The Future of Computer Technology in K-12 Education

(Copyright 2002, Phi Delta Kappan Magazine)

By Frederick Bennett, Ph.D.

        In a piece published in February 2001, syndicated columnist George Will used Hippocrates and Socrates to illustrate difficulties in contemporary American schooling. "If you were ill and could miraculously be treated by Hippocrates or by a young graduate of Johns Hopkins medical school, with his modern technologies and techniques, you would choose the latter. But if you could choose to have your child taught either by Socrates or by a freshly minted holder of a degree in education, full of the latest pedagogical theories and techniques? Socrates, please."

Teaching has always been more art than science and depends heavily upon the talents of the practitioner. Some teachers are outstanding; some are not. In medicine, Hippocrates probably had more innate abilities than many of the new physicians, but his successors have the advantage of modern technology. Teachers, however, rely on basically the same approach that instructors have used throughout history, and, consequently, they must count on their own native skills. This situation presents a difficulty for education because exceptional instructors are in the minority. We see this easily if we think back over the teachers that we ourselves had in our school career. The number we remember as superb is not large.

 THE PRESENT

Education today, as always, depends upon the luck of the draw — who gets the good teachers and who gets the others? Meanwhile, technology has become a powerful force in the world. Theoretically it might change education just as it has made the new physician better equipped than Hippocrates and has brought dazzling benefits to innumerable other areas of society. Education authorities apparently hoped for comparable results because they have placed millions of computers in schools. By 1999, there was one computer for every six children[i]. Yet despite this massive infusion of technology, overall improvements in education have been minimal.

Scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress point up this lack of advancement. Results for 1999 showed no significant change for reading, mathematics, or science, for three age groups tested---nine year olds, thirteen year olds, and seventeen year olds---from 1994 through 1999[ii]. During this five-year period, schools acquired huge numbers computers and hoped earnestly that this influx of technology would improve education.

Since few people want to despair and conclude that K-12 education seems to be about the only major field that technology cannot benefit, authorities have sought reasons for the current failure. The most frequently suggested explanation is that teachers have not learned how to employ technology in their classrooms. Therefore, if schools could train teachers, the argument goes, technology would finally deliver major benefits to education. President Clinton joined those who want additional teacher training when in June 2000 he announced $128 million in grants to instruct teachers in the use of technology.

Lack of teacher training, however, is a myth. The Department of Education in 2000 issued a study in which half of all teachers reported that college and graduate work had prepared them to use technology. In addition, training continues after formal schooling. The same government document pointed out that from 1996 to 1999, 77 percent of teachers participated in “professional development activities in the use of computers or the Internet”[iii]. Thirty-three per cent to 39% responding to two surveys in 1999 said that they felt well prepared to use computers[iv]. Although not the full universe of teachers, this percentage of well-prepared instructors ought to have brought some improvement if technology were going to lift education to a higher plateau.

The failure of education scores to change after schools have added millions of computers, after teachers have received considerable training, and after many years of usage leads to a troubling question,  "Is it possible that technology as currently used can never fundamentally improve today’s K-12 education?” I believe that such hopelessness is indeed warranted for one obvious reason: the power of electronic interaction is necessarily diminished because of the way computers must be used in schools today.

Interaction takes place when the instructor and the student react directly to each other’s contributions.  Interaction between child and teacher has always been found in good instruction. It can make learning enjoyable, can adjust to the varied abilities of different students, and is effective with children of all ages. Very possibly, one of the attributes of the teachers that we remember as being superb was their ability to develop a high degree of interaction with us.

Computer games show the power of electronic interaction. The secret to a large portion of this technology’s success in maintaining its iron grip on the attention of game players is the unparalleled ability of the machine to interact continually with the participant. Theoretically, this same interactive power ought to make computers a potent force in education. When computers are used in classrooms today, however, interaction between the computer and the student cannot be strong and ongoing. This is because the teacher, not the computer, must control and direct instruction. Individual teachers must decide how they will use computer instruction in the dissemination of classroom material---how much the machine will teach the student and how much instruction the teacher will provide. These conditions are unalterable in the present system of education, and they drastically curtail interaction between the computer and the student

BUSINESS AND COMPUTERS

American education, however, is not unique in its poor initial results with computers. Corporate America had a similar experience. For several years businesses added large numbers of computers, but overall productivity did not improve. Many workers acquired the machines for their desks. They used them for important jobs such as word processing and spreadsheets, but the basic manner in which companies carried on their activities did not change. This kind of computer usage was bound to fail. In time, corporations made the necessary structural changes and thus altered the basic way they carried on their business. When that happened, productivity increased dramatically. In an extensive article about the increase in productivity that technology brought to business, Erik Brynjolfsson and Lorin Hitt point out, “Investments in computers may make little direct contribution to overall performance of a firm or the economy until they are combined with complementary investments in work practices, human capital, and firm restructuring[v].”

Education is in a position today akin to American business in those early days. Despite the millions of computers in schools, teaching has not changed. In the encompassing evaluation of technology in schools mentioned above, the Department of Education points out that "According to the literature, the advent of computers and the Internet has not dramatically changed how teachers teach and how students learn[vi]."

 AN ALTERNATIVE

There is an alternative to the way we use computers in schools, an alternative that would take advantage of the power of interaction. We could allow computers to tutor children individually and directly without a teacher in the usual role. This approach seems radical when first considered. Nonetheless, a few schools have tried it for some students or subjects. The usual pupils in these computerized classes are those who are at-risk of dropping out of school. In many cases, these students have been so difficult to teach that authorities have allowed this new approach. The results have been uniformly good

Several companies have developed fitting teaching software. Among these are Plato Learning, Inc., Scientific Learning, and Novanet Learning, Inc. All three have web pages where results of their programs are posted[vii].

Lakeland High School in Florida, Lawrence High School in Indianapolis, and Turner High School in Carrollton, Texas, provide three interesting examples of Plato programs. In retests in Lakeland, student FHSCT (Florida High School Competency Test) scores increased dramatically, and the school identified a significant positive relationship between some student PLATO performance data and the FHSCT test scores. Authorities at Lawrence implemented an extensive remediation program in 1998-1999 to increase the passing rate of their students taking the state-mandated competency exam, ISTEP (Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress). At the beginning of the year, 406 students failed either the math or the English component. At the end of the year, only 74 of these pupils continued to fail the exam.  At Turner, the pass rate on TAAS scores reversed a declining trend and improved from 69% in 1998 to 83% in 2000

Scientific Learning has concentrated on reading and comprehension especially with students who were behind in these vital areas. Pretest and posttest results with standardized, nationally normed tests showed significant gains with various levels of students from kindergarten through grade 12.

Dillard High School in Fort Lauderdale, Florida provides an example of the results of using Novanet software. In this program there were 123 students, all of whom were below the twentieth percentile on state standards.  After three months of using the program, all pupils had made gains. Moreover, half of the students had advanced at least one full grade, and 27 of those pupils had improved by either two or three grade levels.

Although schools have used this form of computerized education primarily with at-risk children, there are other programs that teach average and bright students, and they have recorded equally exciting gains. For example, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University created software to teach algebra through computers. They installed the program in a number of high schools including some in their hometown of Pittsburgh. The authors made a study of freshmen at three schools, none of whom had taken the subject in middle school. Approximately 470 students enrolled in 21 computer classes. At the end of the year the schools assessed results and compared math achievement for these students and a comparable group of 170 ninth grade students in standard math courses. The results showed the power of the computerized learning. The computer students scored 15% better on standardized tests. Moreover, they were 100 percent better on the more difficult questions that “focused on mathematical analysis of real world situations and the use of computational tools”[viii]

 In all these successful programs the electronic instruction takes advantage of many of the strengths of computers: children are taught individually and at their own pace and the software develops interaction between the computer and the student. Moreover, the electronic instructor never retires or gets sick, and programmers can continually improve the software. Teachers continue to be essential, but with a role that differs from our accustomed conception of what teachers do.

Careful consideration of results from these and other studies makes it seem possible that if this type of computerized education were adopted universally, technology could begin to make real and beneficial changes for students, teachers, and schools. Under this scenario, not only would there be interaction between the computer and the student, but also each pupil would have, in effect, a private tutor throughout his or her educational career. Like a human tutor, the electronic instructor would teach the child at his or her learning level. For example, superior students would constantly have new vistas and challenges opened to them, with continual opportunities for advancement. With sub-par students, the computer would provide appropriate material but would also move at a speed that would fit each pupil’s capacity for progress.

Through constant testing and continual interaction, the electronic instructor would be aware of the needs of the student and would immediately provide proper material to correct any problems and to encourage and help the student to advance. Students who had more difficulty learning would never be overwhelmed because the class had proceeded beyond their level of scholarship. Moreover, there would be no embarrassment if the computer had to take longer to cover a given lesson for a particular student. The child’s classmates would not know. Only the computer and the authorities receiving the computer reports would have this information. At the other end of the learning spectrum, students who were capable of advancing more rapidly would find new excitement and challenges, and much of the boredom that has always engulfed these students would be removed.

Moreover, the electronic instructor could be programmed to emulate the approaches that good teachers have always used with their students. It would point out errors and would praise and reinforce all gains. Positive feedback helps the student and makes learning enjoyable, as all teachers recognize. In a classroom of 15 or 20 students, teachers are often unable to give each pupil individual encouragement. The computer, however, with only one child to attend to would always be quick to praise his or her accomplishments. Since the computer would interact directly with the child, it could concentrate its power exclusively on the needs of the individual student without affecting the requirements of other children in the class. They would all have their own private tutors.

TEACHERS

Computerized education would change the role of teachers, but would neither eliminate nor downgrade them. On the contrary, human instructors would remain extremely important but with a radically different focus. This possibility often frightens teachers, but computerization would actually enhance their position. Many of the tedious, boring duties that they must endure today such as preparing daily lesson plans and correcting tests, would vanish. That would leave them more time to function in their true and essential positions as educators. There are two basic roles that I foresee for teachers in computerized education: continuing to conduct group activities and acting as “leader teachers.”

Many teachers today conduct a variety of group sessions such as workshops, seminars, and discussions. In computerized education, these duties would not only continue but would take on more importance than in today’s schools. In addition, some aspects of today’s group meetings would change. The computer would handle the basic necessities of the assigned curriculum, giving teachers greater freedom to choose topics for a group setting and the prospect of dealing more deeply with those topics than is possible today. Group projects might continue for several class periods or for several days. Despite the length of time used in these activities, the students would not miss any of their computer classes because the computer would begin again exactly where the last lesson ended. Today, teachers usually have all the students from their own classes in their groups and no one else. In computerized education, preset conditions would not determine attendance. Students could choose the workshops that would most interest them, and teachers could establish prerequisites for attendance. For a teacher, this type of group would form the ideal teaching environment.

One of the fears sometimes voiced about children learning extensively from a computer is that they would lose the valuable human give-and-take that currently happens in classes. In actuality, because of the need for discipline, less interplay among students goes on in today’s classrooms than is often imagined. But group sessions in computerized education would provide many legitimate opportunities for student interaction.

 Another vitally important activity for humans in the education of children would be to function as leader teachers[ix]. Every student at every age level would have a leader teacher whom the pupil and his or her parents would choose, and who would be responsible for leading the child as he or she pursued an education. This relationship between student and teacher would last for at least a year at a time and might continue for several years. The student would meet this mentor privately and on a regular basis. These meetings would vary, depending upon the age and needs of the child. For example, the leader teacher of a student in the first grade might see and talk with the child several times every day. The leader teacher of a student in high school might meet with the youth only once every couple of weeks if that seemed appropriate.

All children, however, at all age levels would sit down regularly with their teachers, who would have access to their computer records. Time would be available for the instructors to get to know the children well. This system would make directing the education of the child easier and more productive for the teachers and make the children comfortable with this kind of direction. In today’s education system, many students go months or even years without meeting privately with a teacher. That could never happen if computers were teaching and leader teachers had both the responsibility of directing children’s education and the time to carry out that responsibility.

Parents would have another advantage because a leader teacher directed their child. They would find it easier to arrange parent-teacher conferences. They would need to meet with only one instructor who would have a thorough knowledge of the student and of all the subjects he or she was studying.

THE FUTURE

Can schools ever take advantage of true computerized education? When corporate America learned how it could use computers to improve productivity, the central role the computer in business had arrived. The need for improvement in education is present as even such staunch defenders of today’s schools as Sandia National Laboratories and Gerald Bracey point out. Moreover, everybody would be delighted if there could be additional gains even among today’s best schools.

Emulating the successful employment of computers by business, however, is not simple. There are unique difficulties in education. For example, school boards must alleviate the fears of teachers that they will lose their jobs. In addition, since education is much more involved in the political world, proportionately more people must take part in the process of making changes. The numbers of citizens who must become aware of the potential of computerization in education will be larger than in business, where the decision makers are fewer. In corporate America, when software companies developed programs to enhance productivity, individual businesses bought that software because they wanted to improve and did not fear changes. Education, with some exceptions, has a history of resisting serious change. This tendency lessens the incentive for software companies to develop the necessary programming.

The solution, therefore, must be twofold. First, educators, politicians, parents, and concerned citizens must understand how schools can use computers more effectively to improve education and to benefit students and teachers. Second, commercial companies must create suitable software.

These seem to be monstrous tasks, but both are possible. Many teachers, parents, and administrators want improvements and are engaged in an ongoing search for answers. They will need to examine and debate the value of true computerization as they carry out their quest. If these many searchers for improved education decide that computerization can supply an important portion of the answer, then it will be up to the private corporations to do their part. Some of these are already developing programming as noted above, and they and other companies could turn more of their resources and ingenuity to developing outstanding and effective educational software. The potential market is huge and software corporations will produce the programming as soon as they see that education will accept these changes.

Although there are differences in the paths of education and business in developing the use of computerization, there is one major similarity. American business was not able to take advantage of the power of technology until many of its basic practices changed. This is equally true in education. Until schools can permit a major alteration in the way teaching is carried on, they must necessarily continue to miss out on the improvement that computer technology can bring.