Three stories from BBC in the context of recently published PISA research report.

1. School technology struggles to make an impact

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34174795

2. Computers 'do not improve' pupil results, says OECD

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34174796

3. Too much technology 'could lower school results'

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-34252598

My Observations:

Whenever I read such articles (in popular media or in more academic forums), my conviction become stronger that there are no short cuts in life: improvement takes consistent efforts and long-term commitment.

Let me explain. Any technology tend to raise hopes and expectations. Probably when first humans discovered method of igniting fire, they might have thought a magical tool that could solve many of their problems.

Since stone-age, technology has played important role in human life: be it sharp stone projectiles, stone knives or method of igniting fire, technology give power of manipulation and thus tend to raise hopes and expectations that it can solve other problems as well. That’s natural to seek application of technology in wider context. However, what we sometime failed to realise that different context and activities may have different demands and technology successfully employed in one context may not be successful (even disaster) in different context.

Similar thing happened to information and communication technologies (ICT). When ICT revolution started in 1970s, people thought it can solve many problems. People were right! ICT proved great technology in the sectors which require a lot of routine tasks to accomplish, such as cash register at sales counters, making pay rolls, keeping accounts, organising and searching data and doing complex calculations. In all these sectors computers were employed to perform pre-defined computing tasks and computer are best at it after all they are computer!

However, business of teaching and learning, like other human sciences are different. Here one cannot run algorithms to accomplish pre-define tasks of learning. I have constructivist leanings and I believe learning is product of person’s cognitive processes situated and informed by particular social context. This human agency is vital element in education. Hence, to expect that technology can replace human agency in education is extremely misplaced expectation. We cannot expect that learning would happen automatically by just placing computers in classrooms.

Here is it important to distinguish what I call navigational skills and other skills. My four-year old son can open games apps on a tablet since he was two-year old and before anyone told him. He regularly opens and play games thoroughly enjoying his toy. Perhaps in few days he may open google and search for new games (he already have basic literacy skills and can read and write simple words). This is learning of navigational skills in computers and no doubt valuable in its own respect. Thanks to user-friendly graphical interface that makes it possible for young learners to explore through series of trial and errors.

However, to assume that navigational skills will automatically lead to other and higher-order skills is erroneous and too simplistic view. My son need a rich social environment to learn a range of social and cognitive skills that in totality will form his learning experiences. Here computer can act as an important tool which can help extending his experience beyond his immediate social environment and connect with wider world.

Computer cannot and should not replace or undermine value of rich social environment. Otherwise we will be running the risk of producing generation who may lack holistic educational experience and at best confused about their role in society.