Mind Over Machine

New and emerging technology has been a debate involved with the direction of our nation’s education system for years now. Recently, it was called to my attention that we would be required to use tablets in certain classes at Exeter, at our own expense. I had previously thought that this was only an idea that was being passed forward, but the notion itself beckons the debate again: Is integrating technology with learning environments helpful?I first heard word of this movement towards tablets in my math class. My teacher was very open to hearing the opinion of students before anything was to happen, and I’m sure many of the Exeter faculty would like to know how students perceive the situation. The idea was that a tablet device would provide similar functions to that of our calculator, or even beyond, with provided apps and whatnot.I have a cousin who, after a brief stint in Silicon Valley, has worked with numerous technology companies. He’s in his thirties and had no exposure to technology until college. His curriculum consisted of mostly the same type of math and science that we learn here at Exeter. Comparatively speaking, it is not different at all in how basic it is; he learned to write geometric proofs and derive trigonometric functions and the whole lot.He took classes in chemistry, physics and math, which taught similar if not identical concepts to the ones that we are taught here at Exeter. To him and to me, the very existence of these concepts in our curriculum, most of which have been around for decades, showed that the core of learning were these basics, not new technologies. He then told me an interesting story about how Google’s pagerank algorithm was built on the Markov Chain, a math matrix system that deals with probability systems, as I’m sure many of you at the end of the Math 3 book are familiar with.To him, pencils, paper and quiet contemplations were what helped him learn these basics and achieve success in his fields, and to many others it’s the same. Gadgets were never necessary, and it’s our duty to ask the question of whether or not they are now or will be in the future.Admittedly, in the modern approach to technology in classrooms, few people consider the negative implications. Education reformers and computer science teachers alike point out that there are few problems with technology being implemented in our classrooms—for them its a go-to thing that must have foreseeable benefits.Many of you may remember the use of “smartboards,” whether it was in your elementary schools or back in middle school. It’s funny that we don’t see them used here at Exeter, and to be honest, it’s something that I appreciate. Smartboards can range from 2-10k a piece, and have a realistic lifespan of a year and a half before they break down and just become very expensive whiteboards. Based on what I’ve seen in suburban New Jersey, public schools are willing to shell out money to keep at least one of these in each classroom to improve education, instead of the horrifying alternative—God forbid that they increase the compensation of the teachers that they hire. If there’s any solution to education in our nation, it should be that our teachers feel reasonably paid, instead of wasting money on useless gadgets.Now of course, here at Exeter, the story may or may not be different. The quality of our teachers is undeniably amazing, and it is truly a shame that the rest of students in America cannot be taught by men and women of such high caliber. So why should we question the use of more technology in our classrooms?Chalk costs four dollars for a box of 12 pieces. If a piece of chalk breaks in half, you can toss it to your mate and continue using it. The rules of algebra have been taught without a smartboard, and grammar rules have been learnt without $500 iPads. Reading everybody’s favorite novel As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner on an iPad with an app that can help you take notes is irrelevant when we have been taught for decades to make annotations. Our brilliant English teachers are the ones who can truly make this type of text come alive for us and help us dive into the minds of Darl and Vardaman, not the glowing screen.We shouldn’t be blinded by all these new technologies and gizmos 2.0 and 3.0. In a broader sense, our nation should divert resources into classrooms in more meaningful ways, and Exeter should consider the necessity of technology and not be wowed over by the inflated costs. A blackout of technology is not needed, but questions as to whether or not this is the right path are.I’d like to end with a quote from Henry David Thoreau, who once said when addressing the construction of a telegraph line: “We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate.”