Comments

I think the way in which the computers are used makes a big difference as to how effective they are. It might be difficult to do too much with algorithms without a computer. However, I am not sure that using a computer as a stand-in teacher is necessarily the best use (especially if the teaching is mediocre and/or students can easily do 'other things' on the computer rather than their work).

I started discussing this topic a little bit on the "news from nowhere" entry.

Although now that I look at it, perhaps this is a better place. I'll copy my last comment from there over to here:

I definitely agree that students should be able to plot equations by hand, but how far should we take it?

At one extreme, a we have students who want to use graphing calculators to plot equations like y=5, x=2, or y=2x+1. At the other, a computer algebra system could plot solutions to equations like y^2 + 5z^3 - x^3 = 5, but I don't think I would expect students to be able to do it.

Somewhere in the middle fall things like rational functions. Last semester I made my algebra students take a test on rational functions (including graphing) without a graphing calculator. I thought it was ridiculous for them to be unable to construct a qualitatively accurate (I didn't require very much precision) graph of a relatively simple rational function (even when I gave them the function in factored form).

I think about this in the context of calculus as well. There is value to being able to do the symbol manipulation that is required to do differentiation and integration by hand. However, it is not clear to me that knowing the rules (formulas) for differentiation and integration (no matter how well you can apply them formulaically) enhances one's general understanding of calculus to a significant degree, especially when we consider that many (most?) 'real world' problems require numerical techniques to get approximate solutions. Students who will go on and need to do things involving much symbolic manipulation (math majors, for example) get something out of learning/practicing the rules. I'm not sure how much more they get out of that than they get out of doing complicated algebra problems, but it is some benefit. It seems like students who will not need to use such symbol manipulation nearly as much may possibly be better served with a course that spent more time working on calculus from a geometrical and/or numerical approach (including writing programs to approximate derivatives and intergrals of different functions). This is a matter I am still undecided on. I learned math and have most of my experience teaching it using the approach with lots of formulas and algebra. This year I have decided to try a text with an emphasis on a geometrical/numerical approach (the formulas are still included, however).

One thing I am starting to think we should do more of is teach students how to follow/understand/create algorithms. In this case, it would be beneficial to teach them a (simple) programming language and have them due some basic numerical work to solve some problems. I have started doing that a little bit in the calculus class I teach. I think it might be worth discussing how much students should be taught algorithmic stuff and when.

As an anecdotal example: I have one student who likes to use his graphing calculator for most stuff, but he doesn't use it like most other students. He actually programs it himself to do things like the quadratic formula. He does fine without it, but is just 'lazy'. (In the sense that spending 3 hours to write/debug a program save 45 seconds a problem is 'lazy')

-- MattGoff - 20 Mar 2006

"My gut is that 'technology' doesn't help a typical child's education. My gut is that technology may even hurt."

I disagree with the strong form of this assertion.

At this point, I think learning the use of various business applications (word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, and perhaps database) is more important for students than learning how to type was when I was in high school. It might even be more important than home ec and shop now, though I think those classes continue to be quite useful.

Further, I think that crafting and refining a good search string has become a basic skill. The ability to quickly find random facts is basic now. It's not especially easy to teach, but it's important.

FWIW, I doubt we disagree all that much on the value of these sorts of "technology" in the classroom. I understand your real complaint to be with technology that substitutes for teaching (please let me know if I misunderstand), and I largely agree with that complaint.

Math Blaster (to pick on a popular package I used to sell) is no more interesting than pencil-and-paper drill, and I think it's less useful, too. The same applies to most of the other educational software I've seen.

I still think there is a (more limited) place for adaptive teaching software. Mavis Beacon is a pretty good program for increasing your typing speed, for instance. (I don't know how well it works for a new learner; I learned on a manual typewriter.) But the games in Mavis were a distraction, not an enhancement, at least for me. (If they actually increase the probability that younger students keep working with the program, they may have value even if they are distracting. I don't know the predicate of that to be accurate, though.)

-- DougSundseth - 20 Mar 2006

Allow me to rant a little bit about PowerPoint^?. Unless you teach the kids what makes a good presentation, spending a lot of class time on allowing them to make animated bullet lists is a waste of time.

-- RudbeckiaHirta - 20 Mar 2006

At this point, I think learning the use of various business applications (word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, and perhaps database) is more important for students than learning how to type was when I was in high school. It might even be more important than home ec and shop now, though I think those classes continue to be quite useful. -DougSunseth

I agree if these types of applications were taught at the high school level. I don't see the point in teaching 3rd or 4th graders PowerPoint^?. It's not like PowerPoint^? will be the same product in 10 years when they graduate from high school. Time could be better spent teaching them grammar. With Nintendo and all the kid-friendly websites available, I think most kids are getting plenty of technology at the elementary level.

I think high school is a perfect time to introduce these tools. I know a parent that complained that his child got a poor grade in his science class because he didn't know how to set up a Excel spreedsheet for some project. I was shocked that his high school didn't teach him how to use spreedsheets because the high school is in a very well-funded, high-tech, Northern-VA county.

-- NicksMama - 20 Mar 2006

I was conflicted about mentioning presentation software. One the one hand, it's used everywhere, and facility with it has become a basic skill. On the other hand, it's used (intentionally or otherwise) to obscure information almost as often as it's used to present information.

I completely agree your point about when they should be taught, though. Word processors might reasonably be used in later elementary school, but the rest ... not so much.

-- DougSundseth - 20 Mar 2006

Actually, I wouldn't bother with the wordprocessing/spreadsheet stuff. I suspect those 1970s typing classes would be more valuable. WP programs have changed significantly over the years, but the keyboard has not.

I've worked with a very large number of people in entry-level positions in the computer field, and one of the things I've noticed is that people with the ability to type rapidly tend to similarly advance their skills more quickly. Not all of them, of course; I've worked with some painfully slow hunt n' peck elite programmers. But a fast, accurate typist is able to pack a lot more experience into a much shorter period of time.

-- JeffBoulier - 21 Mar 2006

It's all about those foundational skills!

-- JeffBoulier - 21 Mar 2006

Yes, I agree. A good keyboarding class is very helpful. My 9 year old learned to type using "Read, Write and Type" in just a few months. Another program, Typing Instructor Deluxe, is a $10 typing program that is popular among homeschoolers. I am sure some technology vendor will be sellling something similiar for "tax-payer with deep pockets" pricing attached.

BTW, my son is a big RPG fan and is on the internet (limited access to sites) daily. I'd say he is typing at about 35-40 wpm. He knows more about Windows than alot of adults I know. Not sure how well he'd learn these skills in a classroom environment (limited time).

Just a thought...students should be invited to these technology showcases. You'd probably see a bunch of "yawns" from them -- most kids games have better graphics and more interesting storylines than software created by education companies (ask me how I know..QuarterMile Math and Mathblaster 2006 are gathering dust on my shelf). My "Age of Mythology" student was not impressed.

-- NicksMama - 21 Mar 2006

I agree about those 70's typing classes because everyone was still not so enamored with technology in general. Within a few months the keyboard was seared into my brain. From there you springboard to more speed and accuracy if you want.

My kids have had "keyboarding" for years and they still aren't fluent in any way. They're still young, but now is when memorizing is easy. It's seems like a relatively simple skill is being diluted with a lot of other things so that the foundational skill of typing is compromised.

NicksMama

I have an "Age of Mythology" kid, too!

Are those two programs easy to come by? I think I'd be curious to invest in one if it would get the job done.

-- SusanS - 21 Mar 2006

Susan

I bought an old copy of "Read, Write, and Type" for around $10. You can google on it and might find an older version from a discounter. From what I've seen, the new version is expensive and has a bunch of "stuff" with it that you probably don't need. Read, write and Type teaches typing by enforcing phonics. It says "p" and shows a "p". Both my kids preferred it over Spongebob Typing which they didn't like at all.

I don't know about Typing Instructor Deluxe other than it's well-liked and available from Timberdoodle. They have a review of it in their catalog. I think it's about $10.

-- NicksMama - 21 Mar 2006

Jakob Nielsen finds that "reading from computer screens is tiring for the eyes and about 25 percent slower than reading from paper."

This is because paper reflects more light and is still easier to read than a screen. By at least 25%. This was true 10 year ago and is still true.

I speak as one who works at a (very nice) PC monitor 8-10 hours a day.

-- BenCalvin - 21 Mar 2006

oh wow!!

I can't wait to read!!

unfortunately, I have to go upstairs and read Christopher's science textbook so I can help him study for Thursday's test. He's down to a C in science, also a C in 'reading.'

NO GRADE INFLATION IN THE 'BURBS!

I'm allowing myself two comments:

Allow me to rant a little bit about PowerPoint. Unless you teach the kids what makes a good presentation, spending a lot of class time on allowing them to make animated bullet lists is a waste of time.

My ENTIRE viewpoint on Learning PowerPoint at school can be summed up in ONE WORD:

BLECH

As to Word programs versus typing, I'd choose a typing class over a 'Word' class. I type about 95 wpm, which is a HUGE help - and I took a serious, summer typing class when I was in high school.

You'd be AMAZED how many people can't touch type.

You'd be especially amazed at how many special ed teachers can't type. These are people who are required by law to produce CONSTANT written documents on all of their students.

-- CatherineJohnson - 22 Mar 2006

teaching touch typing

I'm pretty sure all you need to do is use the touch-typing chart I loaded onto one of our web pages and have your child type the alphabet over again!

And that's it! (The head of the BOCES office skills class told me this, and she would know.)

(I'll find the chart.)

-- CatherineJohnson - 22 Mar 2006

Teach Your Child To Type

There are also a number of sites that teach touch typing. I think I kept a list of the ones I liked. (I was going to post the touch-typing speed test...)

-- CatherineJohnson - 22 Mar 2006

• learning touch typing again (review of websites

• Peter's Online Typing Course

• MaxType LITE Typing Tutor

• CalculatorCat spead typing test

-- CatherineJohnson - 22 Mar 2006

I took a typing class in high school (1979 or 1980) that was taught on giant clunky manual typewriters. Our text was Personal and Professional Typing, which I still have but Amazon says is out of print (of course). At home I would practice on a Smith-Corona electric typewriter that had the pop-out cartridges. At the time, most people using electrics had the IBM Selectric with the type ball.

I practiced my typing skills only to type up term papers. Nearly all homework, and most regular (3-5 page) papers were handwritten.

I didn't really learn to type until I started BBSing after college (1986 -- wow, I've been online for 20 years). Now I freak people out by continuing to type my thoughts as I turn my head and handle their interruptive conversations on completely different topics.

I highly recommend the forum/chat/other communication method of learning to type. Don't accept cr@p like "u thr? brb, g2g, pos!" That might be a form of communication, but it doesn't fly in school or in the business world, and it won't help with learning to type.

-- GoogleMaster - 22 Mar 2006

Here's Engelmann on computers in the classroom:

All these attractive capacities [of the DI videodisc program] give the medium great potential, but without good, carefully designed instruction, all the flashy video and the clever features of the program will flop. The medium is not magic, a lesson that should have been learned from the school's abortive and costly love affair with computers.

Many districts committed heavily to the promise of CAI (computer assisted instruction). The problem was that most of the software was just this side of pathetic, relying largely on bleeps, gimmicks, and other funsy-cutesy devices to make the machines "user friendly." They weren't friendly. Except in ermarkably few software packages, the instructional sequence was sophomoric.

In over 90 percent of the cases, the software packages were in complete disuse -- gathering dust -- within four months of their purchase date. And the computers all but ceased to be used for CAI. Instead, the computers became "word processors" and "spreadsheet designers."

Whether the medium is a text or a computer, the design of the instruction overrides all other factors, including individual differences in kids.

War Against the Schools' Academic Child Abuse, p. 85

-- KDeRosa - 22 Mar 2006

%META:FORM{nam