Computers bad for teaching?

[Adrian II]

According to this essay teaching has made little advance under the influence of computerised learning. On the contrary, as the article states:

(..) Recent research, including a University of Munich study of 174,000 students in thirty-one countries, indicates that students who frequently use computers perform worse academically than those who use them rarely or not at all.

The main reason seems to be that computers are never 'just another learning tool' -- they replace other learning activities and give children a false sense of control over their environment:

(..) educational computing is neither a revolution nor a passing fad, but a Faustian bargain. Children gain unprecedented power to control their external world, but at the cost of internal growth. During the two decades that I taught young people with and about digital technology, I came to realize that the power of computers can lead children into deadened, alienated, and manipulative relationships with the world, that children's increasingly pervasive use of computers jeopardizes their ability to belong fully to human and biological communities—ultimately jeopardizing the communities themselves.

I think this piece presents a very powerful argument against prevalent notions about the contribution of computers to learning, particularly because the author has seventeen years of personal experience in the field.

Your thoughts?

[Papewaio]

Correlations.

Which field of study... I'm sure its hurting some of the soft skill subjects disproportional more then the hard skill ones. Though I think all skills are suffering because the standards for teachers has dropped, discipline levels have dropped due to far too PC guidelines and the lack of focus on fundamentals first.

[English assassin]

Its a mistake to reject a causal link just because you can't see a mechanism for the link, and if the Munich study shows what it claims to show, then that's a fact whether we understand it or not. But I do have some doubts about some of the arguments put forward.

These seem to be threefold. First, that reading about things on the computer is very structured, and children need unstructured time to learn things too. I'm perfectly willing to believe that this is true, but reading about things in bookls is also structured, as is being taught in class. (Indeed more structured, as you have no choice about the order in which material is presented to you). So I don't see that this can be linked to computers, a point the author half accepts.

The second charge is that "virtual life" on the computer is so exciting that "real life" seems boring. (Inverted commas to indicate that this division into virtual and real life at least needs to be challenged) Here I think there may be a point, although again it doesn't apply to computers alone. Possibly the pleasures (and even if not pleasure, necessity) of persisting at something for a long time to get a slight reward are harder to sell in a world where instant gratification is available on line. Again, computers seem to me to be at best a symptom, not a cause. When the whole examination system in the UK is revised to celebrate what you can do, not indicate what you can't, with the result over time that the very concept of not being able to do something and being marked accordingly seems to have been forgotten (A grades for less than 50%, a C grade for the low teens) then I think we can fairly say the idea that you may have to struggle and work at somethign before getting the reward is being forgotten. But because of computers? Evidence?

And finally, there is the charge that the computer offers a safe social environment where we can interact with others without the dangers associated of real world interaction. We take advantage of ignore lists and the disconnect button to avoid nasty social situations instead of dealing with them. I don't know if this is true. I wouldn't go to a forum that was full of garbage, but I wouldn't associate with people in real life whose entire conversation was violent juvenile fantasy, either. Life's too short for morons whether you are on line or in the flesh.

And with the bad comes the good of a wider circle to talk to. I think I have a better understanding of Americans thanks to this forum, for instance. No, really.

But of course I grew up before the internet and mobile phones and the like, so my behaviour was set then. I can see it would be different now, but if its any worse I am less sure.

[bmolsson]

I am sure the writer never played Total War.......

[Adrian II]

Correlations.

False assumptions, based on bivariate correlations, based on anecdotal evidence. That is what the Fuchs/Woessmann paper is about.

We show that, first, bivariate evidence on the relationship between computers and students’ educational achievement is highly misleading. Because computer availability at home is strongly correlated with other family-background characteristics, bivariate results on computer availability at home are severely biased. Still, simple bivariate correlations are what many commentators base their assessments on. Even high-quality documents such as the initial release of the PISA results, albeit cautioning about possible limitations to the interpretation of bivariate findings, reports the simple bivariate finding that “[s]tudents with higher values on the index of interest in computers tend to perform better on the combined reading literacy scale” (OECD 2001, p. 118). We show that the statistically significant positive correlation between the availability of computers at home and student performance in math and reading reverses into a statistically significantly negative one as soon as other family-background influences are extensively controlled for in multivariate regressions.

Second, similar to the case of computer availability at home, bivariate results on computer availability at school are severely biased because the availability of school computers is strongly correlated with the availability of other school resources. While the bivariate correlation between the availability of computers at school and student performance is strongly and statistically significantly positive, the correlation becomes small and statistically indistinguishable from zero once other school characteristics are held constant. The multivariate results illustrate how careless bivariate interpretations can lead to patently false conclusions.

[..]

Fourth, the relationship between student achievement and the use of computers and the internet at school shows an inverted U-shape. That is, students who never use computers or the internet at school show lower performance than students who sometimes use computers or the internet at school. But students who use them several times a week perform even lower.

We offer two possible explanations for this pattern. On the one hand, teachers might refrain from using computers with students of a low ability level. Then, the first part of the pattern may simply reflect an ability bias, and the second part of the pattern may reflect that computer use might actually have decreased student learning, as has also been found in a previous quasi-experimental study (Angrist and Lavy 2002). On the other hand, assuming that there is no ability bias left after the extensive controls that we include in the regressions, the pattern might suggest that there is an optimal level of computer and internet use at school, substantially below a use intensity of several times a week.

[econ21]

I think the interesting issues arise from the internet, rather than computers per se. A PC not connected to the net is a great tool for some quantitative subjects, especially at more advanced levels, and also makes it easier to write. But I'd guess its educational value in schools is modest at best - a glorified calculator and type writer[1].

The internet by contrast seems pretty mind-blowing in its potential. I remember doing history at school and struggling with the one text book provided, and the meagre related books in my parents' home. Now, when my son or I want to get some historical material on Henry VII or whoever, the amount of stuff available from a google search is amazing. It's even starting to get useful at a post-graduate research level. It's a cliche, but it is getting like having the British library in your bedroom. This can only be good.

The writer seems concerned about the social aspects of internet interaction and again these seem almost as revolutionary. To read bloggers in invaded Iraq, to interact with Germans about their recent election, etc. This is a pretty unprecedented widening of the circle of concern and connections. I think that's very enriching and educational. It is true that the internet gives the capacity to cause offense and walk away. But presumably this is just another form of social interaction that people must learn to cope with. I've certainly pondered over how to deal with people on the internet and if anything find that it hones certain social skills - you learn to be more careful and thoughtful in your interactions, when shorn of the body language that eases conventional forms of exchange. I'm sure kids will play out various roles on the net, not all of them responsible. But I suspect these interactions will allow them to develop their personality. I don't agree with the writer that they have to switch off the computer to do that.

[1]Given that computers are likely to be used mainly for non-educational purposes, I can quite understand that high usage lowers time available for educational purposes and hence hinders learning. The internet as a recreational device might be a similar time sink.

[Redleg]

To answer the topic of the thread.

Are Computers bad for teaching and learning - not in my opinion. Can the use of the computer allow for easy distraction from learning - if the student, the teacher, and the parent are not discpline enough to concentrate on the subject - then yes the computer will allow the student to go off on tangents while researching or writing a paper.

Does the computer cause students to not learn certain skills that are critical to functioning without one?

I wonder if the author did a study on the use of calculators and a decrease in the ability to do math?

Now to this statement of the authors

educational computing is neither a revolution nor a passing fad, but a Faustian bargain. Children gain unprecedented power to control their external world, but at the cost of internal growth. During the two decades that I taught young people with and about digital technology, I came to realize that the power of computers can lead children into deadened, alienated, and manipulative relationships with the world, that children's increasingly pervasive use of computers jeopardizes their ability to belong fully to human and biological communities—ultimately jeopardizing the communities themselves.

He might have a point - anti-social behavior seems to be on the rise throughout the world.

[econ21]

He might have a point - anti-social behavior seems to be on the rise throughout the world.

Do you think young members of the Org are "deadened, alienated and manipulative" or that this is not a "human community"? I don't see it. The internet widens the potential community and makes it easier to connect. Like the printing press in the fifteenth century, I don't think we have fully seen how this will work through but I think the social implications are exciting.

Nor am I convinced the internet geeks are the ones engaging in anti-social behaviour on the street corners.

[Byzantine Prince]

A. Redleg is absolutely right. I know a lot of people who can't study or do h/m at all on the computer because it's so easy to go play games, chat here, or watch porn.

B. We should take into account that calculators have helped accelerate math building skills to an unprecedented level, as Redleg stated.

C. Anti-social behaviour is only negative from the point of view of the society.

[Alexanderofmacedon]

(..) Recent research, including a University of Munich study of 174,000 students in thirty-one countries, indicates that students who frequently use computers perform worse academically than those who use them rarely or not at all.

Now, if those students are anything like me, then I can see that. I usually can't stay focused on school that I'm working on when I could log on to forums, play games etc. If they did that I could see the worse academic performance. If they do all their work like they're supposed to, then I don't really believe it.

Computers are excellent sources of information. I just don't see that happening.

Well, now that I think of it, not all internet sites are really 100% facts so they may get worse grades from bad websites. Hmmm...

[Adrian II]

Nor am I convinced the internet geeks are the ones engaging in anti-social behaviour on the street corners.

I do not understand what point you are addressing here. The Orion article is about the use of computers in schools.

The Orion author merely states that analytic and communicative skills deteriorate as a consequence of frequent computer use in schools, not that it causes a rise in anti-social behaviour on street corners.

The Munich analysis finds an inverted U-shape relationship between computer and Internet use in schools and pupils' performance. No use and frequent use are equally bad, moderate use (a couple of times a week) seems best.

None of these authors is projecting all the ills of society onto computers or the Internet.

[Redleg]

Do you think young members of the Org are "deadened, alienated and manipulative" or that this is not a "human community"? I don't see it. The internet widens the potential community and makes it easier to connect. Like the printing press in the fifteenth century, I don't think we have fully seen how this will work through but I think the social implications are exciting.

Only on the internet does this interaction happen. How do these same individuals interact with real emotions and people? Anti-social behavior is defined as

Anti-social behaviour is that lacking in judgement and consideration for others, ranging from careless negligence to deliberately damaging activity, vandalism and graffiti for example. Someone behaving in an anti-social manner may be a manifestation of an antisocial personality disorder.

I used the very broadest of definations when I said anti-social behavior is on the raise.

Nor am I convinced the internet geeks are the ones engaging in anti-social behaviour on the street corners.

Nor am I - its a general observation based upon what I read in the news. People do not seem to generally want to inter-relate in polite discourse. Anti-social behavior does not always imply violence. How many people no longer interact with others daily in person verus only interacting with others on the computer. I spend about 4-6 hours a day interacting on the computer, about 8-10 hours a day interacting with my associates at work, and maybe 5 hours a week interacting with others outside of the norm. Just the other day I had about a 30 minute discussion about Korea with a vetern from the Korean War time period.

There are many who would not open themselves up for discussion with others outside of the computer - internet discussion forums - to me this is an anti-social behavior.

[Redleg]

The Orion author merely states that analytic and communicative skills deteriorate as a consequence of frequent computer use in schools .

I heard this same arguement concering analytic skills about 25 years ago concerning the use of calculators in the classroom for math.

The Munich analysis finds an inverted U-shape relationship between computer and Internet use in schools and pupils' performance. No use and frequent use are equally bad, moderate use (a couple of times a week) seems best.

None of these authors is projecting all the ills of society onto computers or the Internet.

True but notice what the 2nd quoted paragraph that you put from the article states. It supports the anti-social correlation aspect that I have drawn.

[yesdachi]

I put this one on the teacher’s shoulders. A good teacher can use the tools available to be a better teacher. A computer is like a ruler or calculator and if used correctly could be a very effective teaching aid. Just like math class had to change when calculators became available other classes need to change now that computers are available.

I think kids are less physically social than they use to be because of computers and forums and chat rooms, etc. but I don’t necessarily see it as a bad thing as they are still being social. But don’t forget that even thou kids may be online more in the evening they are still forced to be physically social 7-9 hours a day at school. And of course, anything in excess is a bad thing and I think sports and membership in physically interactive groups should be encouraged as much as doing stuff on the computer.

[Adrian II]

I heard this same arguement concering analytic skills about 25 years ago concerning the use of calculators in the classroom for math.

That may be true, but computers are a different animal altogether. I was thinking of another analogy. I remember hearing the same hyped argument of educational progress through the classroom use of television as we are hearing about computers these days. Needless to say it never materialised, although school tv (or video), if used modestly, can enhance the learning process.

[Redleg]

......if used modestly, can enhance the learning process.

To paraphrase - that statement its the nail on the head. Used in moderation as a learning enabler - the computer should enhance the learning process. Just like the calculator enhanced the learning process for my Calculus classes.

[ah_dut]

All right, no offense to anybody but I think I'm reasonably qualified to talk on the matter (being in school and being taught both by the chalk and talk and the powerpoint is lord methods)

So here's the summation. I personally prefer to be taught by chalk and talk. It seems...I dunno, more personal? The powerpoint teachers just click buttons all day. They don't seem to do as much. It's a very good way of teaching a subject like RE (my school has some of the best results...28A*s and 3 As in this last year) but a subject like english or philosophy...it appears less useful. I say RE as GCSE RE is very...hmm unoriginal? You just write what the teacher told you and you get full marks.

On the point about IT in lessons, nothing ever gets done. Face it, give a boy a computer and tell him to do reserach...then multiply by 30, you'll have 29 people just doing their own thing. And my school's supposed to be a good one and I'm talking the top set here. People just playt games all the time. In such a respect, I believe that yes, it's a hinderance not a help.

However, stuff like Sibelius (music composition software) and the internet are also incredible resources that cannot be ignored in how they help students. I say let the chalk and talk live on. A bit of the internet ain't bad...just leave it to the teachers and pupils at home if you want anything done

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Computers are a fantastic tool for the adult learner. You can access information, or -- using CBT/WBT type tools -- have an interactive learning experience with others scattered across the globe.

As Pappy noted early in the discussion, what computers do NOT do as well is aid in the learning of fundamentals. Certain education/learning skills are critical to learning: good sentence construction; memorization training; basic math functions; all of these basic tools must be second nature early on in the learning process to allow for greater/richer things to be accessed. Computers may be an aid for some of this, but the rich interaction between student and teacher is vital here.

Seamus

[yesdachi]

On the point about IT in lessons, nothing ever gets done. Face it, give a boy a computer and tell him to do reserach...then multiply by 30, you'll have 29 people just doing their own thing. And my school's supposed to be a good one and I'm talking the top set here. People just playt games all the time. In such a respect, I believe that yes, it's a hinderance not a help.

Teacher’s responsibility to keep the students focused on the assignment. A piece of paper shaped like a football could be just as distracting. It is not the computers fault.

[Duke of Gloucester]

If computers are only being used by students for word processing, calculating and surfing the internet, then they are not really going to enhance learning (and may involve distractions). Power point can definitely be souless if used unimaginatively. However computers, like telivision, have the potential to make a huge difference by widening the types of learning experiences that students are exposed to. The key is using them sensibly, imaginatively and as part of a range of other strategies.

[Moros]

I think computers can be good and bad when it comes to learning.
me for example if I haev to study something verry long and boring, I play games or come to the guild,... but if it's not so long or when I'm intrested in the subject the computer is really a great tool. Today for example I made a lil' proggy with 129 irregular English verbs in it and then asks you the past simple or the past participle off it and corrects if you made a mistake.
wich made it quite easy to learn it.

Aren't there even schools in Asia where children use their computers almost the whole day. And Some Asian countries are scoring higher than a lot of European countries and the US.

Than you've got the internet it's good for assignments or research but it usually isn't verry handy when you're learning your exams. tough sometimes it can be useful if you forgot or don't understand something, you can always ask someone on msn for example.

so I think Computers are good for gathering information, helping you learn not to "big" things and there might be someone who can expain you someting or ...
therefor I think it's good and schools should use it but it's idiot to go learning you maths exam before you're distracting computer.

[King Ragnar]

Whenever one of my classes gets into a computer room for a lesson, it usally involves playing on games for an hour or lookig for stupid stuff on google and generally messing around.

[yesdachi]

Whenever one of my classes gets into a computer room for a lesson, it usally involves playing on games for an hour or lookig for stupid stuff on google and generally messing around.

Another great teacher keeping the class motivated and eager to learn.

Ok, I’ll stop my teacher bashing. I think my point is made.

[ah_dut]

Teacher’s responsibility to keep the students focused on the assignment. A piece of paper shaped like a football could be just as distracting. It is not the computers fault.

No it's not and lessons can get very boring indeed. But stick a thing like the internet in front of somevery bored boys, very little chance of getting caught (a teacher cannot be everywhere at once) and you have a recipe for disaster. I think Ragnar nailed it to a tree, people just doss around

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

If computers are only being used by students for word processing, calculating and surfing the internet, then they are not really going to enhance learning (and may involve distractions). Power point can definitely be souless if used unimaginatively. However computers, like telivision, have the potential to make a huge difference by widening the types of learning experiences that students are exposed to. The key is using them sensibly, imaginatively and as part of a range of other strategies.

Couldn't have said it better. Computers in lessons only become a problem when the teacher is using for the sake of it to avoid having to actually deliver a lesson.

[Tribesman]

I heard this same arguement concering analytic skills about 25 years ago concerning the use of calculators in the classroom for math.

There might be something in that , I have noticed that the vast majority of my recent apprentices cannot even do very basic calculations without a calculator , also the majority of the younger engineers and QS I have to deal with .
I mean seriously a QS is involved in only one thing , calculations , and they cannot even multiply , sometimes even with the use of a calculator working in base 10 !!!!!!

[yesdachi]

No it's not and lessons can get very boring indeed. But stick a thing like the internet in front of somevery bored boys, very little chance of getting caught (a teacher cannot be everywhere at once) and you have a recipe for disaster. I think Ragnar nailed it to a tree, people just doss around

You have just reinforced my position. Boring lesson, bored students, and poor supervision. Sounds like a candidate for teacher of the year… NOT! Heck, I’d be surfing too but not because the computer is bad for teaching but because the lesson is boring, and that is the teachers fault.

[R'as al Ghul]

However computers, like telivision, have the potential to make a huge difference by widening the types of learning experiences that students are exposed to. The key is using them sensibly, imaginatively and as part of a range of other strategies.

Absolutely.
The Computer is a new tool, not a substitute for a teacher.
I remember when my school got the first TV's and VCR's. From
there on we watched a lot of movies. Sure they were supposed to
be educational ones but the way they were used in the classroom
was just plain wrong. We saw the movie in one week and talked about it
in the next, where it should have been splitted into logical parts and
be discussed until understood before going on with the next part.

I also have the feeling that the use of the tool isn't taught very well.
The first thing to teach should be the proper usage of a search engine
and an understanding of the technology behind it. This would lead
to a more differentiated approach of the sources that can be found.

[Redleg]

I heard this same arguement concering analytic skills about 25 years ago concerning the use of calculators in the classroom for math.

There might be something in that , I have noticed that the vast majority of my recent apprentices cannot even do very basic calculations without a calculator , also the majority of the younger engineers and QS I have to deal with .
I mean seriously a QS is involved in only one thing , calculations , and they cannot even multiply , sometimes even with the use of a calculator working in base 10 !!!!!!

How terrible is that.

Have you noticed that when you go to the store the clerk can not give you change without consulting the cash register calculation for the amount.

[Tribesman]

How terrible is that.
Considering a QS takes either a 3 or 7 year course at college/univesity dealing almost exclusively with calculations after 12 or 13 years of ordinary education it is atrocious .
Seriously , I recieved practically no formal education from the age of 13 yet end up having to correct these "educated" peoples mistakes .