The role of computer in education has been changing since it was introduced to public use in early eighties. Nowadays, arguments about introducing more information technology equipment into public education or having a reasonable control of it bother not just school administration but educational councils, psychologists and sociologists countrywide; moreover this problem have spread in recent years on other developed countries. In order to have a look on this problem from different sides and examine major "for" and "against" its enough to read the works of two authors who introduce this problems from different perspectives.
The article Computer Education Is Vital for Students of the Future by Richard W. Riley, discusses the importance of making impressive investment into computer equipment of high schools, as it improves the pedagogical process, improves the skills of students, eases the work of teachers and raises future professional skills of students. To his point if the government doesn't spend more money on information technology equipment for public education it will definitely loose in future, as the only result of such educational process would be unskillful and unqualified professionals who will require additional training.
From the other side, the article Computers Cannot Teach Children Basic Skills by David Gelernter, states that importance of computers in education is exaggerated, more over intensive use of computers in early childhood education will result low thinking and critical skills of children in future, as computer substitutes all functions of mental activity that have to be developed during this age in order for kids to develop gradually.
The main concern of Richard Riley is that modern schools of low-income communities are not sufficiently supported by government, as well as classrooms for children with special needs. This mainly results in poor education they get, in inability to increase their financial situation and social status through the considerable lack of professionalism:
"…If the nation continues to ignore the educational needs of new students—particularly low-income students--and continues to give them a watered-down curriculum and link up their schools last, it will find itself in an economic bind of the first order. It will have a work force that does not know how to work. If the United States continues to think short term, as it did in the 1980s, the results are potentially disastrous." (Riley, R. Computer Education Is Vital for Students of the Future)
Stating that the role of technology is growing as it penetrates to every sphere of our life and makes a man become dependent on its achievements, the role of computers and electronic facilities in modern education should not be undervalued: "The first thing to understand is that technology is not a cost but an investment. Educators need an investment mentality that is firm, fair, and flexible. That is to say, schools should firmly commit themselves to technology as the wave of the future." (Riley, R. Computer Education Is Vital for Students of the Future)
From the other side David Gelernter wants to persuade that introduction of computers into earlier education is not a matter of the main concern, appositively it's effects are often more harmful than fruitful:
"In Kentucky, as the Wall Street Journal reported, students in grades K-3 are mixed together regardless of age in a relaxed environment. It works great, the Journal says. Yes, scores on computation tests have dropped 10 percent at one school, but not to worry: "Drilling addition and subtraction in an age of calculators is a waste of time," the principal reassures us. Meanwhile, a Japanese educator informs University of Wisconsin mathematician
Richard Akey states that in his country, "calculators are not used in elementary or junior high school because the primary emphasis is on helping students develop their mental abilities." No wonder Japanese kids blow the pants off American kids in math.(Gelernter, David Computers Cannot Teach Children Basic Skills)
Probably this fact is worth of thousand words, true facts about decreasing abilities of American children to perform basic analytical skills of arithmetic as well as in writing and reading (as the computer does the spell check, and multimedia features are directed on passive audio-visual perception of information). David Gelernter opposite to Richard Riley considers that subsidizing of public education was excessive: "Over the last decade an estimated $2 billion has been spent on more than 2 million computers for America's classrooms"
Still the arguments of both authors look to be single-sided and lack of multi-side evidence to be objective and convincing. Richard Riley sees the solution of poor education in increasing public education budget mainly by spending more money on school computer equipment. It may look that the computer and technology are the "only" exit and the only solution in this situation, but it's quite far from real truth. Teachers, as well as their pedagogical competence and professionalism are more important than equipment. To blindly rely on the educational success due to new technologies is absurd, but to undervalue their use would be a fault as well.
Even though that he insists that:
"Technology can help tailor instruction to the individual needs of students; improve instructional management; support teachers and their professional development; connect student learning with the real world and schools to the home and community; and expand time for learning beyond the traditional school day"(Riley, R. Computer Education Is Vital for Students of the Future), it would be impossible to reach progressive achievements without adequate academic preparation of teachers, and basically this has to be the matter of the main concern for educational authorities.
Article of David Gelernter being more objective, still has a lot of subjectivism in referring to the influence of computers on educational process, as he describes mainly the negative impacts. Here he had not to blame computers for being the reason for the growing children problem of imperfect and poor education, but he had described incorrect educational methods of computer application that led to such crisis. He accuses nearly every piece of educational software in contributing to this growing problem, instead he had to describe how incompetence of educational councils and educational authorities countrywide led to this changes, as being the supporters of progressive innovations, they often fail to look on the problem from the face of teacher, of educator and pedagogic specialist.
To make his point of view understandable and persuasive, Richard Riley uses the following techniques as the means of "passive" propaganda: besides giving his opinion on the question and stating that some of his arguments can be concluded from rational and logical thinking, he as well uses his professional status of educational authority to popularize his ideas: "As secretary of education, I have come to believe that…". Besides he uses previous evidence of government's failure to improve the situation with public education in eighties and tries to compare it to nowadays practices of educational budget planning, insisting on increasing school equipment funds. For a person who has no or little background about education budget planning, situation in public education and academic performance of students in general, it would rather difficult to form personal point of view to oppose author's arguments, and he would more likely agree with the author.
David Gelernter, the author of Computers Cannot Teach Children Basic Skills uses a persuasive and critical tone in order to explain and prove his ideas. The arguments he presents are quite well explained and argued, he gives evidence from respective periodical and relies more than on simple statistics, but on the general nature of things which are described by others as well. The comparisons he uses to accuse computer domination in education with electoral campaigns of politicians, about making simple approach to delivering information be dominating over individual thoughts make to accept his view points and agree with him. Being a computer professional, a professor of computer science at Yale, David Gelernter has enough credit to express such point of view, because he as no one else is acquainted with the problems of artificial intelligence and knows that artificial intelligence or modern PC would be not able to substitute a teacher, as education is double-sided, mutual process, which requires the participation of a teacher and student, but not a simple pressure to accept new information.
Inability of Richard Riley to look on the problem from different perspectives and to look for other deficiencies of modern education makes his work to lack some of logical foundation, moreover his individual opinion forces out other possible facts that could be mentioned in his essay as well as it makes the article to look really subjective. He uses a lot general facts about the use and benefits of using computers in modern life, which touch the theme but don't give an exhaustive argument for its solution. His single-valued answer to the problem, that educational deficiencies have to be solved by increasing the number of computer units at public educational institutions makes a vision that he fails to understand the core of the problem, which lies not in the quality of delivered information from technological point of view, but which lies in the quality of received information. Here it would be important to include that teacher's educational standards and standards of teaching have to be raised as well.
From the other side David Gelernter fails to fully develop his ideas as well as he is more preoccupied with negative impacts of modern educational software over the educational process than to define its real place in the educational process. According to the mane of the article Computers Cannot Teach Children Basic Skills, he had to bring to the evidence the arguments that would prove his idea, but not to describe the bankruptcy of modern computer software to execute teaching functions, as it makes the vision that "right" software will change this problem. Being full of critics on both educational authorities and educational software he does not truly and objectively defines the role of computers in education.
Having described the nature of these articles, their deficiencies and strong points, I would agree with some of the arguments of both authors. It would be absurd top deny the importance of computer education, as it is our future and perhaps it had become our presence. But from another side it would be na๏ve to rely only on computers in educational process. As David Gelernter had stated, there has to be a face to face interaction while teaching, it has to be a dialogue, critical thinking and analysis while educating, not a blind perception of information. And that's why to reach desired equilibrium between the role of a teacher and computer its essential to give advantage to teacher in the practices that require the development of thinking skills, the development of analytical and speech skills and the development of formulating and expressing personal viewpoint as senseless machine would never perform that.
Custom written research papers
Custom Essays
research paper
Aaron is a professional freelance writer at custom essays writing service: custom-essay.net
He is also a technical writer, advertising copywriter, & website copywriter for Custom Essay Writing Service.