Schools in Maine have spent $15 million (with $22 million to go) on a contract to put laptops into the, well, laps of middle-schoolers. After two years of the program, the students with computers performed about the same as the students without them.
One school board member tells what her son learned in the process:
… David, 14, who will be in ninth grade this year, said his classmates found ways to play games on their laptops without their teachers noticing. Also, he said students spent a lot of time downloading and pasting photographs and sound effects to create movies.
”You don’t have to do as much work as writing a report,” he said. ”It’s more about getting pictures and putting in sound effects than learning about the topic.”
Education Commissioner Sue Gendron said teachers over the past two years were just learning how to integrate laptops into the curriculum, and that it is unfair to judge the program after only two years.
When asked when the test scores should improve, she declined to give a timetable, saying laptops are worth the investment even if they don’t boost test scores.
”I believe that the jobs of the future will be based on technology, and part of Maine’s goal is to have the best-educated citizens and to ensure that they are skilled to work in a creative economy,” she said.
It’s sad to think that educationists are falling for the attraction of shiny objects. They’re spending money and time on machines — admittedly cute, handy machines — that don’t make much measurable difference to learning, while local governments are forced to cut teachers’ jobs.
Exemplifying the classic linear thinking of the professional educator, the “Education” Commissioner said:
”I believe that the jobs of the future will be based on technology….”
Could someone explain to me how one learns how to design the next generation computer by becoming adept at manipulating its keys?
Or, if you prefer, what form of technological improvement will be more likely to burst upon society once students learn how to add sound to downloaded movies?
Lastly, can anyone conceive of a way to explain this to this woman?
Another thing — how are the kids’ wrists? I have heard that there are more and more kids developing carpal tunnel syndrome, sometimes really crippling cases, from all that keyboarding. Imagine having to wear wrist braces and use adaptive equipment before enrolling in college.
I sit in front of a computer 8-12 hours a day, and I cannot think of any reason that children need to use it (other than for very simple tasks). I don’t encourage my children to use the computer, and I will not encourage them in the future. If they’re interested in it, that’s fine, but
[whoops]…I would rather have them read books or play outside.
Maine has been eaten alive by sicko liberal transplants!
This is a perfect example of how NOT to use computers in education. What MIGHT be useful is giving the teachers a computer (a laptop would be nice, but not essential).
There is one use of a computer that is VERY appropriate, more inexpensive than the non-computer alternative, and has a long track record that has been validated by data. That is hooking up science probes, microscopes, and other equipment to computers. That equipment is LESS expensive than the alternative, and can easily be justified by the multipurpose aspects.
For those who can’t picture what I’m talking about, go to
Vernier, and check out what relatively inexpensive computer probeware can do.