No school like the old school
CHICAGO If you’ve been following the occasional series in The New York Times about the efficacy of technology in the classroom, “Grading the Digital School; Unfulfilled Promises,” you were probably not surprised by Sunday’s article, “A Silicon Valley School that Doesn’t Compute.”
Interestingly, some of the finest minds at high-tech companies such as Apple, Yahoo, Hewlett-Packard and Google are enrolling their children in technology-free schools that teach through the time-tested methods of hands-on exploration and project-based learning.
Instead of employing pricey iPads or specialized software to teach or reinforce skills, students learn math through the complexities of knitting, they grow vegetables in the school garden, and they read real paper books.
As I said, this makes perfect sense if you’ve been following the Times’ series, which has found that neither classroom software solutions nor the addition of technology-based teaching methods has had significant impact on students’ academic success.
An earlier story, “In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores,” found that “something is not adding up—here and across the country. In a nutshell: schools are spending billions on technology, even as they cut budgets and lay off teachers, with little proof that this approach is improving basic learning.”
The story about Silicon Valley’s elite choosing low- or no-tech schooling for their children casts much-needed light on the bottom line of excellent education: basically, “great teachers with interesting lesson plans.” Sure, that’s way too simplistic—but only as simplistic as the current belief that technology will be the magic bullet that gets America’s educational system on the path to greatness.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan recently reinforced this notion by announcing an initiative called Digital Promise, designed to make it easier for public schools to get more technology into their classrooms.
Worse than the promise that presenting engaging multimedia content is all that’s needed to overcome the life challenges that students bring to school with them each day is the view that since technology underlies so many aspects of both adults’ and children’s worlds, it’s irresponsible to not use technology at school.
“It’s (consumer technology) supereasy. It’s like learning to use toothpaste,” Alan Eagle, a Google employee with a child in a tech-free school, was quoted in the Times’ article. “At Google and all these places, we make technology as brain-dead easy to use as possible. There’s no reason why kids can’t figure it out when they get older.”
But alas, the Waldorf School of the Peninsula, a private school where children learn—much like the engineers who put the first man on the moon did—from information chalked on blackboards, from thick books, and with hefty doses of intrinsic motivation, is also pricey.
That’s the irony: Families with little or no choice but to send their children to struggling neighborhood public schools are asked to put their faith in new classroom computers while the affluent can afford to travel back to a schooling era when content, and not the delivery method, was king.
Education policymakers could stand to learn a little from the parenting philosophies of the technology elite: Old-school methods such as high-quality instruction and hands-on experimentation must take precedence over the theory that today’s children aren’t capable of learning without the aid of fancy electronic devices.
Esther Cepeda is a columnist for the Washington Post Writers Group. Her email address is estherjcepeda@washpost.com.

Nov 6, 2011 at 11:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Wait a second...now the rich are getting school without technology and the poor (according to this article) are stuck with computers? Technology isn't good or bad, it's just a tool like anything else in the classroom.
Delivery, content, and instruction are key. There is no one better than the other. Shall we go back to dissecting frogs on the marble desks or use the computer version that can be used anywhere and without the stench of formeldahyde?
How far removed shall we go? No computers... No graphing calculators, no slide rules, how about arithmetic tables? Chalk and slate tablets? Thank goodness for open enrollment.
I guess we're already sending our public workers back to the 50's ... Might as well keep going to the schools and lesson plans too.
Nov 6, 2011 at 5:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Totally agree with KLC.
Nov 6, 2011 at 11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Extremes in either direction are fool-hardy. Students need to learn the "why" and the "how" at the same time as they learn the "way". Both the All approach and the Nothing approach are doomed to failure.
-
How ought we spend our money? Teachers over computers. That doesn't mean no computers.
Nov 6, 2011 at 10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Old school is better. Colleges, especially technical or community colleges rush courses through like there is no tomorrow. Teachers don't have time or don't want to give the time to teach kids or young adults anymore and expect them to learn all on their own. At least with online courses, you can go at your own pace and you are not rushed through learning. In the long run, you are not really learning or retaining anything. Same thing with companies who need and want to hire people for certain jobs, but don't have the time to fully train anyone. They expect you to know what it is your supposed to do as soon as you walk in their doors. No wonder this country is going to the dogs. Products and customer service has deteriorated.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.