"Information Please"
In this chapter Roszak puts major emphasis on the meaning of information. He states that "the word comes to have vast generality, but at a price; the meaning of things communicated comes to be leveled, and so too the value." He references Claude Shannon, the publisher of "A Mathematical Theory of Communication," in which his theory states that "information is no longer connected with the semantic content of statements." Here Roszak mentions the destruction of human life to be considered simply a "game" without the real sense of consequences or having a full understanding of all involved.
The Data Merchants
This chap
ter reminded us of the Jetsons, the futuristic cartoon from the 1960's (later episodes created in the 1980's). This cartoon was about a family who lived with a robot named "Rosie." She possessed humanistic characteristics and took care of the household's necessities. These types of characteristics is the selling point of technology. In the book, Roszak mentions several enticing technologies that are appealing to the masses: fully automated office, high industrial future, information center, intimate technology (friendships/warmth to "electronic sex"), and the geriatric robot. The Hidden Curriculum
"Can we invent a machine that does what a teacher does?"
As with the two previous books, Roszak makes reference to the fact that technology is all about the Benjamins and that companies are receiving credits for providing schools with technology.
In addition, Roszak makes several thought provoking statements that are worth mentioning. In order to be concise and to maintain the brevity of this blog (part deux), we will list them:
- Educational millions are being budgeted for machinery at a time when the average teacher in America has a starting salary that is barely above the official poverty level.
- Roszak believes that some kids click with computers while others also click with violins or paintbrushes. "But there are no millions being spent to bring violins or paintbrushes into the schools."
- Good software is expensive and time consuming. It is thought that more worthwhile, in depth, and challenging software requires more time and more equipment to ensure that all students have equal access.
- They have spent generously on training teachers computer skills, "but that does no good when there is no clear idea as to whether the schools are to teach about computers, or through computers, or by way of computers."
This chapter deals entirely with Seymour Papert's program Logo, which was inspired by the philosophies of Jean Piaget. According to Papert, it is a program that emphasizes "procedural thinking." Logo promotes program design with the ability for students to fix it along the way.
Roszak mentions a few instances in which Logo is used in the educational setting. One example includes the use of the program to teach art. However, children's creations are limited to the geometric shapes available to them. Furthermore, it does not expose children to the use of artistic mediums such as pencils, crayons, etc. In the end, this program does nothing more than teach programming and not art. Furthermore, it limits the creativity and imagination of the children as they are limited to what they can use.
However, Roszak, sees "bugs" in the approach by saying that is does a good job teaching basic programming, however, that is all it does. He further approves of it by saying that some kids will excel at programming, while others will not, nevertheless, it is beneficial to expose them to the program.
Points of Agreement:
"At times, one cannot decide to weep or laugh at what the Information Age supposedly has in store for us."
- Geriatric Robot: We both agreed that this was a sad reference to the state of our family units in today's society and how we are no longer taking care of our elderly.
- Will the "information center" at one's home create lazy humans when people no longer have to leave the house to go to school or work, turn on lights, or identify malfunctions within the home. Or will this free up more time for us to do other more worthwhile activities?
- "Even at the low level task of drill, it helps to have human intelligence at work, offering an encouraging smile here, a jibe there, a wink and a nod, perhaps catching the blush or stammer that reveals the nature of a student's problem." This statement on its own does a adequate job of summarizing the role of a teacher and that there is more to it than just lecturing and giving information.
- "If teachers do not have the time, the incentive, or the wit to provide that, if students are too demoralized, bored, or distracted to muster the attention their teachers need of them then that is the educational problem which has to be solved - and solved from inside the experience of the teachers and the students. Defaulting to the computer is not a solution; it is surrender." We agree that the computer is not the solution; however, there are more factors which need to be involved in order to tackle the educational problem (i.e. family).
Kerri and Marcy
10 comments:
I think there are many themes that we keep touching on each week from the readings, one being that computers will not solve all of education's problems. Another theme I notice is that teacher's are underpaid, they don't have the incentive, time, etc. and that much of the blame is put on the teachers. Now that we recognize these issues I think the issue needs to be what are we doing to do about it and/or how can we do something about it?
I think it is beneficial to expose kids to programs but it is also important to expose them to other aspects. They need experiences that foster creativity. Information isn't everything.
The quote about needing a clear idea as to whether the schools are to teach about, through, or by way of computers needs to be addressed. I see many who try to do it all. What is the purpose for doing it all? Another theme I see that applies to this point is needing to think about what is being gained and what is being lost.
I agree with one of Ellen’s reoccurring themes, “that computers will not solve all of education’s problems” and think it is safe to say that computers also will not solve society’s (political and social) problems. Most, if not all, things that can be done with the computer can be done without the computer. Yes, computers make collecting and organizing information faster and computers can be more convenient than other traditional methods; however, I agree with Roszak that computers should not be the sole source for collecting, organizing, and processing information. This leads to another reoccurring theme that computers should be used in moderation.
A recurring point in both class and the books is not many professions directly utilize technology and professions that do actually value other employee characteristics over technology skills. However, schools are focusing a large amount of time, energy and money into teaching students to be computer literate. Technology is highly valued in most schools yet the majority of students will not be highly involved in technology in their careers. In the original post, Kerri and Marcy stated that “Roszak believes that some kids click with computers while others also click with violins or paintbrushes.” After considering this idea, I began to think of the careers available within music and art. Like technology, the majority of students will not need extensive training in music or art for their careers. Although skills in technology, music and art may not be mandatory for the workplace, skills in all three areas add to the quality of one’s life (some more than others depending upon the person). But in contrast to technology, funding for music and art is quite low and dropping in most schools. Music and art contribute greatly to one’s personal life and to the culture yet they are terribly undervalued within the school systems. I think students are being robbed of precious opportunities as technology receives an abundance of funding and class time while music and art are consistently cut short.
I couldn’t agree more with Robin’s statement that “students are being robbed of precious opportunities as technology receives an abundance of funding and class time while music and art are consistently cut short”. This is definitely the case at the school where I previously taught. It seemed like we were constantly getting “refreshed” with new computers and receiving other technical equipment, such as scanners, video cameras, digital cameras, and high quality laser printers. Meanwhile, the band and strings students were using borrowed equipment that was well beyond its prime and the art and music teachers had to beg and borrow for anything that they needed for their classes. Why is it that technology is always updated regardless of whether a school needs it or not, and the need for materials in other areas such as music and art are often overlooked?
Kerri and Marcy mentioned, "Will the "information center" at one's home create lazy humans when people no longer have to leave the house to go to school or work, turn on lights, or identify malfunctions within the home. Or will this free up more time for us to do other more worthwhile activities?" I think if we keep using technology to find ways to save time and make our lives easier than we will free up more time for us to do more worthwhile activities. The reality is, once we've freed up that extra time, will we actually take part in those worthwhile activities? If there does come a point in society when most people are working from home, and most children learn from home, at that point, will we still be looking for a quicker and easier way for us to work and learn? I think we will. If our main goal is to save time and make our lives easier, than I doubt we'll ever really be focused on worthwhile activities.
Brad, I think you are absolutely right. Will we ever be complacent and sit back to enjoy what we've worked to hard to make easier? Bottom line, it seems, is that we are constantly looking for that one solution in our lives. Recall the old saying, "the grass is always greener..." However, will we ever truly be satisfied with what we have or will we always be seeking further what inevitably we will never attain. Could it be that the thought of life with technology has allowed for us to envision this great new world that we are blindsighted to actually realize what resources we already have in front of us and that life could be made great if we just set our minds to do just that given a little, patience, and (oh no, here it comes~thanks, Sara) moderation?
Education has fallen into the pitfall. We are living in a society that constantly needs to push the envelope with every issue (and if we don't have an issue...it's created).
Where was your backup plan!?!?!?!
Your points of agreement touch on the major issue I have with using technology as a replacement for teachers, even in the "drill and kill" setting that many people have bought into even if they are not techno-nuts. A computer can spit out a generic "helping" thought or question to push a student that is struggling with a particular problem, but a computer cannot "know" a student. A computer doesn't see a student's attention wander away and do something such as a shoulder tap or personal to bring them back to where they need to be. A computer is only kind enough to do what is has programmed to do, whether that be give the student as much time as they need (which is not necessarily a positive), give them a pre-programmed hint, or other. That sounds to me like the options a poor teacher might use.
My question to whoever is, why can't technology/the arts coexist in schools? I understand much of it is financial, but if the arts were a higher priority, couldn't they both exist? If the school systems were more efficient (i know it is a stretch), could both be fully funded/taught in schools?
I have always wonder where the true "finger-pointing" in education will end, but maybe at the time of my life where I begin to realize that maybe is what is the problem of education. If it is not the student's fault they are not learning, then whose fault is it? Oh yeah, it is the teacher's fault. Let us replace that with a computer. Oh yeah, it is the parents fault let us use the computer as a babysitter. I heard that AOL IM and MySpace.com is pretty popular place for my kids, plus we can buy all of these games to keep them busy. When people ever learn that there is never a one-size fits all for any problem (except for t-shirts). I honestly think education would solve all of its problems if it were to stop looking for where is the problem and to actually trying to solve the problem. Education Systems finds the "one-size fits all" and at the cheapest.
The issue gets back to Postman's point: What are schools for? If we can't answer that question, we can't decide on technology's proper place. Roszak is arguing that schools are for developing thinking skills, including the ability to deal with ideas. This is the antithesis of what most schools tend to work toward. Of course, schools mouth the words that they are interested in thinking, but Roszak is arguing that the processing of information, the most prevalent form of "thinking" in schools and society, is not true thinking.
Post a Comment