This is a research paper I wrote a few years ago as an education major looking for scientific evidence for the effectiveness of technology in education. What I found was quite shocking, and I feel it needs to see the light of day (or the internet).
The use of technology in the education of America’s preschool and early elementary-aged children has increased steadily, yet dramatically in the past few decades. I remember my early childhood quite well. My parents were very strict about what I could and couldn’t watch on television. I was only allowed to watch those shows they thought were educational. When I was in preschool, I don’t think there was a more faithful viewer of the show Sesame Street. As I grew older, they cut back the amount of time that I spent in front of the television and began to get me educational games to play on our dinosaur of a personal computer, but I continued to watch an occasional episode of Bill Nye the Science Guy, or Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood. But, in observing the children that I come into contact with, the amount of time that they spend in front of a screen of one type or another is completely astounding. I’ve asked the parents out of pure curiosity how they feel about how their children are spending their time, and the parents seem to have no problem with it based on the fact that they believe their children are learning necessary skills for life. As an Education major (at the time I was writing this),this response brought me to my next question: how effective is the use of technology in early education, and at what price to the child’s well being are these academic accomplishments gained? This is what I found.
In working with kids in a variety of grade levels, I get to see the things that today’s elementary aged children are learning and not learning. Few of these children have the math competency required of me when I was in their respective grade levels. For example, when I was in third grade, I was memorizing my multiplication tables, but in working with the third graders under my supervision, I have found that they are still struggling with the concept of borrowing when subtracting. In addition to this, the majority of the students that I work with are enrolled in remedial reading classes, because their reading abilities are not up to the level at which the State says they should be. These claims are further substantiated by the fact that an examination of the average verbal SAT scores from 1972 to 2005 have dropped by twenty-eight points (Pearson Education, publishing as Infoplease). While this study also indicates that math scores have risen, I have to ask myself if this is due to a true greater understanding of the mathematic principles or due to advancement in the capabilities of modern calculators. My experience and the test scores indicate that children in high-tech education environments are not learning more, but actually appear to be learning less.
Academic success should not be the only factor examined when looking at the effects of technology in the education of our young. There is considerable evidence that links certain learning disorders to the early use of technology. In fact, it has been suggested that among other things, over stimulation of the young mind by flashing lights, electronic sounds, and flickering screens could lead to or exacerbate Autism. Technology proficient toddlers may face unique developmental peril if specific mediums trigger too much stimulation of the creative portion of the brain while at the same time neglecting to stimulate the relational portion. A research project documented by N. Fox and others indicates that children around the age of four who experienced overstimulation of the right side of the brain combined with a lack of stimulation of the left exhibited relational isolation (Olfman 86). These are classic, textbook style symptoms of the ever prevalent disorder, Autism. In fact, estimates indicate that twenty to thirty years ago, only .05% of children had Autism or Autism related disorders (Chang M.D.). The number of cases has risen similarly to the rise in technology usage by toddlers. By 2008, the Center for Disease Control approximated that 67% of children around the age of eight had an autism related disorder (Chang M.D.). While it is certainly not the only factor, research seems to indicate that the use of technology in early brain development contributes to learning disorders.
Another effect that I have observed in working with young children is a lack of understanding of the basic physical laws that govern the world around us. If you have ever watched a young child drop a toy repeatedly and watch it fall, you know that it is quite natural for a child to test the laws of physics. However, if that child spends a considerable amount of time in front of a computer, television, or gaming device, he does not get this experience in the workings of the physical world. “Young children naturally tend to disbelieve their own power as compared with a computer, which is “opaque” – that is, on can’t really understand or see what makes it work. Even though youngsters become adept at running programs, they can’t ultimately control the computer’s behavior….On the contrary, good play materials (e.g. paints, empty boxes, nonanimated dolls, toy tools, tinkertoy building blocks, and playing cards) are fully under the child’s control and operate in accordance with natural scientific laws, such as gravity.” (Olfman 87) If a child can see that the car does not move unless he pushes it, he will learn that Newton was correct when he said that an object in motion or at rest will remain in that state until acted upon by an outside force.
While educational technology may reduce the amount of time young children spend in front of the television, these children are still not getting the necessary amount of physical activity needed for proper development. Pediatricians have found that physical activity is crucial for proper bone development, and should be encouraged (Janz 1387). In addition, it is believed that a child’s physical activity routine is determined for life in his early preschool years (Grøntved 1). The lack of physical activity on the part of our youth becomes apparent when we look at the number of campaigns to get our kids active. America’s youth sit in a classroom all day with but brief moments of recess, they come home, sit at the table and do homework, and then instead of going outside and getting the fresh air and the exercise that they so desperately need, they sit in front of the television, or they play video games. This pattern of physical inactivity was perceived to be a problem as early as 1903 by a revolutionary in the field of education. She said, “The physical inaction which seems almost inevitable in the schoolroom – together with other unhealthful conditions – makes it a trying place for children, especially for those of feeble constitution.” (White 207) Educational technology just eats up more time that these kids could be utilizing to build up their physical health.
Finally, these educational technologies are not going to the students that would need them the most. Minorities and those of low income have historically had to work harder to gain a quality education than those of higher income, indicating that they could benefit the most from these technologies. However, it is not financially realistic for these people to obtain these tools. The majority of the games designed for the cheaper and more popular gaming systems (Nintendo, Playstation, etc.) are the less educational action games; whereas, more of the educational games are designed for the more expensive personal computer based systems. The case that an unbalanced portion of the noneducational, and often brutal games are played by poorer kids has been observed by R.M. Scantlin, and raises alarm (Clavert, Jordan and Cocking 51). While there are programs designed to take these technologies to the low-income and minorities, it is hardly enough. It must be remembered that these programs are designed and run by corporations geared toward making money, and will typically only go far enough in providing these technologies to boost their public image. Those technologies being used by minorities and those of low income are typically not those designed to be educational, but rather the more action oriented and gore filled games marketed toward entertainment rather than education.
I found the results of my research to be both unexpected and educational. As an Education major, I want to know the most effective methods available, so as to efficiently achieve the desired ends without interfering with the mental and physical development of the children under my care. I fully expected educational technology to be at least slightly more effective and less detrimental considering the incredible support given to the cause by parents, legislators, and educators. However, my research gave an entirely different picture. The effectiveness of the technology is inconclusive, while the mental and physical jeopardy to which it places the student is well documented. I am unsure of whether technology would be more useful in the education of older, more mature students, but I am now convinced that its use should be avoided in the education of our preschool and early elementary-aged children, for the good of both their physical and mental development.
