December 15th, 1999
Push for Computers in Classrooms Gathers New Foes
By Pamela Mendels
New York Times
The conventional wisdom in education policy circles in recent years has held
that children need to be introduced to computers early and that technology should
be a strong presence in their school lives.
Now, a new group of educators, doctors, psychologists and others is challenging
that notion. In a draft statement on technology literacy, a committee of the
group, called the Alliance for Childhood, says that the American approach to
technology in homes and schools has been flawed, emphasizing ephemeral vocational
skills and the razzle-dazzle of educational software, rather than helping children
think critically about technology and its appropriate use.
Among other things, the committee is urging that computers have a restricted
role, if any role at all, in elementary school classrooms and in later years
be introduced in a way that assures children understand how computers work,
can examine the appropriate place of technology in their lives and be instilled
with the idea of ethical behavior online.
The hope, said Joan Almon, coordinator of the group, is to influence policy
makers, parents and teachers at a time when "there is still a window,"
when computers have not yet become as entrenched in life as, say, television.
The alliance, which was formed last February, plans to incorporate as a formal
nonprofit organization. Its founding members include Almon, a long-time teacher
and consultant; Jane M. Healey, an educational psychologist and author of "Failure
to Connect," a critique of computer use in education; Stephen L. Talbott,
the editor of a well-regarded electronic newsletter examining the social implications
of technology; and Bettye Caldwell, a professor of pediatrics and former president
of National Association for the Education of Young People.
The purpose of the group is to fight what its members see as a "toxic
cultural environment" where they say children are buffeted by stress that
is leading to a decline in their well-being and an increase in health problems
like hyperactive disorders and depression. They say that stress includes academic
pressures, lack of interaction with caring adults, and mass exposure to violence,
sex and crass commercialism in electronic media.
Next year, the group hopes to publish a report examining computers and children,
and the draft statement, published on a Web site and in the most recent issue
of Talbott’s newsletter, will be part of that.
The authors of the draft—Talbott was one of several who wrote and edited
it—are asking for responses at their Web site that will help them craft a
final version. Colleen Cordes, a technology and science policy writer who helped
with the draft, said she was hoping for broad comment both from alliance members
and the public. Among the questions up for discussion, she said, is what does
"intensive" computer use mean; would large-scale computerization of
elementary school classrooms displace cheaper and more rewarding educational
experiences and what, precisely, is the best age at which to introduce computers.
It may make little sense to teach children skills that will be outmoded by the
time they reach working age.
Declaring that the point of technology literacy should be to prepare children
to be "morally responsible citizens" who can actively shape the nation’s
technological future, "rather than merely reacting to it as passive consumers,"
the draft outlines four principles for parents and teachers.
The first is that intensive computer use should have no place in elementary
schools, where, the statement says, the focus should be on nurturing a child
using connection with other people and with real objects, like crayons. The
second principle is that children learn ethical computer conduct before going
online. The third is that in high school they learn basics of how computers
operate and perhaps even be required to take apart and rebuild a simple computer,
so they understand the capabilities and limits of the machinery. The fourth
is that they learn about the history of technology and how it has shaped society,
in part so that they, in turn, can make informed decisions about technology
in their lifetimes.
Moreover, the statement asserts that much of the argument for placing computers
in the schools has been essentially a vocational one: that children need to
learn computer skills needed in the modern workplace. But, the statement says,
in the fast-changing world of technology, it makes little sense to teach children
skills that will be outmoded by the time they reach working age.
It says computer skills that could serve students well, like knowing how to
use a word-processing program, could easily be taught in a one-semester course
in the upper grades. "How long does it take to teach a child to use Eudora
or Netscape?" asked Lowell W. Monke, an assistant professor of education
at Grinnell College in Iowa, former high school computer teacher and another
of the draft authors, who believes the course could be best taught in middle
school years.
Much of the draft is at odds with thinking that pervades education policy.
The Clinton administration, for example, is in favor of having every classroom
wired to the Internet by next year and has pushed for a number of measures,
like the E-rate subsidy, to bring technology to schools. And proponents of such
efforts, like Keith R. Krueger, executive director of the Consortium for School
Networking, a nonprofit Washington group that promotes the use of technology
in schools, say the statement is misguided.
Krueger argues that far from feeling overwhelmed by high technology, children
embrace it, and that the task of educators is to figure out how to use that
enthusiasm in the classroom. "It’s a powerful tool," Krueger said
of the computer. "And at a very young ages, kids are extraordinarily energized
and captivated by games. To say you don’t want to use educational technology
at an elementary school level seems silly. The real question isn’t whether we
should have computers or not in classrooms. It is how do we capture the excitement
and enthusiasm and apply it for educational purposes."
Heidi B. Rogers, president of the International Society for Technology in
Education, a nonprofit group that last year issued a set of proposed standards
for technology in the classroom, including recommendations that elementary school
students learn certain computer skills, says that computers are not meant to
displace teachers or crayons. But she argues that computers can enhance learning
in early grades through things like collaborative projects, in which children
learn together around a computer or communicate with people in other locations.
She also argues that early exposure to computers can help make sure children
keep pace with fast-changing technology. "As we get into the digital age,
our students are growing up in a technology-rich environment," she said.
"To be successful in society, they need to understand and use technology
tools."
But the draft’s authors hope their ideas will resonate with parents and teachers,
especially those who have a nagging sense that modern childhood has become too
hurried and that increasingly children are experiencing the world through the
high-paced graphics of electronic screens, rather than through the real, if
simple, grit of the sandbox.
Talbott said the current enthusiasm for computers in the classroom should
be seen in historical context. "There’s been this powerful general sense
that the next new technology—radio, television, now the Web—was absolutely
essential for education," he said. "But then each one gets abandoned
and the next one embraced without anyone asking: ‘Are we any more clear on it
this time?’"