Posted on 11/13/2003 9:51:28 AM PST by avg_freeper
excerpt:
...Effective teaching tools?
That may be so, but it is still a gamble. For all the rhetoric behind the high-tech revolution, relatively little evidence backs the idea that computers improve learning in readily measurable ways, such as producing higher grades.
Bob Spielvogel, principal author of a three-year study by the nonprofit Education Development Center that evaluated a $45 million IBM education program, cautioned that equipment is only the beginning of technological reform in the classroom. "We know that simply putting computers into schools doesn't work," he said, adding that the IBM program succeeded because it engaged "researchers, corporate managers and educators in a long-term partnership."
To that end, Microsoft and the School District of Philadelphia in September announced a partnership to build a state-of-the-art high school that incorporates technology throughout its operations as part of what educators called a "long-term relationship" with the company. Under the project, which will cost an estimated $46 million in taxpayer money, Microsoft will donate software, services and support staff to the school.
Yet even these comprehensive efforts cannot guarantee success when the value of technology in the classroom remains a subject of dispute.
A controversial report that claims to offer the first side-by-side comparison of the effects of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) on test scores was published in a British academic review, The Economic Journal, in October 2002. The report found that Israeli 8th graders did slightly worse in mathematics when course material was taught partly on PCs in the classroom relative to others who studied the same material the old-fashioned way.
"CAI does not appear to have had educational benefits that translated into higher test scores," according to economics professors Joshua Angrist of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Victor Lavy of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, who authored the study.
Such conclusions are still preliminary and have not persuaded policy-makers to lower the priority of technology in favor of other needs. In fact, the lack of compelling evidence that technology works in the classroom is sometimes used as a justification to push the envelope further. If computers haven't proven effective as a teaching tool, the argument goes, it must be because not enough has been done to make them indispensable.
The influences feeding such circular thinking are complex, spanning such diverse interests as politicians courting voters with school-age children, technology companies vying for contracts, and cash-strapped districts happy to accept any kind of handout. The result, critics say, is a situation that allows for questionable corporate relationships.
"Companies give large donations to help out with technology purchases or build buildings and then try to use that as a leverage point to sell their products throughout a school district," said Mike Lorion, vice president of education at handheld computer maker Palm, which has donated equipment to schools in the past.
A corporate presence is obvious to visitors at Evergreen Valley High, where a main wing bears the name of Applied Materials, a manufacturer of chipmaking equipment based in nearby Santa Clara. The building was dedicated after the company donated $1 million for teacher training and promised another $1 million if the school could prove that its initiatives were working.
Former Evergreen Valley High School plant manager Mike Welch bristled recently when asked what Applied Materials expects in return for its donations. "There're always strings," he said, noting that company representatives have played a role in certain hiring decisions. "You pay special attention when the person who's offering another $1 million is talking."
But Welch doesn't think Applied has a hidden agenda. "They're interested in being good corporate citizens, in being part of something that really makes a difference," he said.
blog - web log - A blog is basically a journal that is available on the web. The activity of updating a blog is "blogging" and someone who keeps a blog is a "blogger." Blogs are typically updated daily using software that allows people with little or no technical background to update and maintain the blog. Postings on a blog are almost always arranged in cronological order with the most recent additions featured most prominantly.I don't think this c|net article was really trying to suggest that kids need to blog. Rather it questions how much computer technology is necessary for education.
So, when he came on campus for his 'inspections', our lab tech would run from door to door with a special knock. It was a signal to drop everything and fire up the lone computer in the classroom. The students were well-rehersed enough to act interested in the cartoonish, dumbed-down computer-animated simulation software that played on the screen. The supervisor lavished kudos upon us and when he left, we packed up the computer and headed over to the lab... to do the real experiments.
Computers don't cause learning.
Other studies have shown that connecting workers' PCs to the internet actually lowers their productivity. Computers are great tools; they are not the answer to every problem.
In saying this, I hope that you're at home right now. ;)
Oh that's a bunch of BS!
Oh damn, I gotta go, the boss is coming.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.