Coexistence in the Classroom: Is it Possible?

Here's a question you've definitely heard before: should we allow technology in the classroom (at the high school level)? Last year, my school district decided that yes, we should. However, not only did it allow for laptops in the classroom, but it also made Chromebooks into a requirement for freshmen, sophomores, and juniors. Every day, I observe students with their Chromebooks, and I find myself wondering if this technology improves learning.

There are a plethora of arguments that can be made both for and against the use of technology in classes. Unfortunately for those for such use, I am against it. For one thing, college students are paying for their education; it's up to them to waste their tuition by playing games in class if they want. Public high schools, which are funded by local property taxes, should not give students the option of rejecting their education.

Of course, there are other reasons beyond economics as to why high school students should not be allowed to use laptops in classes. One argument I hear often is that writing down material helps students retain it--muscle memory. Supporters of laptop use in classrooms would argue that technology allows students to take notes on more of the lesson. But are you really learning by typing? There's no memory involved, and if your notes are that much longer, just how many students will take a second look at them?

Sure, maybe laptops do hinder learning in this way. "But," supporters for laptop use might claim, "laptops increase productivity and provide students with numerous tools." Well, it seems I'm attending the wrong high school, since most students here use laptops to browse sites unrelated to classroom material. "Then restrict those sites," supporters would argue. But just how many sites can you block? Sure, you might restrict Facebook and Youtube, but what about Reddit or Imgur? Would something like this blog be blocked, too?

Maybe this would work in a high level environment in which students are constantly focused on schoolwork. Unfortunately, the majority of high school often is not, and laptops may even give them a greater incentive to not focus in class. For example, my friend always scrambles to finish his English homework (due the next period, by the way) during AP Japanese.

Despite my current beliefs, I am open to any arguments regarding the use of technology in a high school setting and would like to hear what others have to say. What do you think? Has technology improved the high school learning experience?

Update: Today, I obtained a Chromebook to see for myself what ramifications will result from using it in classrooms. Will my learning experience improve, contrary to my expectations, or will I prove myself correct? This may not be a perfect nor an objective experiment, it will definitely be an informative one.


For some more analysis on the effects of using technology in classes, check out this post on a similar blog.

Source: http://watermarked.cutcaster.com/cutcaster-photo-100361979-Computer-teacher.jpg

The Opportunity Cost of Technology

Africa. As far as most of us know, it's the land of the poor and uneducated. Almost everything we hear about Africa is about corruption and warfare running rampant. Although it's undeniable that such stories may be true in certain areas of Africa, many people describe Africa as a beautiful place with extraordinary scenery not available anywhere else.

So why, then, do we see the entirety of Africa as a poverty-stricken battlefield? The simple answer is technology. In case it wasn't already evident, technology has revolutionized how we live our lives. It does make menial tasks easier and faster! Unfortunately, technology in Africa is not as widespread as it is in the United States. Consequently, we see Africans as people who require our guidance, which may not be right for them.

It is impossibly easy to do laundry and cook with the use of technology. All it takes is a matter of minutes and a bit of effort. But take that technology away, and can we really do either of those tasks? I know I personally can't do laundry without a machine and I definitely can't cook (with or without technology, actually) without a stove.

As I've mentioned repeatedly before, many Africans lack the tens of machines buzzing in our houses. What this means is, they have found a way to do laundry and cook without technology. What if a sample of Americans were suddenly dropped off in the remote areas of Africa (yes, places without malls!)? The water that they drink would have to be boiled, then cooled, for laundry, baths, and drinkable water. The fires they need to heat this water and cook food would have to be made using the right types and amounts of wood.

The Africans, then, might seem to be the superior and enlightened people. They would know where to farm, hunt, and settle. They would be knowledgeable about the different plants to avoid and woods to gather. And they would be a lot more efficient than we would. In this type of setting, we would be the needy, uneducated people. My book is currently reading Barbara Kingsolver's The Poisonwood Bible, which deals with this scenario that I just described. I strongly recommend this book; it's my favorite book that I've read in high school.

But if Africans were to come to America, they might be just as confused by our technology as we would be by their lack thereof. Perhaps the right conclusion is that the Africans are not a backwards people. In fact, they are certainly not a backwards people. If we were to remove all external influences from Africa, it would likely thrive on its own and eventually develop things like technology (but that's for another time). Perhaps the only conclusion that we can agree on is that there are no backwards people; there are only different people. The opportunity cost of technology are the skills necessary for a life together with nature, without technology.

Kingsolver's The Poisonwood Bible:

http://www.kingsolver.com/images/large_covers/the-poisonwood-bible.jpg