The New York Times reports the results of recent studies in which children in low-income families were given laptops to take home. Web access was either absent or inhibited — much as I’d like to say “blocked,” we all know what happens when kids encounter filters. Researchers were looking for an impact on learning. After all, they had given the kids a powerful tool. Would it help them at school?
The standardized tests showed no improvement in reading, writing, or math scores. It appears the students spent most of their time using the computers to try to get around the “nanny ware” and to play games.
The knee-jerk reaction might be to think, “Well, computers must not be all that important to education. We can scale back on that expensive technology and save some money.”
A better response to this research might be to use an analogy. Students were give the equivalent of a car, and researchers expected that students would use it to learn how an engine works. Instead, students figured out how to get to the the ball field and how to avoid radar traps.
If we want kids to develop skills in self-directed learning, a rudimentary understanding of filtering technology, and game theory, then simply giving them a laptop and getting out of their way will probably accomplish this. But standardized test scores don’t measure those skills.
Didn’t we establish 10 years ago that technology integration isn’t about giving kids machines but about using new tools to develop new skills, especially in reading and writing? Why are we still testing that?
It’s not about the car. It’s about the mechanic and the apprentice.
