The speaker asserts that
innovations such as videos. computers, and the Internet toooften distract from "real"
learning in the classroom. I strongly agree that these toolscan be counterproductive in some instances,and ineffectual for certain types of learning.Nevertheless, the speaker''s assertion places too little value on the ways in whichthese innovations can facilitate the learning process.In several respects, I find the statement compelling. F i t of all, in my observationand experience,
computers and
videos are misused most often for education whenteachers rely on them as surrogates, or baby-sitters.Teachers must use the time duringwhich
students are watching videos or are at their computer stations produc-tively-helping other students, preparing lesson plans, and so forth. Otherwise, thesetools can indeed impede the learning process.Secondly, passive viewing of videos or of Web pages is no indication that anysignificant learning is taking place. Thus
teachers must carefully select Internet resourcesthat provide a true interactive learning experience, or are highly informativeotherwise. And, in selecting videos teachers must be sure to follow up with livelyclass discussions. Otherwise, the comparatively passive nature of these media canrender them ineffectual in the learning process.Thirdly, some types of learning occur best during face-to-face encounters betweenteacher and student, and between students. Only by way of a live encounter can alanguage
teacher recognize and immediately correct subtle problems in pronunciationand inflection. And, there is no suitable substitute for a live encounter when itcomes to teaching techniques in painting, sculpture, music performance, and acting.Moreover, certain types of learning are facilitated when students interact as a group.Many grade-school teachers, for example, find that reading together aloud is the mosteffective way for students to learn this skill.Fourth, with technology-based learning tools, especially computers and theInternet, learning how to use the technology can rob the teacher of valuable timethat could be spent accomplishing the teacher''s ultimate educational objectives. Besides,any technology-based learning tool carries the risk of technical problems. Studentswhose teachers fail to plan for productive use of unexpected down-time canlose opportunities for real learning.Finally, we must not overlook the nonquantifiable benefit that personal attentioncan afford. A human teacher can provide meaningful personal encouragement andsupport, and can identify and help to solve a student''s social or psychological problemsthat might be impeding the learning process. No video, computer program, orWeb site can begin to serve these invaluable functions.Acknowledging the many ways that technological innovations can impede "real"learning, these innovations nevertheless can facilitate "real" learning, if employed judiciallyand for appropriate purposes. Specifically, when it comes to learning rotefacts and figures, personal interaction with a teacher is unnecessary, and can evenresult in fatigue and burnout for the teacher. Computers are an ideal tool for the sortsof learning that occur only through repetition-typing skills, basic arithmetical calculations,and so forth. Computers also make possible visual effects that aid uniquely inthe learning of spatial concepts. Finally, computers, videos and the Internet are idealfor imparting basic text-book information to students, thereby freeing up the teacher''stime to give students individualized attention.In sum, computers and videos can indeed distract from learning-when teachersmisuse them as substitutes for personal attention, or when the technology itself becomes the focus of attention. Nevertheless, if judicially used as primers, as supplements,and where repetition and rote learning are appropriate, these tools can serveto liberate teachers to focus on individual needs of students-needs that only "real"teachers can recognieet.
More summaries about the Do technologies interfere with real learning?