Caveat Emptor Buyer Beware (Technohype)

(Reprinted with permission from the Thrust for Educational Leadership (magazine of the Association of California School Administrators) April 1996)

Imagine a technology that instantly connects teachers to resources around the world, that allows teachers to reach parents on a moment's notice, that helps teachers reach out to the community and even helps bring the community into the classroom.

Imagine a time when virtually all professionals have such terminals in their work spaces, and virtually all homes-even those of the poorest citizens-are connected to the net work.

Imagine the day when all teachers in the state of California have that crown of 1880s technology, the telephone, in their classrooms.

That day is probably a long way off. Instead, in an effort that is more public relations than common sense, we are spending millions of dollars bringing "cutting edge" programs to a small percentage of California's students. We are investing in CD ROM towers and fiber optic net works that will be obsolete in 18 months, and we are failing to invest in enduring and essential resources like roofs, walls and libraries.

I invite you to take a walk down your school's hallways, to look for artifacts of previous "cutting edge" technological innovations, to reflect upon the fate of those programs. Perhaps you'll find the remnants of a '50s-'60s language lab that was going to revolutionize the teaching of second languages, until we found out the labs were no better than a decent teacher, decent materials and a room with desks.

Perhaps you'll find the cabling and jacks of a closed-circuit television system from back in the days when "educational television" was a buzzword rather than an oxymoron Can you find a closet in the library -I mean Media Center-filled with dusty film strip viewers, film loop viewers, Systems 80 machines and Language Masters?

We need to be more savvy

There is plenty of evidence that educators are not very savvy consumers of technology. While high tech companies like Hewlett Packard and Boeing are quite satisfied to manage their internal operations with 10 year old but adequate systems, we want the latest and the fastest.

When Joe Consumer can go down to Fry's and buy a CD ROM player for $150, we want to spend nine grand on a networked CD ROM tower. When a slick corporation flies us to Tucson to show off a snazzy integrated computer lab that is unsupported by research and overpriced by a factor of five, we buy.

Required reading

He questions the value of the kinds of information available over the Net: "To get a terrific picture of Orion xtype ftppubinfo.jpl.nasa gov... and enter get orion.gif. ... and there is a close up photo of M42, the Great Orion Nebula, complete with false color rendering," Stoll writes "But have you actually seen Orion? x Spend a few nights with a pair of binoculars, a constellation chart and a compass. You may swat mosquitoes in the summer and shiver in the winter. But you'll get to know the sky."

Review the literature

Educators would also be well advised to review the limited literature on the effectiveness of computer-based instruction. I believe that any objective review of the literature would have to conclude that the jury is still out as to the cost-effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction. Where there has been substantial research of well-defined programs, as in studies of IBM's Write to Read program, there is little evidence in support of the programs.

The San Jose Mercury News, in a recent feature on educational technology, could find no evidence of increased student achievement in schools that had made significant commitments to technology.

Steven Krashen, a recognized expert in literacy instruction in California, recommends in his book "Every Person a Reader" a "three year freeze on all technology related to literacy development ... with the money going to books and other reading materials."

Krashen writes, "There is no compelling evidence that computers are especially useful in helping children to learn to read, nor is there convincing evidence that they have increased anyone's reading ability " He concludes, "Computers are important but books must come first."

Before you buy

Given this background of caution, I suggest that California educators consider the following points as they consider developing technology plans:

• Don't buy technology based upon a technology plan. Use technology as a tool that may help to achieve ends that are described in a school plan. Again, technology is a tool, not an end in itself. Invest in technology only to the extent that the investment supports the goals and objectives established in a school and/or district plan. In almost every case, it is a mistake for technology planning to take place independent of a school planning process.
• Invest in appropriate technologies, not sexy technologies. The most appropriate technology for connecting classrooms to the home may be the telephone, not the Internet. The most appropriate technology for turning kids on to reading may be great library books, not drill-and practice computer games. The most appropriate way to prepare kids to thrive in a high-tech world may be to teach them to type, not to program in UNIX.
• Don't try to be on the "cutting edge." Technology is changing too rapidly, and our resources are too thin. Ten-year-old 286 PCs will work just fine for teaching word processing and spread sheets, basic skills of the '9Os. The private sector is all too anxious to sell us the latest networking products that will be obsolete or available at half the price in two years.
• Don't fall for technology for its own sake. We should always be asking "so what?" We should be asking for evidence, not just anecdotes, as to the educational value of educational technology. We should be conscious of our own natural tendencies to be seduced by new and jazzy toys We should examine records of use after the novelty wears off, and ask for objective evidence of increased student achievement. We should ask how technology will support the achievement of established educational goals, and examine cost:benefit relative to other possible spending.
• Watch the actual, long term costs. Districts that were sold lease- purchase agreements for expensive, unproven integrated computer labs could have bought better technology three times over for the aggregate costs of lease-purchase payments. High capacity data lines that are being connected to schools for free today or are being provided through grants carry very high long-term service costs.
• Remember that technology can be a double edged sword in relation to education. Computers can be powerful, essential tools for understanding, interpreting and communicating about the real world. Or they can be black holes (just like television) into which we pour our money, intelligence and time, getting little in return.