Computer Technology for Children Education - Article Example

Computers in the room The world seems to spin a little faster nowadays that progress comes quick with technology. Computers have been hailed asgreat inventions that make life more convenient. Now, integrating Information and Computer Technology (ICT) in the school curriculum is becoming an issue. Eugene Schwartz in his discussion on Computers in Education opines that “one of the most readily accepted truisms concerning computers is that they, along with other electronic media, are "a set of tools to enhance the imagination and provide new methods for expression and learning." Indeed, the rich colors of the animated graphics, the dynamic movements, interesting sounds and music and fast-paced action on screen keeps viewers in awe. Add to that the appeal of being interactive, that at one click of a button rewards the viewer with an immediate response. Children would definitely choose something so exciting over traditional educational materials like one-dimensional textbooks and plain lectures. Wendy Schwartz states three main reasons that computers should be a significant part of a student’s education: (Norman, n.d. ) computer can make learning all subjects easier, and they are especially valuable in developing students language and problem-solving skills Students can use computers to reach hundreds of telecommunications networks, these sources provide a huge amount of information that students cannot get from textbook and more traditional learning tools Computer literacy, understanding computers technology, is necessary for most good-paying and interesting careers These seem to be valid reasons for insisting on the inclusion of multimedia, specifically computers in schools. However, this paper intends to develop a more thorough analysis of such justification. Advocates claim that benefits of multimedia use far outweigh the disadvantages. Clements (1999) maintains that “Technology can change the way children think, what they learn, and how they interact with peers and adults” (1). He also recommends technology as a tool for improving childrens learning through exploration, creative problem solving, and self-guided instruction (Clements & Samara, 2003). A three-year project at the Center for Best Practices in Early Childhood Education at Western Illinois University (Hutinger & Johanson, 2000) provides additional support for using computer technology with young children with disabilities. Their study emphasizes access to computers as an avenue to social interaction among children, working cooperatively, gaining confidence in themselves, controlling their environments, and making gains in language and communication. Hutinger and Johanson, supported by research by Clements (1999), point out that the enabling component of computers assists children in transforming concrete ideas into symbolic form. Jessy Norman reports that school districts across the United States, about seventy of them, are working with The Microsoft Corporation to create what they call a "Connected Learning Community". Together, Microsoft and the schools have developed the "Anytime, Anywhere Learning" program whose goal is for all students to have their own portable computer and to use these tools like pencils and paper. According to the programs promoters, the idea is to enable students to produce the work that would be acceptable in classrooms around the world (The Education Digest:58). The program also gives teachers access to the Internet, they can talk with other teachers and put technology into the curriculum anytime, anywhere. Teachers in this program have stated that students are not just learning better and faster: they are also learning and doing things that were impossible without the new technology (59). The program is said to have boosted the students problem-solving skills and intellectual autonomy. The mechanical processes of typing and retyping have been minimized; it is reported that these students can spend more time now on other things in the classrooms. Enthusiasm for computer use in Education is not universally shared by specialists in childhood development. The doubters greatest concern is for the very young -- preschool through third grade, when a child is most impressionable. Their apprehension involves two main issues. (Oppenheimer, 1997) First, they consider it important to give children a broad base -- emotionally, intellectually, and in the five senses -- before introducing something as technical and one-dimensional as a computer. This is coherent with the beliefs of Education and Psychology giants such as Piaget, Rosseau, Froebel, Montessori, Dewey that hands-on experiences with concrete objects are necessary prerequisites to more abstract learning. The concrete interactions and experiences with the real world helps children retain learning better because they have actually experienced learning using most, if not all their senses. Hands-on learning is “the opportunity to manipulate physical objects such as beans or colored blocks. The value of hands-on learning, child-development experts believe, is that it deeply imprints knowledge into a young childs brain, by transmitting the lessons of experience through a variety of sensory pathways.” (Oppenheimer, 1997) "Curiously enough," the educational psychologist Jane Healy (1990) wrote, "visual stimulation is probably not the main access route to nonverbal reasoning. Body movements, the ability to touch, feel, manipulate, and build sensory awareness of relationships in the physical world, are its main foundations." Unfortunately in most schools, activities that promote active learning are not encouraged beyond the preschool level. Second, they believe that the human and physical world holds greater learning potential. The teacher is one major component in the real world. Schwartz (n.d.) puts it beautifully when he says, “The teachers living and warm presence, and the unfolding of content in the immediacy of the moment are what convey knowledge - and wisdom - most powerfully to the child. Anything that "mediates" between the child and teacher will, in some sense, dampen down this living quality.” A thorough inquiry paper in Australia on the effects of television and multimedia on children and families in Victoria likewise gives honor to teachers as it mentions, “Nothing can properly replicate the educator who completes mathematical tasks before your eyes; nor the logical philosopher who debates paradoxes extempore; nor the historian who has smelt the archives and brought their dusty documents to life; nor the professor of English who weeps as he reads Scottish border ballads. Books have been doing for centuries what multimedia can do, and still, in all their variety and brilliance they never replaced the living, breathing, creative teacher” (Family & Community Development Committee, 1998). Wardle (1999) believes that computers do not need to be part of childrens foundation for learning. She asserts that the early years are necessary for establishing a foundation for success later in life, and computers have limited value in doing so. Cordes and Miller (2000) report that an international group of physicians, scientists, and researchers called for a moratorium on computers in preschools and early elementary grades. They believe that computers interfere with healthy physical and mental development. The early and excessive concern about “computer literacy,” too often at the cost of basic literacy has greatly affected how children think. “There is some evidence that too much computer activity early in life—in lieu of real-world experience—may indeed limit intellectual and creative development.” (Rogers, 2003). One computer feature highly attractive to children is its immediate response without taking into account the thinking time of children. When children get much exposure to such spoonfeeding of knowledge, they learn to rely on the alternative answers the computer provides instead of thinking through questions themselves. One small but carefully controlled study went so far as to claim that Reader Rabbit, a reading program now used in more than 100,000 schools, caused students to suffer a 50 percent drop in creativity. Apparently, after forty-nine students used the program for seven months, they were no longer able to answer open-ended questions and showed a markedly diminished ability to brainstorm with fluency and originality. (Oppenheimer, 1997). Students do develop creativity with computers, but not of the kind original thinkers have – that of processing real knowledge and applying it to life situations. Because of the infinite options computers have in making student projects look snazzy, children have the tendency to focus more on beautifying their presentations with eye-catching fonts, graphics and special effects rather than concentrating on the expression of true quality learning – sort of focusing more on form rather than content. The easy "cut and paste" function in todays word-processing programs, for example, is apparently encouraging many students to cobble together research materials without thinking them through and if its attractive enough for them, assume that the external quality of the presentation could make up for the content, however poor. Jane Healy and other psychologists do not believe that computer games expand childrens imaginations. Instead, they think that “the computer screen flattens information into narrow, sequential data. This kind of material, they believe, exercises mostly one half of the brain -- the left hemisphere, where primarily sequential thinking occurs. The "right brain" meanwhile gets short shrift -- yet this is the hemisphere that works on different kinds of information simultaneously. It shapes our multi-faceted impressions, and serves as the engine of creative analysis.”(Oppenheimer,1997) Children in their growing years need to experience life as nature intended them to. They need opportunities to see and care for real animals and plants, smell real scents, taste real flavors, listen to real sounds emanating from actual objects and feel real textures with their hands. It follows that children should learn from a real person. Eugene Schwartz says, “If a living teacher is the childs role model for learning, the child will naturally strive to become more of a human being; if software and the ghostly images of people on TV screens are the role models, the child will (through her inherently imitative nature) slowly become ever more "machine-like," impersonal and "cool." He also notes that allowing a child to have real life experiences rather than all of the animated and digitized substitutes for such experiences offered by software - such a child will have the healthiest foundation for valuing technology in later life. This paper does not suggest to totally ban computer use in schools. Rather, it suggests that it should not dominate the school curriculum. It is respectful of differing views of professionals regarding multimedia use, but moreso those that advocate the best interests for children. One such organization held in high esteem when it comes to children’s interests is the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). In their position statement “Technology and Young Children—Ages 3 through 8,” NAEYC (1996) notes that “professional judgment is required by teachers to determine whether technology is age appropriate, individually appropriate, and culturally appropriate for the children in their care. NAEYC recommends the integration of technology into the learning environment as one of many options to support childrens social and cognitive abilities but cautions that computers should not replace other valuable learning centers, such as blocks, art, sand or water play, books, dramatic play, or exploratory areas in the classroom. “ References Clements, D. H. The effective use of computers with young children. In Juanita V. Copley (Ed.), Mathematics in the early years (pp. 119-128). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. ED 440 786. (Also available: http://investigations.terc.edu/relevant/EffectiveUse.html [2004, November 18].) Clements, D. H., & Samara, J.. Young children and technology: What does the research say? Young Children, 58(6), 34-40., 2003) Cordes, C., & Miller, E. (Eds.). Fools gold: A critical look at computers in childhood [Online]. College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood.,2000. Available: http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/projects/computers/computers_reports_fools_gold_contents.htm [2004, September 11]. ED 445 803. Family & Community Development Committee, ‘Inquiry into the effects of television and multimedia on children and families in Victoria , retrieved on March 24, 2009 from: http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/fcdc/default.htm, Healy, J., Endangered minds: why children don’t think and what we can do about it , New York: Simon & Schuster, 1990. Hutinger, P. L., & Johanson, J. Implementing and maintaining an effective early childhood comprehensive technology system. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20(3), 159-173. 2000. EJ 614 771. Norman, J., ‘Negative Effects of computers in classrooms’, retrieved on March 22, 2009 from http://courses.wcupa.edu/fletcher/english121/projects/10b/jessy.htm Oppenheimer, T., ‘The computer delusion’, The Atlantic Monthly; July 1997; Volume 280, No. 1; pages 45-62.,1997. Rogers, M., ‘Are computers wrecking schools?’, Newsweek Web Exclusive, Oct 28, 2003 retrieved March 24, 2009 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032542/site/newsweek/ Schwartz, E., Computers in education, retrieved on March 23, 2009 from http://www.millennialchild.com/Computers01.htm , Wardle, F., Foundations for learning: How children learn: The latest on ways to maximize childrens learning and development. Children and Families, 18(3), 66. EJ 623 694. Read More