An Exploration into Teaching with Computers

Ludwik Kowalski

Any teacher who can be replaced by a machine should be.

--Arthur C. Clarke

Introduction

Everybody is aware that computers are widely used for word processing and book keeping, for organizing information and making it available over communication networks. These applications are relatively recent; electronic computers were originally invented (in the 1940's) for a single purpose, to perform numerical calculations. Computational applications are still tremendously important but the marketing of digital technology would suffer greatly were it not for the other applications being promoted. Educational uses of computers are still relatively modest in comparison with traditional methods such as lecturing, laboratory work, recitations, debates, field trips, etc. But the situation is likely to change in the near future. According to some educators "the major way of learning at all levels, and in almost all subject areas, will be through interactive use of computers" (1).

The purpose of this note is to present controversial statements about educational uses of computers and to ask questions about the anticipated effects of new technology. The note was prepared as a "discussion tool" for a critical thinking workshop devoted to instructional uses of computers. Critical thinking is a process in which an opinion, or a decision, is justified by an educated person. It is not easy to formulate an opinion on possible impacts of rapidly changing technology and, more specifically, on teaching applications of computers. A workshop for teachers is a natural place to debate such issues. Critical thinking about computers in teaching is an essential element in our addaptation to the new educational environment. In the role of discussion leader I try to be as neutral as possible about the statements quoted in the article. Positive and negative impacts of technology on the learning process are likely to be different in different disciplines but many common problems can be identified in a workshop. My own background forced me to use examples from the familiar areas of teaching but the questions asked are general and applicable to many fields.

In the past, technical innovations have often been promoted as means for improving education. For example, in 1913 Thomas Alva Edison made the following prediction about the instructional impact of motion picture technology. "Books will soon be obsolete in our schools. Scholars will soon be instructed through the eye. It is possible to teach every branch of human knowledge with the new technology. Our school system will be completely changed in ten years" (2). Similar claims were later made with regard to television. This is natural; new mass communication media have always been attractive to those who want to improve education. The present situation with computers, however, is unprecedented in terms of high expectations and efforts to introduce the new devices into the classroom. The K-12 schools in the US spent $2.1 billion on educational technology in the 1992/93 school year; the total number of microcomputers in schools was 4.4 million at the end of that year (3).

Teaching Physics and Mathematics with Computers

According to many educators (4-11), computers are highly promising devices for delivering interactive and individualized instruction because they can be programmed to act like human tutors, to match the level of individual students, to respond immediately and to facilitate "learning by discovery". Unfortunately, the software available to teachers before the 1990's rarely met such expectations. Automated tools for students to interact directly with the materials stored in computers were, and often still are, very primitive. Reacting to the absence of experimental components in such tools one physics teacher wrote: "This machine business is a curse upon us - anathema! It robs the Beauty of Physics - it cheats the students - it is a sickness! It destroys the humanism the subject possesses. Deliver us from this affliction - this plague - this evil monster - which so abuses the spirit of physics" (12).

Recently developed software is significantly better than what was available several years ago; it can often be used to enhance real demonstrations and experiments. Here is how one advanced software package for teaching physics, CUPLE, is described by its developers. "New technology challenges the old, traditional approaches to education and questions the effectiveness of passive learning, which is based largely on textbooks and lectures. Current research supports the belief that in order to achieve a holistic understanding of the relationship between science and the world, students must actively participate in the learning process. And one forum that lends itself totally to interactive learning is itself a child of the technological revolution: the computer. With this conviction in mind, a consortium of educators has created the Comprehensive Unified Physics Learning Environment (CUPLE). CUPLE uses the computer as an interactive platform for the study of physics. It unifies teaching ideas and materials from educators around the country and provides immediate access to a robust assortment of learning tools."(13) I was greatly impressed by a demonstration of that software but I had no chance to observe its actual use in a teaching situation.(14)

Rapid technological changes in software and hardware and the existence of many kinds of computers with mutually incompatible operational systems should be recognized as obstacles in educational applications of new technology. The prerequisite for using a computer as a learning tool, in any area, is familiarity with the tool itself. A child must know how to write letters and words before learning how to compose sentences and to communicate with other people in written form. Similarly a computer has to be mastered to the point at which no mental effort is required to use it. Only then can attention be focused on the concepts to be comprehended rather than on the manipulation of the gadget. Failure to meet that prerequisite is likely to hinder, rather than help, the learning process. Hopefully, existing trends toward simplicity and uniformity will evolve to a point at which most computer tools are simple, interchangeable and operationally identical.

The effect of computational devices on mathematics teaching was analyzed extensively several years ago. Recognizing powerful new ways of performing routine computations the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics recommended shifting "the focus of instruction from an emphasis on manipulative skills to an emphasis on developing concepts, relationships, structures, and problem solving skills" (15). Specific recommendations on how to implement this major change at different levels of teaching included a suggestion that "programming activities...can be done by students as early as at the kindergarten level to convey both mathematics and computer concepts. Computer literacy should come as a natural by-product of such experiences rather than as a specific addition to the elementary school curriculum." It was recognized, however, that successful implementation of such proposals depends on several fundamental assumptions, one being that "all students and all teachers will have access to calculators and computers for the study of mathematics, in the classroom and at home."

Educational failures of new technology are likely to occur when forging ahead takes place without meeting the prerequisites. The universal availability of compatible computers is still a dream and adequate training is not always available to teachers. Furthermore, it is not at all obvious that higher level mathematical skills can be developed without traditional methods of precollege math. Manual multiplication and division are not necessarily purely mechanical activities; properly guided they form a natural path to abstract thinking. The same can be said about transformations of expressions in algebra, trigonometry and calculus. Is it realistic to expect that "magic boxes" will shorten the path from concrete operational ways of reasoning to progressively more and more abstract ways of thinking? Isn't it important for youngsters to gain understanding and self-confidence through the independent performance of quantitative operations?

Roles of Human and Artificial Teachers.

The epithet "sage on the stage" is often used to criticize the limitations of the traditional, lecture-based, mode of teaching (3). The new role for the classroom teacher, in the technologically enhanced environment, is to be an effective catalyst for student-directed activities. "Teachers must become facilitators of cooperative learning as students engage in realistic learning projects that computers make attractive. Teachers and students must emulate real problem solvers as they deal with problems of complexity, accuracy, and precision that occur in the collection and analysis of real data. Teachers must know how to maintain effective communication with and among learners" (15). Unfortunately, a tendency toward large classrooms (often dictated by economics) may interfere with attempts to implement such recommendations.

The introduction of computers into the educational environment is often justified on the basis of two arguments. The first is that some pedagogical tasks are performed better by machines than by human beings. According to many scholars computers are highly suitable for individualized teaching by the Socratic method of inquiry (16). High expectations for such teaching are based on the machine intelligence research conducted by computer scientists. The term "artificial intelligence" is often used to describe devices which simulate and automate brain activities. Spectacular advances in this area lead to programs which help, for example, to play chess, to diagnose diseases and to make reasonable stock market decisions. But even practitioners of the discipline disagree about what is and what is not possible (17). Can learning processes be automated while they are not yet fully understood?

The second argument for the introduction of new technology into the teaching environment is that computers are widely used in society and students must be prepared to use them. The validity of that argument is undeniable but it is also important to keep in mind that technology changes rapidly while the scientific foundations of disciplines are more or less permanent. Some approaches to computer literacy may actually interfere with learning. Suppose it is desirable to teach a child how to play chess, hoping that in the process of playing she develops abilities to plan ahead, to make reasonable compromises, to be ready for drastic changes of strategy, etc. Would a magic box telling her what to do at each step of learning be useful? Following such instructions she would win many games, but she would be deprived of the chance of becoming a good chess player. In education, unlike real world situations, the process of finding a solution is often much more important that the solution itself.

Calculators have been widely used in schools for many years; how much have they contributed to mastery of mathematical skills? The promoters of new educational technology claim that it eliminates drudgery and makes time available for more advanced mathematical reasoning. But what is drudgery for some students is often absolutely essential for others. At early stages of learning manual mathematical solutions, discussion of intermediate results, opportunities for errors, intuitive evaluations of what to expect and experience with correcting activities are extremely important. This applies to multiplication and long division, to solutions of linear equations with several unknowns, and to all areas of college mathematics. Similar observations can be made in other subject areas. Many teachers think that premature reliance on computerized tools in schools may interfere with learning.

Electronic problem solvers are useful to practitioners of many disciplines but their positive effect on learning depends on many factors which should be carefully evaluated. How does a solution to a problem copied from the screen of a productivity tool, such as Mathematica, differ from the one copied from a friend or tutor? How will "instant gratification" tools affect motivation for hard learning? Making technology available to consumers who use it without understanding is quite common. Many TV viewers, for example, have very little knowledge of the scientific principles of television; this does not prevent them, however, from enjoying it, and benefiting from it. Can the same attitude be tolerated in schools? Is it compatible with academic principles of critical thinking which we are trying to cultivate?

I recently posed these questions to a group of colleagues. The prevailing opinion was that new technology should be linked with traditional methods of teaching to maximize effectiveness. It was also emphasized that teachers are in the best position to decide what is and what is not appropriate at any given stage of learning. Here is what one respondent wrote on this subject. " It is my impression that much of the software coming on the market is not being used properly. For example, symbolic algebra programs like Maple are being used to solve very elementary problems instead of very difficult ones. Even at the very basic arithmetic level, students are encouraged to use calculators for everythig, even trivial problems like multiplying or dividing by 10. My personal opinion is that these technological marvels should be used to extend our abilities to solve very difficult problems. They should not be used as a substitute for basic skills (18)."

Successes and Failures of Technological Innovations in Teaching.

New challenges of the last decade of the century are associated with the global "information highway", such as Internet, and with computerized tools to navigate it. In the context of that technology all computerized files in the world (text, pictures, movies, etc.) can be subdivided into two categories: those which are closed and those which are open to outsiders. Millions of open files are already available worldwide and numerous programs can be used to rapidly find what is needed. The availability of such resources has already had dramatic effects on research in many areas. But it remains to be seen how a mass-oriented educational system can benefit from the worldwide web of information. Why should computer-delivered text and pictures be more attractive to our young people than what has been widely available to them in public libraries and in schools? Can an appetite for learning be created by technological means? It will certainly cost a lot of money to put a networking computer with a high resolution monitor on every desk, and a good printer in every classroom. How much "hunger for information" will be generated by such an extravagant undertaking?

An interesting analysis of limited successes and prevailing failures in the history of educational technology (before computers) led to the conclusion that defeats are predictable when "greater importance seems to be attached to the equipment used than to the design of the program" and when "implementers are not aware of the expenses that will accrue during the course of operation of the project"(19). The authors of the reference ask: "Will the mistakes of the past be repeated? Will the next 50-year analysis be similar to this one? The potential for failure is still there. We have a visible piece of hardware with software that has been developed largely for business, industry, the military or government purposes. Worldwide problems in education still exist, and the urgent calls for a 'quick fix' are creating pressure to embrace new technologies."

Similar concerns are expressed by another educator who is quite enthusiastic about teaching with computers. Enumerating and analyzing possible pitfalls the author wrote: "Computers are bad for children when they are viewed as a panacea for the supposed ills of education. They are not the quick-fix solution that many people think they are. To be sure, there are exciting possibilities for learning, but the computer is merely a tool to assist in the discovery of these new ways: it is, in a word, a vehicle. It will enable educators to explore ways of doing things that were not possible before its arrival within schools or homes. Whether or not young children will benefit from these ways over the long-term remains to be seen.... Computers are bad when they are used as a substitute for a human being, whether teacher or parent, when that living being could have just as easily helped a child to learn a topic or skill. This may be called educational baby-sitting. Where a teacher could be used, a teacher should be used. There is no substitute for the dynamics of human encounter" (20).

Are Traditional Schools Compatible with New Forms of Learning?

In the Spring of 1993, in Washington, DC, the National Academy of Sciences convened a conference "Reinventing Schools; the Technology is Now," at which several hundred representatives from academia and industry discussed the future of the American educational system. According to one participant "Learning and schooling are on a collision course...The classroom and the teacher have as much place in tomorrow's learning enterprise as the horse and buggy in modern transportation" (21). Highly publicized failures of our educational system convinced some scholars that presently existing schools should be abandoned, as soon as possible, and that a new technology-based system should replace them. But what do they have to offer beside hopes that the system will work? Can a social problem be solved by purely technological means? Should radical changes be advocated without testing alternative solutions?

One of the alternatives, already tried on a relatively small scale, is teaching by correspondence. For example, 4570 students participated in 20 correspondence courses at the University of Texas in 1993 (22). The delivery system in such courses was traditionally based on printed materials, radio talks, televised lectures and, more recently, on videocassettes. The repertoire of tools for distance learning will increase with the availability of interconnected computers. In a distance learning facility at Stanford University students already participate in "lectures on their computer desktops. In one window they see the professor's full-motion color video image, indistinguishable from that offered by cable television...A second window caries data that the professor may want to share with his students, whether it's application software running on his computer or an image from an electron microscope. In the future students will be able to open multiple windows and see each other" (22). Is this the ideal prototype for of a modern mass-oriented educational system? Why should it be more effective than the present system? The costs of education are high and powerful economical forces may soon be at work to replace schools by modern forms of distant learning.

Endnotes

1. A. Bork "Preparing Student-Computer Dialogs: Advice to Teachers" in "The

Computer in the School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee", R.P. Taylor editor, (pp 15-52).

Teachers College Press, New York, 1980.

2. As quoted by M. R. Lepper and J. D. Milojkovic, "The Computer Revolution in

Education: a Research Perspective", (page 20 of reference 3 below.)

3. A. Fisher, The End of School?", Popular Science, vol 244, p68-71, January 1994

4. A. Bork "Learning with Computers", Digital Press, Bedford, Mass, 1981.

5. P. F. Campbell and G. G. Fain, editors, "Young Children and Microcomputers",

Prentice-Hall, Inc. Engelwood Cliffs, N.J., 1986.

6. C. K. Kinzer, R. D. Sherwood and J. D. Bransford, "Computer Strategies for Education",

Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, Ohio, 1986.

7. R. S. Nickerson and P. P. Zodhiates, "Technology in Education: Looking Toward

2020", Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Hillsdale, N. J., 1988.

8. J. Lockard, P. D. Abrams and W. A. Massy, "Microcomputer for Educators", Harper

Collins Publishers, New York, 1990.

9. "Computerization and Controversy, Value Conflicts and Social Choices", C. Dunlop,

editor, Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, Publishers, Boston, 1991.

10. L. Finkel, "Technology Tools in the Information Age Classroom", Franklin, Beedle &

Associates, Incorporated, Wilsonville, Oregon, 1991

11. S. M. Alessi and S. R. Trollip, "Computer Based Instruction, Methods and

Developments", Prentice Hall, N. J. 1991.

12. J.S. Miller Physics Today, p 11, 35, (July), 1982.

13. J.M. Wilson and E. F. Redish in "Physics Academic Software1994-1995", page 2,

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. (Physics Academic Software is a

project of the American Institute of Physics, in cooperation with American

Physical Society and American Association of Physics Teachers.)

14. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, "The Impact of Computing

Technology on School Mathematics", Journal of Computers in Mathematics and

Science Teaching, Winter 1984/85.

15. R. Hake, "Socratic Pedagogy in the Introductory Physics Laboratory", Phys. Teach.

p 111, vol33, 1992.

16. T. Forster, editor, "Computers in the Human Context", The MIT Press, Cambridge,

Mass, 1989 .

17. Steve Luzader, Frostburg State University, PHYSHARE discussion group, 2/15/95.

18. D. P. Ely and T. Plomp, "The Promises of Educational Technology: a Reassessment",

International Review of Education, p 2, vol. 32, 1986.

19. G. Clark, "Computers and Young Minds", Reston Publishing Company, Reston,

Virginia, 1989.

20. L. J. Perelman, as quoted in (3). Perelman is the author of "Schools Out;

Hyper Learning, The New Technology and the End of Education".

21. J. Ball, "Texas Facility Serves as a Hub for Distance Learning", Technology in High

Education Journal, p. 64, December, 1994, (vol 22 #5)

22. J. Weiss, "Distance Learning", Technology for Education, p 43, November/December,

1994. (vol 8, No 3)