PHOTO: Mary van Balen When my daughter briefly entered graduate school in science and math education, she did a short stint in an affluent suburban high school physics class. Besides being disappointed in the interest and knowledge base of the students, she was surprised by the software being used. Instead of actually building small “contraptions” to test various energy sources (springs, levers, weights, etc) the students manipulated models on a computer program.
“If the spring didn’t work, ‘click,’ they replaced it with something else. If that didn’t work, ‘click.’ No one was invested in the project. They didn’t have to be. They just clicked their way to the correct answer, not having to give much thought let alone time to the process.”
I thought of this conversation while reading an article in the Oct 8 edition of the New York Times, “Inflating the Software Report Card,” by Trip Gavriel and Matt Richtel. Basically, the article reviewed rating systems for the success of computer based curricula and found them misleading.
My experience as a teacher and programming director as well as being the mom of three children tells me that acting on concrete materials is indispensable in the process of learning. Unfortunately, many students have few opportunities to do that with teachers being forced to focus on high stakes test scores for both curricula development and their evaluation.
When my children were young, a well-meaning educator suggested that I enroll them in summer school for the gifted. I said I would rather have them climbing trees, playing in the creek, and getting bored enough that they had to dig deep and find things to do. (That often ended up with art projects, contraptions built in the basement, a hut built with the help of cousins, elaborate imaginary games, etc.)
Years later, one daughter used her understanding of life’s interdependence gained through hours of playing and observation in the creek at as the organizing theme for her Rhodes Scholar application.
I am not saying that computer and technology have no place in today’s classrooms. Certainly they do; they are an increasingly important part of the world in which our children live. I am saying that concrete experiences undergird virtual experiences. Measuring out ingredients to bake a batch of cookies or make a blob of “super clay,” help kids understand what fractions are all about. Trying to build a bridge out of toothpicks to hold weight, or make a car powered by a mousetrap help students understand geometry and stored energy.
Wasting time” mixing concoctions of baking soda, vinegar, and cabbage juice can whet the appetite for chemistry. Keeping a microscope in a kitchen cupboard, making place for a chemistry set in the basement, having art supplies easily accessible, taking long walks and picking up bugs and plants…all these things are, at some stages, more important than playing computer games or learning math online.
I recently visited friends who have a two year old daughter, their first. Someone had given her a plastic “computer” on which she could play games. My friends had yet to install the batteries, not sure how much they wanted their little one to spend time with it.
I say, more time should be spent baking together, reading books, exploring the backyard and parks, making puppets, taking walks, playing with water toys and cups in the sink or bathtub. Go to hands-on children’s museums, have messy things like finger paint, water colors, chalks, and clay around the house. And “play” with her. When she paints, you paint some too. Let her see you write more than a check and read more than the newspaper.
I probably sound old fashioned. Computers and technology are critical parts of our children’s world and are an important part of their education. Children without computer savvy are at a disadvantage. Still, computers cannot replace foundational experiences and are not the best way to “teach” everything from reading to physics.
In addition, immersion in creation and interacting with it teaches even more than the obvious. The age of electronic and virtual worlds is also the age when developing respect for creation and concern for human impact on it is as critical as developing intellectual concepts and computer skills.
Cleaning bones found on a walk and figuring out what animal they came from or framing a recent artistic creation provides opportunities for developing relationship, respect, and a sense of wonder that clicking a mouse does not.
© 2011 Mary van Balen
Speak Your Mind