There Is No Substitute For A Talented, Motivated Teacher

Dear superintendent of schools:

A high-tech seductress is about to pull us away from what real education is all about.

We spend too much of school district budgets on computers, thinking they can do everything that teachers do.

The computer obviously will be a vital part of vigorous education for the foreseeable future but viewing this extraordinary tool as a cure-all is a major error. There is real danger in neglecting the elevated role of the teacher when we think that an interactive screen is a replacement.

We are seeing almost a cattle stampede to get the greatest number of the fastest machines into the classroom, with the expectation that somehow computer skills and access to the Internet will speed education in an effortless, miraculous way.

We very well may end up with students who can look at a screen and absorb a fraction of what flashes before them but who do not actually learn very much, and who do not learn to think.

Computers cannot replace the passion and devotion of teachers.

Computers do many things so well that there is a mad rush in our culture to believe they can do everything. Under pressure from wild waves of technology, school administrators are attempting to shape too much of teaching methodology to fit the new tools.

The computer must be viewed not as a panacea, the lures of which dictate retrenchment and reckless spending, but rather as just another in an arsenal of a teacher’s tools and techniques for getting content into students’ minds.

When the microwave oven heralded significant changes for the home cook, there was an initial move toward revising all sorts of recipes to adjust to the way the microwave worked. Over time, we realized that microwave ovens do some processes very well, some adequately and some not as well as conventional cooking methods. Now, we tend to reserve the microwave ovens for areas where they shine and cook much food the old-fashioned way.

By the time we realize that the same sequence applies to the computer in the classroom, real harm will have been done to students who didn’t receive the education they should have - and several fortunes will have been wasted.

In a dash to get a computer into the classroom, with a goal of one terminal for every four or so students, we are risking our money and our children’s future.

The computer can teach much in the school but there are areas where its application is inefficient. In English, for instance, the computer can do phenomenal work when teaching spelling and vocabulary. But it does poorly in literature. It cannot come close to a teacher reading and discussing great works with students.

A computer cannot evaluate in any meaningful way a student’s grasp of the symbolism, significance or beauty of a poem, play or novel. It does badly with syntax and grammar. Although it surely will improve in these areas, it will not be able to equal the delicate interplay between an eager student and a knowing teacher, never be able to tailor its responses to individual need.

Philosophy, logic and debate, speech, performing arts, painting, sociology, civics, government are important subjects where the computer is of minimal use beyond the quick retrieval of text and for research.

In the hard sciences, computers, with their speed, memory and graphics, are of enormous worth. Yet they cannot fine-tune delivery of the magic and splendor of chemistry and biology to students hungry to learn.

To convey the essence of knowledge you need a teacher, and a very good one.

Great teaching requires at least three components:

Deep knowledge of and love for the material.

The ability to convey information.

A desire to give.

Individuals who combine these qualities are few and will be harder to find if too much of a district’s budget flows into a chase for higher and higher technology.

This is not a Luddite’s view; the computer - patient, tireless, captivating - is a phenomenal teaching tool. It simply must not be considered the equivalent of a passionate teacher, who, with enthusiasm and a primitive blackboard, can inculcate students with more education, and link them to more information, than all the gigabytes and flashy displays that so intoxicate us today.

School boards and administrators need to adopt a more nuanced view of this technological marvel. They need to remember that superb teachers, flesh-and-blood teachers, are still our best tools for instructing our most valuable resource.

We must not lose our best teachers because the money to compensate them adequately goes to buy generation after generation of fancier machines.