READY FOR THE COMPUTER?
Teacher«s Responsiveness Towards IT-based Learning
Mohamed Chaib and Ann-Katrin Svensson
1997
School of Education and Communication
University of Jšnkšping, Sweden
Box 1026, S-551 11 Jšnkšping , Sweden
Tel: +46 36 15 77 91 and 46 36 15 77 93
Fax: +46 36 16 25 85 - + 46 36 16 62 92
E-Mails: Mohamed.Chaib@hlk.hj.se
Ann-Katrin.Svensson@hlk.hj.se
Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education
Annual Conference: Researching Education in New Times
Brisbane, November 30 Ð December 4, 1997
READY FOR THE COMPUTER?
Ð Teacher«s Responsiveness towards IT-based Learning
Mohamed Chaib and Ann-Katrin Svensson
Abstract:
______________________________________________________________________
This paper discusses some basic aspects of computer-based education in
Sweden. Reporting the results of three ongoing studies conducted at the
University of Jšnkšping, the central roles played by the teachers in
computer-based education is thoroughly analysed. The studies reported
in this paper were all conducted at the comprehensive school level. In
the first one, studentsÕ communicative interactions in front of the
computer were compared to the interaction occurring in other forms of
activities. The second study is concerned with the analysis of how
students communicate between themselves when working with different
types of software. Finally the third study is related to the analysis
of teachersÕ Social representations of information technology in
educational settings. In all three studies, we found evidence for the
central roles teachers are playing in the process of monitoring
communicative interactions in front of the computer. Our discussion
will particularly address this aspect of IT-based learning. We
furthermore find evidence for teachers ambivalence and confused
representations of the computer as a technological teaching device.
From these empirical evidence we discuss, in this paper, some possible
outcomes for computer based learning in the future. We will
particularly pay attention to the necessity of a better understanding
and enhancing of teachersÕ preparedness for the roles they are expected
to play in this important educational issue.
______________________________________________________________________
Key Words: Computer-Based Teaching, Learning and the Computer,
Communicative Interaction, Social Representations, Information
Technology, Students Achievement.
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION 4
2. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE 7
2.1. Communicative Interaction in the Classroom 7 Background of the
studies 7
Students interaction in front of computers and in other activities 7
Students interactions when working with different types of software 10
Instruments of analysis 10
2.2. Images of Information Technology among Teachers 11
Teacher as a ÓPessimistÓ 12
Teacher as an ÓOptimistÓ 15
Teachers as a ÓRealistÓ 16
3. DISCUSSION 18
Teaching Frames and IT-based learning 18
Teachers Representations of Technology and IT-based learning 20
REFERENCES 23
Tables
1. INTRODUCTION
In no other field, except that of industrial production, has the impact
of new information technology been more conspicuous than in the field
of education. The debate, concerning the introduction of computer
technology and access to the Internet in modern education, has been
going on for at least the last 10-15 years. Much of the debate about
the use of information technology in teaching during the last 20 years
has focused on how it could be effectively used and controlled. The
question has always been whether human beings, who are able to create
such sophisticated communication devices could really use them in an
appropriate way and make students benefit from their use.
In this paper we define information technology as the use of modern
communication devices such as the computer and the Internet.
Information technology as compared to earlier technological teaching
brings about specific changes in modern teaching. Kerr (1996) argues
that in contrast with earlier applications of technology devices in
education, for example the radio or the TV, the new information
technology raises two fundamental questions:
(i) It marks a shift away from the traditional concerns of
technologists, and ushers in a period in which the interests of
administrators, parents, teachers and community members come to the
fore.
(ii) Earlier technologies supported the educational status quo, whereas
computer technologies seems to be about more than simply teaching and
learning. Their representation is strongly associated with economics
and employment prospects, success and pride.
It is in the field of education where one can, most clearly, see the
resurgence of conflicts between traditional teaching paradigms and the
increasing expectations of schools to adapt to modernity (Barnes et al.
1996; Papert, 1993; Goodson et al. 1996).
Information technology, explains Chen (1994), differs from the earlier
attempts to ÓtechnologiseÓ schooling in the sense that it aims to be an
intelligence extender and amplifier. The purpose of the Internet, for
example, is to instantly provide the user with most of the information
accumulated by mankind over long periods of time. Immediate on-line
access to the entire Encyclopaedia Britannica through the Internet is
only one small example of the possibilities available.
Ó ...information technology is mainly involved in the social fabric
concerned with the creation, accumulation, preservation, and
distribution
of Exogenic (public) knowledge, and we must bear this in mind when we
want to understand the relationship between knowledge, technology and
education.Ó (Chen, op. cit. pp. 166)
Most studies on information technology in educational settings have
focused on its efficiency in improving teaching (Kristiansen, 1991 &
1992; Bork, 1997; Papert, 1993). Less attention has been paid to its
understanding as a social construct by teachers and students. There are
plenty of studies concerned with the measurement of the attitudes of
teachers and students towards the computer in education, but hitherto
few studies have been concerned with the study of its social
representations in educational settings.
A basic question to be addressed in this paper concerns teachersÕ
social practices of the computer in educational context. We would like
to discuss some of the most influential factors likely to determine
teachers« roles in information technology based learning.
Based on empirical evidence gathered from our own research and from the
study of the literature we would like to focus our discussion on at
least two factors which, we believe, are basic determinants of a
successful use of information technology in educational settings: a)
the communicative interaction processes of learning and b) the social
attitudes of teachers towards the use of the computer in the classroom.
a) Our assertions about the communicative interaction processes in
classroom settings are supported by data gathered within two studies
conducted within the project Computer in School Teaching (CST). In the
first study studentsÕ communicative interactions in front of the
computer were compared to the interaction occurring in other forms of
activities. In the second study we investigated how students
communicate between themselves when working with different types of
software. A basis for the two studies is that social competence, taking
the initiative and creativity are getting more important for managing
the future. Therefore school must emphasise problem solving, meta
cognitive competence and that students in interaction develop
strategies for learning. With this view about essential abilities and
knowledge, interaction and communication are given an increased
importance. Therefore it is essential to a greater extent to reflect
upon the computer as a mean to increased social interaction. By
focusing more on the interaction while using computers we can study how
children share their intellectual experiences with each other. Studies
have shown that the ability to discuss and argument for oneÕs own
opinions can be extraordinarily clear while working in front of the
computer (Crook, 1994; Clements & Nastasi, 1992; Nastasi, Clements &
Battista, 1990; Nastasi & Clements, 1993). In this fostering process
the teachers, of course, play a central role in framing the contexts of
the interaction processes by enhancing studentsÕ initiative taking and
creativity.
b) Professors and teachers are a strategically important group in the
march towards the new information society, hence the importance to
understand not only their technical knowledge about the use of the
computer in education but also the social attitudes supporting their
basic conception of the computer as an artefact of modern teaching. In
a recent study conducted in Jšnkšping, teacher«s social representations
of the computer in classroom teaching have been analysed. We will
briefly introduce the theoretical concept of social representations and
give brief accounts of the findings obtained from the study mentioned.
The computer in education, we believe, is not only a new technological
device with high performance but also a metaphor strongly loaded with
ideological and attitudinal beliefs and misconceptions.
Social representations, a theoretical construct introduced by a French
scholar Moscovici (1976; 1984) in the early sixties in France, aims to
study the socially formed and collectively shared beliefs and ideas
among a group of people towards a specific phenomenon. Social
representations is basically a modern reformulating of Emile Durkheim«s
famous theory of collective representations from the end of the 19th
century. These representations are believed to be socially acquired and
articulated in everyday communication. Social representations are also
supposed to be articulated by people in reference to their cultural
background and heritage. Reality is socially constructed and reshaped
by people according to their fundamental beliefs and cultural
references. To study teachers« social representations of modern
technology is an attempt to understand how these representations are
anchored and objectified in the world of
ideas and metaphors expressed by people in their everyday
communication.
2. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE
2.1. Communicative Interaction in the Classroom
Background of the studies
In Jšnkšping, a city of 110.000 inhabitants in the southern part of
Sweden, a study started in 1995 called Computer in School Teaching. The
students in this project have had opportunity to work with computers
since they were three years old. In the study investigations have been
carried out concerning students work with computers, teachersÕ and
studentsÕ thoughts about computers as an educational tool and a change
in the teacherÕs role. Several studies have focused on childrenÕs
communicative interaction in front of the computer as this is central
for the learning process. It is of great importance for children to be
given as rich an environment as possible to express their thoughts and
verbalise themselves in order to assimilate new knowledge. This
hypothesis is based on the theoretical assumption that the cognitive
capacity and the language ability will be enhanced if children are
given more opportunities for social interaction (Bruner, 1983; 1990;
Vygotsky, 1962; 1978; 1980). By interacting with others the children
learn in time to solve problems by their own. Besides, in interaction,
conflicts occur now and then as the children are confronted by others
with different opinions and knowledge. These conflicts can turn into
discussions to reach a solution. Discussions can force children to
express themselves in a more specified way and to make their thoughts
clear (Crook, 1994; Feuerstein, 1979; 1980).
Students interaction in front of computers and in other activities
In the first study we investigate differences in students quantitative
and qualitative interactions with other school fellows and teachers in
front of the computer as compared to other activities.
33 students, aged 8 have been videotaped in four situations. There are
two kinds of computer activities:
ÐÊa student working with the computer holding the mouse (for this
purpose called the Pilot)
ÐÊa student sitting beside a fellow student who is holding the mouse
(for this purpose called the Co-pilot).
The other two situations are
Ð creative activity
Ð school work
The students verbal and non-verbal interaction with fellow students and
teachers has been studied through videotapes. The studentsÕ interaction
has been studied for a period of five minutes in each of the four
situations. Every interaction that occured was coded and tallied by
means of a coding system inspired by Lee, 1993). The interaction has
been analysed according to four categories.
In the search for a fruitful and distinct analysis we tried many
different ways to analyse the information. After a while we found a
coding scheme that was considered useful, after modification, to
analyse the videotapes. Lees (1993) coding scheme consists of four main
categories to code the interaction. These four main categories have
been divided into sub-categories. Some modifications have been done to
these sub-categories as certain categories have been removed and others
have been added. The type and frequency of the interaction were
determined for the target student. The four main categories are:
A. Task-related interaction
(interaction to find out what the purpose of the task is)
B. Procedure-related interaction
(interaction about how to solve the task)
C. Socio-emotional interaction
(interaction about when students show emotional attitudes)
D. Miscellaneous off-task interaction
The analysis of the video tapes shows that students interact more when
they are working in front of the computer compared with other
activities. No matter if the students are pilot or co-pilot they are
just as much involved in the work. The fact that both the pilot and the
co-pilot both pay equal attention is a state that does not appear in
many other activities.
Procedure-related interaction, which means students are concentrated on
solving the task, occurs most frequently (Table 1). Procedure-related
interaction refers, among other things, to
Ð if the student gives help when other student asked for it
Ð if the student spontaneously gives help
Much of the interaction which occurs within the category
Procedure-related interaction is when the co-pilot gives help without
the pilot asking for it. Another sub-category is Confirmation. An
example of Confirmation is ÓWe must do it like thisÓ. ÓThis way is
good.Ó Confirmation also occurs often from the pilot to the co-pilot
as well as vice versa. Task-related interaction occurs rarely as there
is no need to discuss the task as the software is well known to the
students and they know what to do.
The students work very steadily and are extraordinarily effective in
front of the computer. They are very engaged and take their chance to
cooperate. The fact that the students are helpful, give each other
advices and share their knowledge with others can indicate the co-pilot
is helping the pilot to function on her/his zone of proximal
development while solving the problem or handling the computer. A
disadvantage could be that the pilot does not get time for her/his own
reflection but is governed too much and too soon by the co-pilot. This
could result in that the pilot does not internalise the new knowledge,
but does what she/he is told without really understanding what is
happening. To prevent this the teacher should be in the background to
make clear and facilitate the students cooperation.
From the studentsÕ comments to our results it is obvious they
experience the situation in front of the computer as eventful,
fascinating, fun and meaningful. According to the students they do not
to talk about anything else but the topic for the task because they
might not work in front of the computer as often or as long as they may
in the other activities. Therefore they do not want to waste their time
in front of the computer on things that do not concern the topic.
We found that the teachers had a central role in arranging the work in
front of the computer. The students cooperation is steered among other
things by whether they are allowed to talk. Moreover, the cooperation
is steered by where the computer is located as the location gives more
or fewer opportunities to talk and to get help which can influence the
work. Other things that influence the work is the kind of software the
teacher wants the students to work with. Different kinds of software
function as a source of inspiration for creativity and for discussions.
Students interactions when working with different types of software
In our second study we investigate studentsÕ communication in front of
the computer when they are working with different types of software,
open-ended programs and structured programs.
The sample consists of 66 students in grade 2 (8Ð9 years of age) who
are working together. The students have been videotaped while working
with both open-ended programs and structured programs. 32 video
sequences have been analysed when the students in half of them (16
sequences) are working with open-ended programs and working with
structured programs in the remaining 16 videotapes. These videotapes
have also been analysed for a period of five minutes to study if there
are differences concerning the content in the dialogs according to
which kind of program they are working with.
While video taping students in the first study we found it was rare for
students of this age to work with open-ended programs. For this reason
we had to search hard for classes where students worked with open-ended
programs.
Instruments of analysis
Every video sequence has first been looked at quantitatively which
means that frequencies of words and turn-takings have been counted. We
have identified nine content categories which we use in our analysis of
the studentsÕ discussions. We have especially studied the discussions
as they can clearly demonstrate if the studentsÕ conversations support
their learning and their ability to express themselves. The nine
categories are:
Ą Asserting attitudes to fellow students
Ą Confirming, exclaiming, agreeing
Ą Suggesting
Ą Questioning
Ą Talks related to knowledge
Ą Talks related to computer technique
Ą Adult utterance
Ą Requesting
Ą Miscellaneous off-task interaction
The results from our earlier studies stand and are strengthened by this
study as it shows that students have a lot of interaction with other
students in front of the computer. There are many dialogs and many
discussions concerning the task.
We found differences in the content of the discussions depending on the
kind of software (Table 2). When students worked with open-ended
programs the sub-category ÓTalk related to KnowledgeÓ was the most
frequent in the discussions. This is a great difference compared with
students working with structured programs. The quite high proportion of
ÓTalk related to KnowledgeÓ is constructive as the students has to
verbalise their knowledge while using the computer. This might
contribute to increase intellectual capacity as the students have to
make their thoughts and expressions more stringent. They also discussed
computer technique a great deal while working with open-ended programs.
The students are testing their ability and use of computers more while
working with open-ended programs than while working with structured
programs. This is shown by the great frequency of the sub-category
ÓTalk related to techniqueÓ in open-ended programs. The more frequent
occurrence of ÓConfirmationÓ when using structured programs indicate
that students support each other, but it cannot be characterized as a
cognitive developing conversation .
From our studies of students work in front of the computer we have
thoughts about the reason why teachers mostly let students work with
structured programs (see Discussion).
2.2. Images of Information Technology among Teachers
In our study of teachersÕ social representations of information
technology we are interested in two specific aspects of these
representations. The first one is the everyday representation of the
computer as a typical artefact of modern technology and its image among
teachers. We are furthermore asking the fundamental question whether
enhanced practice of the computer may bring about changes in teachers«
social representations of the information technology. Finally peopleÕs
ideas and beliefs about technology is not only determined by the
artefact itself, e.g. the computer, but mainly by the cultural
attributes of these people. LetÕs briefly develop these ideas a little
more.
* A central objective of the theory of social representations is to
study how scientific knowledge about a certain phenomenon, in this case
information technology, is reflected in the common sense knowledge of
ordinary people. Information technology is a controversial enough
phenomenon to make it very relevant as a theme of research. The
computer assembles all the elements of a teaching device which could
jeopardise the traditional roles of teachers and hence creates both
suspicion and enthusiasm. Its image among ordinary people is surrounded
by many myths and misconceptions. Although the artefacts of modern
information technology are widely distributed among all social classes,
few people really understand their technical finesses or the true
benefits to be gained by their use. Common knowledge and opinions about
information technology are very divergent. Ó How are these diverging
representations reflected among teachers?Ó was one of the question
addressed in this study.
* The acceptance or the rejection of new representations is reported to
be dependent on the cultural attributes people carry through their
entire lives. As Moscovici (1984) stated: ÓNobody«s mind is free from
the effects of the prior conditioning which are imposed by his
representations, language and cultureÓ. In order to be accepted new
representations must be anchored in some pre-existing cultural
foundations. The process by which information technology becomes
anchored in the thought and minds of teachers is thus a major concern
of our study.
In a recent study (Kšnig, 1997) a group of 11 teachers, 8 women and 3
men with an average age of 40 years and a teaching experience of 15
years, were interviewed in depth about their social representations of
the use of the computer in education. The results were analysed in
accordance with a phenomenological method in order to extract the basic
categories of thinking expressed by these teachers. The results of this
study show that teachers« statements about the use of the computer in
schooling could be essentially grouped into three basic categories.
There are teachers who express a) a pessimistic view of the use of the
computer in the classroom; teachers who express b) an optimistic view
and finally; teachers who have c) a realistic conception of the
entrance of the computer as an inevitable teaching device. These
different categories are not exclusive between themselves. When
speaking about the use of the computer one and the same teacher may
express different views about the computer which could be categorised
as both optimistic, realistic and pessimistic.
We will here briefly present some of the ideas expressed by teachers in
the course of the interviews and make some comments about them.
Teacher as a ÓPessimistÓ
Under this category we could assemble those teachers who, for different
reasons, believe that the computer constitutes an encroachment on their
traditional role as teachers. Basically these teachers have a
fundamental suspicion toward the computer. They see it as an
uncontrollable device which they could easily do without.
Eva: I was very much afraid of it. And I believe most of the children
were too. It will destroy something. Well! I think it is just something
new that«s all!
Inger: I think we will lose much of the contact human beings are used
to. iI is something I am definitely not looking forward to.
The views expressed by these teachers show both a dreadful attitude
towards the computer but also fear for the technological advances as
well. From the interviews we could read that they are afraid of
organisational changes in school and see themselves as guardians of the
basic values of schooling. They are also quite reluctant to acknowledge
any intrinsic pedagogical value to the software they have to use.
Barbro: Actually, they are of no good pedagogical value (the
computers)...if you take into account what they are believed to
achieve. The kind of knowledge they bring about in school is of no
value at all. Jeopardy (a TV-game) knowledge, that«s what we call it!
There is also the human dimension, the consequences of information
technology on human relations which scares teachers.
Inger: We lose a lot of human contact if we only rely upon information
technology. This is really something I am not looking forward to!
A point of view supported by Josefin, who says:
Josefin: The computer should not be allowed to take over like the
pocket calculator did. Students must know how to use the multiplication
tables before we put a pocket calculator in their hands...They have to
know how to calculate on paper as well... It ought not to be
exaggerated. Elementary knowledge must be firmly planted in the minds
of children before we introduce them to the computer.
Some teachers feel they are more or less obliged to comply with the
inevitable development of computer based learning in schools. They feel
compelled to keep up with the rest of the community, even though they
are not necessarily convinced of the benefit of the computer.
Barbro: In the meantime it is unbelievable that this mess has been
enforced upon us...that everybody is forced to buy a computer, just in
order to keep up with others. No! It is wrong, I believe. ItÕs quite an
expensive investment after all...and many people think it is...they
certainly would like to invest their money in something else. If
parents think they are forced to have a computer at home, otherwise
their children will not succeed in school, then there is something
wrong with the system, I believe.
For some teachers the computer inhibits studentsÕ initiative taking and
creativity. As an example two teachers, Barbro and Hedvig, bring as
evidence the use of the computer in aesthetics teaching.
Hedvig: Human beings have a tremendous need to express themselves
aesthetically, creatively...it is not fully creative to take out
material from the computer. One can easily see that it is a picture
from the computer that one is showing
Barbro: Well! This is also a question of aesthetics. The fact they find
pictures in the computer instead of painting them themselves. YouÕll
lose something and it is free creativity.
Teacher as an ÓOptimistÓ
An optimistic teacher generally shows a ÓtoughÓ attitude towards the
computer. He/she believes that the task is to master the new technology
in the same way that one has had to master the ability to drive a car.
The problem for this category of teachers is then, not so much the
computer itself, as the fact that they do not feel confident enough
with the technology itself. For the optimist the computer is a
challenge. The optimists are very few and are found mostly among the
male population and in teachers occupying a leading position.
Gustav: Technology force you to show blind obedience toward the
computer. Just like that! The nice feeling that you can communicate in
the way I have just described (before). It sounds natural, enormously
attractive and exciting.
The same teacher, Josefin, who previously expressed fears about the
computer, stated now her fascination for the new technology.
Josefin: I have always been interested in the technical development in
this area.
Other teachers see in the computer a teaching device that could help
them in difficult situations where they have to deal with students with
learning difficulties.
Cecilia: I mean, earlier when I had to work with children with motor
skills difficulties, I used to use tthe type writer. That was all I
had. Now with the computer itÕs much easier.
The computer is seen by the optimists as a mean to enhance social
contacts.
Cecilia: Nowadays they (the students) never sit alone. They usually sit
in pairs two and two. We have learned from those specialists that this
thing (the computer) is good. Children sit together and discuss
solutions to the problems they are faced with, although it is in the
front of the computer.
Optimistic teachers consider the computer as a device to allow greater
freedom for the individual. The only restrictive factor is the
financial side. However, freedom of choice is greatly enhanced with the
computer.
Gustav: I think so! Yes I think..from this point of view it is a good
thing, we break the barriers. The frontiers, which earlier constituted
hindrances, are now erased...even the linguistic ones. To be able to
communicate, as for example in English or....in whatever other world
language. It must be seen as an enrichment.
As we said earlier the opitimists are few compared to the pessimists
but, on the other hand, they are more convinced of their arguments and
beliefs.
Teachers as a ÓRealistÓ
Realists among teachers express the point of view that the computer is
an unavoidable tool for modern teaching. In a recent evaluation study
in Sweden about 80 per cent of the interviewed teachers consider that
the computer is necessary in school teaching.
Cecilia: ...I must allow my students to meet the computer. I insist on
this even though I donÕt really want it.... I hate all new forms of
summons to meetings, all the reports, letters and now even private
letters written on the computer...I have to accept that this is the
future. ThatÕs how it is. I can really see that thecomputer will
improve things. The computer is here to stay and we have to live with
it. ThatÕs what I feel today!
Some other teachers see advantages in the computer. It is considered as
a natural aspect of everyday life. Why then not try to assimilate it in
everyday schooling.
David: It doesn«t matter to me if I succeed in finding information or
if my students find it on the Internet or on a CD-Rom, or for that
matter in a dictionary or in a newspaper. It makes no difference to
me. That«s that!
Thus, realistic teachers consider the computer as a natural consequence
of the paradigm shift in society. However they would not like to see
the computer as a new discipline or an autonomous subject in school
teaching. In their conception, the realists conceive the computer as a
tool for evolutionary changes, rather than a revolutionary device.
Agneta: I would like to see it as an instrument and as a mean of
assistance. It should not be allowed to take to much prominent place or
position in either society or school.
The so-called realists are mostly found among female teachers. They
seem to have accepted the computer as a device for helping to realise
modern teaching, although they are not completely convinced of it«s
perfectibility.
Cecilia: The world of the computer has arrived, you have to accept it.
It must have been the same story when aunts and uncles were faced with
the car and the train and nothing was impossible. The computer is here
and we must accept it and manage it.
Eva: I had the same feeling (fear) at the beginning but then I thought
why (laugh) canÕt we give ourselves time? To learn how to handle it,
just like we did with the micro-oven.
Most of the teachers interviewed above show an ambivalent attitude to
the computer. Whether they are pessimists, optimists or realists they
all share common complex representations of the computer. In their
utterances and discourses one can easily discern attitudes that are
deeply rooted in their concerns about the future of education. Both
pessimists and optimists express ideas and put forward thoughts about
the computer which are future oriented. They know what their roles are
now, but certainly not how these roles may be changed in the future
when the use of the computer is generalised.
3. DISCUSSION
In this section we would like to discuss our findings and reflect about
the future of information technology in educational settings.
Teaching Frames and IT-based learning
While carring out through the second study we looked for teachers whose
students worked with open-ended programs as most of them worked with
structured programs. One reason for working with structured programs
could be that open-ended programs do not seem to be effective from the
perspective of learning. When students in Sweden are doing their fifth
and ninth year in school they are given a national test. Consequently
teachers want their students to perform well. This kind of frame
factors can be one reason for using structured programs to a greater
extent than if there were no important test. The computer is in this
case used to make learning more effective Ð but not to change the
learning material or the view of what knowledge is.
By letting the students work with structured programs it seems though
they learn basic skills, which are also measurable. This makes the
teacher feel confident. The knowledge the students receive while
working with open-ended programs can appear many years later. From this
can be deduced that the teacher cannot always be aware of the results
when students discuss and verbalise their knowledge. The teacher does
not see the result of her work together with the students.
Another experience is that the use of the computer mostly offers an
alternative way to reach goals for the instruction which have been set
long before the computer was invented. This can be exemplified by the
teachers using structured programs that are based on a view of pedagogy
that ruled 30Ð40 years ago. These programs often have the character of
task to fill in the right answer. This is an expression of knowledge
seen as something the students should reproduce. It does not leave any
room for the students own solutions, for their thoughts or
possibilities to try out their own ideas. Students learn more about how
to use computers, to handle a keyboard, mouse and to go in and out of
programs.
Another reason for using structured programs can be that teachers are
not familiar enough with the use of computers and therefore are not
able to use the computer for activities they otherwise would not be
able to do. However using structured programs need not indicate that
teachers work from an old view of pedagogy such as reproducing
knowledge. It happens that teachers who in their instruction use a
progressive style of teaching and give their students the resonsibility
to work on their own using structured programs that are not typical of
their pedagogy. We found that this is an expression for the teachers
wavering about how to best make use of the computer. This teacher needs
carefully prepared support from the head of the school and from
administrators as well as training in how to use computers in the
classroom.
We have also noticed resistance on the past of the teachers to using
computers in the classroom as they cannot see what is to be gained. The
question is entitled if many teachers do not experience that they gain
anything from using the computer but just that it causes them trouble.
If they get a feeling of increased demands concerning the planning of
the instruction to use the computer in the best way, they might not be
too enthusiastic about this tool. If the computer and software as well
take a lot of time to learn and to avoid problems, it might not be so
helpful in the classroom as in commercial life.
Another reason for why many teachers do not use computers in the
classroom can be related to the fact that they realise it needs another
kind of educational conception. Teachers might not want to change their
view about education, at least not yet, but may have a changing view
upon how to educate students.
In Sweden we have a huge commitment to equip schools with computers and
to educate the teachers. Municipalities have to make a plan to realise
this IT-commitment. In addition, every school and preschool has to make
its own plan for IT. In this way all teachers are supposed to be
engaged in this commitment to IT which is looked upon as essential for
the country.
The realisation of the IT commitment is carried out in many different
ways in municipalities and in schools. There is a correlation between
how the teacher uses computers in the classroom and the way the head of
the school supports them. The support from the school administration
can, for instance, just exist of buying computers and a minimal
computer education of the staff. Some school administrations
concentrates on training a person responsible for the computers in
school and others put their money into computers, training about
computers and pedagogical training of teachers to discuss and learn
more about use of computers in the classroom. In some schools all staff
are trained and in other schools the staffÕs interest settle who will
be trained.
One reason for teachers resistance to computers can be traced to the
decision from above to use computers. It is not something that stems
from those who will carry out the commitment to IT.
Teachers Representations of Technology and IT-based learning
Teaching is traditionally considered as a rather conservative
profession. In spite of all scientific theories on education, most
teachers perceive teaching to be a social practice and an art, rather
than a science. As an art it is embedded in the cultural and moral
values prevailing in society. In every society, teachers are assigned
the role of principal guardians of the basic ethical, political and
ideological values in that society. Sociologically speaking their
social representations of teaching constitute a securing of barriers
against undesired change and cultural subversion (Bourdieu et al.,
1971). Considering these facts, it is then easy to understand why
changes imposed upon teachers often engender conflicts between old and
new values of teaching. In our attempt to generalise the application of
modern technology in education we seldom take into account the
difficulty people have in accepting new arguments compared with
previous representations. This problem has been stressed by Moscovici,
when he writes:
Ó All the systems of classification, all the images and all the
description
which circulate within a society, even the scientific ones, imply a
link with
previous systems and images, a stratification in the collective memory
and a
reproduction in the language, which invariably reflects past knowledge
and
which creates the bounds of current informationÓ (1984, p 10)
A strong argument for the aggressive marketing of information
technology to schools and teachers is the alleged superiority of the
computer, its unbiased and neutral character (Papert, 1993). Most
teachers do not, however, perceive it as such, and in fact feel quite
suspicious towards it. The computer and the Internet challenge some
fundamental Swedish educational principles, i.e. the ideal of equality
of opportunity. From this encounter one can discern the emergence of
conflicts which we believe are necessary to understand if we wish to
succeed in adapting education to modernity without reducing its
importance as a bearer of the cultural heritage.
As demonstrated by Bourdieu and Passeron (1971) the most important task
of education is the reproduction of culture. In that sense, the aim of
education is to maintain and reproduce the basic cultural values of a
given society. Teachers all over the world are, consciously or
unconsciously, trained with that in mind. The reproduction of culture
in a teaching context is also an act of maintaining and transmitting
what is agreed as the cultural realities of a given society.
We have reason to believe that teachers are firmly attached to the
conception that teaching is primarily an act of communication. In the
use of paper and pencil, and in the course of conversation between
teachers and students, by arguments and discussions, reality is
constantly maintained and reshaped within the classroom.
As Berger and Luckmann (1966) explain: ÓThe most important vehicle of
reality-maintenance is conversationÓ. Transmitting culture to new
generations is heavily dependent on verbal communication, an efficient
tool a teacher can rely upon for the fulfilment of his/her task. To
what extent the generalised use of the computer in the classroom
constitutes a threat to the teacher's verbal communication with
students is a question that is constantly asked by teachers. Postman
observed this kind of problem some 20 years ago. In Schooling as a
conservative activity he explains the march of modern schooling into a
collective media environment:
ÓEvery society is held together by certain modes and patterns of
communication which control the kind of society it is. One may call
them information systems, codes, message networks, or media of
communication.Taken together they set and maintain the parameters of
thought and learning within a culture... The information environment
gives specific directions to the kinds of ideas, social attitudes,
definition of knowledge, and intellectual capacities that will emergeÓ
(in Barnes et al, 1996, pp. 183).
Maybe we should try to understand the problems faced by teachers in the
light of PostmanÕs ideas. Confronted with the emergence of a completely
new teaching environment, teachers may react with more conservative
attitudes to the changes brought about by the extensive use of modern
information technology devices. In fact some of PostmanÕs ideas support
teachers' reluctance to engage fully in the process of modernisation.
They see their role as guardians of the intrinsic values of education,
and a balancing force against the enforced changes brought about by the
extensive introduction of new information technology in education.
If, despite all the propaganda and the diverse political and
ideological arguments, we have not succeeded in understanding the
teacher«s basic attitudes to the new information technology, then a
great amount of human and capital resources is at risk of having been
invested in vain. The information technology challenges humanity's
capability of developing, in the age of cyberspace, new forms of social
bonds through the creation of what LŹvy (1997) calls "a collective
intelligence".
Our final conclusion concerns the position of teachers in the
overwhelming development of computer-based teaching in the future. We
believe that we have to consider teacherÕs images of the computer in
the teaching process very seriously. There is otherwise risk to se the
often claimed computer revolution in the classroom as not merely
another remake of the introduction of the TV in teaching settings. The
computer will not mean more for the renewal of modern pedagogy than TV
or Radio.
However, and the Swedish experience shows it, if teachers are given
enough time and good opportunities to familiarise themselves with the
computer, they will certainly understand how to use it in a way that
will be beneficial to students, and indeed to the teachers themselves.
REFERENCES
Barnes, S. & Strate, L. (1996). The educational implications of the
computer: A media ecology critique. The New Jersey Journal of
Communication, 4, Nr 2.
Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social construction of reality Ð
A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London: Penguin.
Bork, A. (1997). The future of computers and learning. (Unpublished
manuscript).
Bourdieu, P. & Passeron, J. C. (1971). La reproduction. Paris: Edit. de
Minuit.
Bruner, J. (1983). ChildÕs Talk. Learning to use language. New York,
NJ: Oxford University Press.
Bruner, J. &ÊHaste, H. (Eds.) (1990). Making sense. London: Routledge.
Chen, D. (1994). An epistemic analysis of the interaction between
knowledge, education, and technology. In Barrett, E. (Edt.):
Sociomedia: multimedia, hypermedia, and the social construction of
knowledge (pp. 161Ð173). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Clements, D.H. & Nastasi, B.K. (1992). Computers and early childhood
education. In Gettinger, M. Elliott, S.N. & Kratochwill, T.R. (Eds.),
Preschool and early childhood treatment directions. (pp 187Ð246).
Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the collaborative experience of
learning. London:ÊRoutledge.
Feuerstein, R. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers.
The learning potential assessment device, theory, instruments, and
technniques. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Feuerstein, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment. An intervention program
for cognitive modifiability. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Goodson, I. F. & Marshall Mangan, J. (1996). Computer literacy as
ideology. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 17, Nr 1.
Kerr, S. T. (1996). Visions of Sugarplums: The future of technology,
Education, and the schools. In Kerr. T. (Edt.), Technology and the
future of schooling (pp. 1Ð27). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kristiansen, R. (1991). Consensus on computers in education: do
teachers, parents and pupils share the same expectations and attitudes
towards computers? Education & Computing.
Kristiansen, R. (1992). Evolution or revolution? Changes in teacher
attitudes toward computers in education, 1970-1990. Education &
Computing.
Kšnig, P. (1997). Sociala representationer om informationsteknik och
datoranvŠndande i grundskolan. (Master Thesis.). (Social
representations of information technology and of the computer in
schools). Jšnkšping, Sweden: School of Education and Communication.
Lee, M. (1993). Gender, group composition, and peer interaction in
computer-based cooperative learning. Journal of educational computing
resarch, 9 (4) 549-577.
LŽvy, P. (1997). L«intelligence collective Ð Pour une anthropologie du
cyberspace. Paris: La DŽcouverte.
Moscovici, S. (1976). La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Paris:
Presses Universitaires de France.
Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In
Farr, R. M. & Moscovici, S. (Edts.), Social representations (pp. 3Ð69).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nastasi, B. K. Clements, D. H. &ÊBattista, M. T. (1990).
Social-cognitive interactions, motivation, and cognitive growth in Logo
programming and CAIÊproblem- solving environments. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82, 1.
Nastasi, B. K. & Clements, D. H. (1993). Motivational and Social
outcomes of cooperative computer educational environments. Journal of
Computing in Childhood Education, 4 (1).
Papert, S. (1993). The Children«s machine - Rethinking school in the
age of computer. Harper-Collins Publishers.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. London: Harvard University
Press.
Vygotskij, L. S. (1980). Psykologi och dialektik. HydŽn, L. C. (Red.)
Stockholm: Norstedt.
Table 1.
Frequency of students interaction in four situations.
________________________________________________________________________
Table 2.
Distribution on sub-categories between open-ended programs and
structured programs in the category Discussion.
________________________________________________________________________
The interview data reproduced in this report have been collected,
under the guidance of one of the authors of this article, by Per Kšnig
whithin the frame of a MasterÕs Thesis in Education,.