where we want to be. Sorry, but people aren't wired that way. We are clearly headed for a major shift. Maybe everything will collapse in 2012 and we won't have to worry about it anymore.
Frankly, any electronic device given to children will be used for things other than it's intended function.
Give a kid a calculator and time how long it takes them to write "Boobless" on it.
We got given TI-83's for our Higher Maths class (16-17 y/o) and myself and a couple of friends learned to programme for it, got a C for Maths, but got an easy A for Computer Studies.
With something like an iPad, which is designed purely to consume information, children won't learn anything from it unless it's locked down even further and disallow the installing of applications entirely.
If all you're doing is giving the child an iPad to take notes, then it certainly isn't E-Learning in any way shape or form.
E-Learning should actually be a piece of software or hardware that actually teaches something. Not just as a glorified notepad.
As someone who develops E-Learning software, we are rarely called to actually build something for children. I think in the 4 years I've worked here I've done two projects aimed at children and both were on the subject of Environmental Awareness and Renewable Energy (Although slightly more involved than just Solar Panels Good, Fossil Fuels bad), as opposed to any of the core subjects. It was incredibly difficult to make it engaging for them. There's been a few times when the clients who've commissioned these projects don't actually understand how boring their subject matter is. The project brief essentially consisted of vomitting walls of text at children in between mini-games. We had to explain to these people - those people who actually *teach* children - that Kids can't learn like that. We convinced them to turn their content into a free-form exploration game, where a) the content was simplified and all the complicated words were removed, b) kids got points for discovering things, c) kids could choose things for themselves, engaging them in the process.
These are the same people trumpeting iPads as the solution to all their problems. I was shocked at how disconnected some of these people are from the kids they're teaching.
I honestly believe that E-Learning-as-games work quite well if done right, especially for children.
I remember when I was a kid my mum bought some E-learning software for the Commodore 64, Fun School and I loved it. It was done really well and I enjoyed alot of the games in it.
Nowadays, since children grow up with games, and tend to see anything cheap, or graphically inferior as unworthy of their time, makes developing E-Learning software for kids harder. In some ways, the rise of Facebook games is bringing the expectation bar down for the next generation, so my job might actually get alot easier. Since teaching core-skills like Mathematics, English, Science, History etc to children takes alot more work and alot more thought than classroom teaching. Which also equates to alot more development time and thus, alot more money to pay. So if you want to come under budget, or to run on the archaic school hardware, the first thing to suffer is normally the graphical quality.