The Family Guide to Digital Freedom

Information and Communication Technology is an essential part of any complete, modern education. Computers are already replacing pen and paper as basic, necessary tools to find a job or accomplish several everyday tasks. This started about thirty years ago: less than two generations ago, which is extremely fast on a global scale.

It is for this reason that, in spite of the media hype about how empowered and productive we all are thanks to computers, most of us still look at them with a sense of fear and inadequacy and know almost nothing about how they work. The result is that everybody proposing to "teach kids about computers" is greeted with gratitude and an open wallet, and anything done with computers looks cooler and self-justifies itself.

Too much technology, however, doesn't guarantee good results. A study on the effectiveness of education technology released in April 2007 by the U.S.A. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance found achievement scores "were no higher in classrooms using reading and math software products than in classrooms without the new products".

Too much technology can also seriously dumb down young people, if it isn't proposed in the right way, at the right moment and in the right order. It may be useless, for example, to learn computer programming at any level before integrating computers in the existing curriculum. There are four simple things to check before saying "Yes, let my children use computers".

How early is too early to start using computers?

It is very likely that computers as study tools don't provide any meaningful advantage to children who haven't really yet mastered what are popularly called the "Three R's", that is Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic. If this isn't guaranteed, sooner or later the results show, and they aren't pleasant. The author has personally known several Senior High School students who could not mentally multiply by powers of ten without a pocket calculator. A recent study in Italy found that many University students "could not articulate thoughts".
"They write theses as if they were cell phone short text messages", the Rector said. The average level at some Universities was so low that they had to organize introductory classes to re-teach punctuation, grammar and so on.

Even in the absence of such excesses, most parents will agree that time passed in front of almost any screen, especially alone, should be minimized. Not because computers are evil, but just to enjoy life more and to learn first things first.

Are there clear goals and restriction on computer usage?

At least until 10/11 years of age, computers can find a place in study and
school activity only if the children receive them to do something specific, rather than being just abandoned in front of a keyboard. Otherwise the computer would become simply an excuse not to teach, or at least a source of distraction and a waste of time already denounced by several parents in the Wall Street Journal: specifically, every computer provided for study with public money to children in that age
range should have really strict content filters.

Do teachers force students to think and look for substance even when using a computer?

Children who are told to use a computer for study "just because", often only learn, as a mother in Maine found out, how to waste time and be superficial. First of all, she noted, the laptop encouraged her son to behave just like many grown-up managers with masters degrees from the coolest Universities: he would spend more time finding the fanciest fonts than "digging through library books". In addition to this, all a child can learn by doing research online without strict supervision is how easy it is to copy, paste and believe whatever is found in the first two minutes spent with a search engine or online encyclopedia. This is perhaps the greatest danger of all: to end up, in just a few more years, with teachers "formed" in this way, hence unable to conceive of anything better.

Are the teachers really motivated and up to the task?

Too many teachers, especially in primary school, are not prepared yet to use and propose computers effectively, or don't even believe it's really useful to do so: often this isn't even their fault. Many of these people are very responsible, dedicated and well-prepared in everything related to traditional teaching. Often, however, they barely know how to operate a mouse and have no interest at all in ICT: they are "teaching" how to use computers, often with little or no decent training for themselves, only because some central Government Regulation said so. In such cases, the only solution is to discuss the problem openly, encourage them to ask for better assistance and training and support their requests towards the School Administration.

Don't be afraid to ask!

Don't accept computers in the classroom or for homework unless you have
personally checked with the teachers that they want to avoid these dangers and know how to do it. The next and last thing to do is to verify if the curriculum is designed properly, as explained in the corresponding chapter.

A word on the ultimate "Children Machine"

The "Children Machine" is the current name of what was initially named "The 100 Dollar Laptop" or "One Laptop Per Child" Project. This mini-portable computer is to be purchased in very large quantities by the nations of the emerging world, which would then give one laptop to each one of their children. The reason to do so would be the chance to "leapfrog decades of development - immediately transforming the content and quality of their schildren's learning".

During summer of 2006 some countries like Nigeria had already ordered a lot of units, while other important markets like India officially said "no, thanks". The reasons range from lack of trust in the project founders to the same general doubts expressed in this chapter, that is the fact that children, especially poor ones, need a lot of other things before any computer.

While only time will tell if the Project will succeed as its founders expect, the Children Machine remains a good thing because it may have very positive impact on computing in general, if not on education in developing countries. Even if nothing else should come from it, this Machine should teach a lot, both to designers and to the general public, on how to give to the great majority of people all and only what they really need from computers: reading, writing and arithmetic at the smallest possible cost, without wasting electricity.

The interest around the project may also spark an interesting debate: if a 140 US dollars object is enough to "leapfrog decades of development - immediately transforming the content and quality of their children's learning"... why isn't it offered everywhere? Why should families in other countries have to spend much more, directly or indirectly, to achieve the same result?