“What changes in language are being forced by these new technologies? ~ Neil Postman

Recently, Lee Kuan Yew suggested that Singaporeans should learn American English because of the rapid spread of that version of English due to globalization. This is for a country that was once ruled by the British. I believe that American English has become even more pervasive today because the Internet. Most often the language we used is decided by the default language set by our computers. All too often it is American English. While we hear it spoken for years on TV, it is on the Internet that we really begin to use it because if we spelled it the British way, we will see a red underlining which will disappear only if we re-spell it using the American spelling. Even for Internet marketeers, they would be wise to follow the American spelling on their websites for “anti-ageing” products will not appear as often on search engines as “anti-aging” products. That is the power of SEO.

The above is related to the fifth question that was asked by Neil Postman with regards to the use of technology. Has ICT made changes to language?

With the widespread use of ICT, certain terms have become replacements for everyday English. When we search for information, we say “google it”. When we say this, we accept the impact of the giant search engine on our lives. It conveys  sense of the instantaneous availability of information. This gives rise to the question as to how we value information that is so easily obtained? Has the easy accessibility to information also blurred the difference between information and knowledge? Do more of us think that the knowledgeable man is the same as the one who has Google at his finger tips?

One of my favorite books

Has the meaning of “education” also changed even more profoundly with the rise of ICT? To be sure, the meaning of education has changed with the Industrial Revolution. This is itself proof that meanings change with technology use. It has shifted to a greater emphasis to the acquisition of skills that is useful at the workplace. In other words, when we say “education”, we actually mean training for employable skills. Has this worsen with ICT? What is the meaning of “education” when it is prefixed with “online”? In fact, often it is now usually termed as “online learning”. “Education” has been dropped. Why? Or in the Facebook era, what does it mean to “like” a post? Or to be a “friend”.

What other terms can you think of that has its meaning changed (or may change) due to the pervasiveness of ICT? What is the impact of this to (dare I say the word?) education? Share your thoughts.

“What new problems might be created by solving the original problem?” – Neil Postman

This is the third in Neil Postman’s series of questions for anyone who wants to introduce a new technology. Often technology is seen as the savior of much of the world’s ills. However, in more recent times we have become more acutely aware of the problems that have arisen as a result of the introduction of new technologies into the world. Some of these new technologies have made it already threatened our own existence. And we are not only talking about nuclear missiles here.

The trick for us is to discern what that technological genie is going to be doing once it has been released from its bottle. Too often we cannot put the genie back in. For this reason we have to do our very best to try and understand the impact of any technology before we unleash it to the world. As I have written and mentioned before, in this regard we have a lot to learn from the Amish people and their approach and attitude towards technology. Far from being Luddites, I believe they have tried their best to have a proper conversation with technology which is a lot more than can be said of many of us in the developed and developing world. The Amish people try to pre-empt problems that may arise from the use of technology. Those involve in education should adopt the same attitude.

For schools, the introduction of ICT for educational purposes can create problems within the school environment. Bear in mind, this is in addition to the fact that the jury is still out about the positive impact of ICT use in schools. One of these problems is that the introduction of ICT for education can be a distraction from the goals of education itself. many have even come to believe that acquisition of software and ICT hardware skills have become one of the goals of education. They may not announce these as goals but in practice that is what it means. I have on a few occasions already mentioned in this blog how schools teach software to their students in the computer labs s if these students will be Adobe Photoshop  or some other specialists of some other software. How many have stopped to ponder if it is the business of schools to teach students specific software? Not recognizing this means that schools will overburden themselves on wrong priorities and worse, think they are making great progress on educational goals. The real problems related to education that can be addressed in schools may not be addressed in such an environment as there are many things that become distractions.

Teachers already have enough problems making learning meaningful and effective. If ICT is brought into the classroom without careful thought and preparation, there is a real danger that it will add to the problems of designing and managing effective lessons. Teachers become more stressed out if ICT use becomes a requirement when they are ill-prepared to do so. This was the experience even in Singapore. When the MasterPlan for IT in Education (MPITE) was introduced, there was quite a number of teachers who decided to retire early to avoid having to meet the “recommended” dosage of ICT in the classroom. They know all too well that what has been recommended has a tendency of becoming a “requirement” soon enough. The pressure to adapt to the use of ICT  tools can lead to a negative reaction to ICT use for education

ICT for education has often been touted as the way to get students to learn through collaboration, personal and group research and inquiry and make learning meaningful such that students become life-ling learners. But seriously, if the only ICT adaptation to education that occurs in the classroom is the kind that only re-emphasizes rote-learning and mechanical operations only, then there is only a pretense at trying to achieve those goals. Unprepared teachers will resort to ICT that only repeat what they have been doing all their teaching lives, albeit in an electronic form. It does not matter if they use a software found on a CDROM or on an online platform. The way the teaching and learning is done is still very traditional. In fact, it can easily be further compounded with ICT.

The introduction of ICT on a mass scale for education can also lead to a problem of high maintenance costs, which will then be passed on to the consumer either through higher taxes or higher school fees. Computers need to be repaired regularly, costs of maintaining printers and their ink or cartridges will also rocket as the paperless classroom is still a long way to go despite the introduction of ICT. Will this lead to a greater divide in education between that for the rich and the poor? In Indonesia, we see the divide getting bigger as privately-owned schools which cater to the higher income families try to boast an ICT infrastructure within the school. It is an irony of sorts that the schools for the rich who can already afford the computers in their homes are getting computers in the schools while the poor are not likely to see any for their use both in the home and the schools. Even in ICT-rich Singapore schools, the Minister of Education has had to fend off parental worries that member schools of the FutureSchools@Singapore will be out of reach of lower income families.

ICT in schools is often described as an “enabler”. But many forget that ICT in schools can also be a “disabler”. For this reason, conversations like this, must continue, to help those responsible to draw up better plans for ICT usage in schools. It should also continue so schools will continuous check and -re-check what they are doing with ICT to see that it does not become a “disabler”.

“Whose problem is it?” ~ Neil Postman

This is the next question that Postman posed when considering why a new technology is to be introduced. After answering “what is the problem to which this technology is a solution”, Neil Postman wants us to identify the real owner of the problem. This is important because by seeing this we will realize whether we are trying to solve our problems or that of someone else?

Let’s look at virtual environments. Why are virtual environments created for schools? As explained in my previous post, I do not think that such virtual environments are important for schools. I believe that the fact that it was pushed to schools shows that there is a problem but it is not that of the schools. It is that of the software industries. They want to create a market for them to sell their products. It is largely a problem for the sales managers and their salesmen. Not for schools. For this reason, school teachers and administrators must learn to see through the hype, or sales pitches. Do schools really need them?

As mentioned in my previous posts, ICT is also often introduced to schools to lend an aura of prestige and progressiveness to the schools. For example, one reason why Singapore’s schools are considered world class is the ubiquitous presence of ICT equipment. In Indonesia, the surest way to lend a school an air of “international” quality is to promote the availability of computers in the school. Never mind if in both cases, rote learning and mechanical operations are the order of learning in the schools.

Whose problem is it that there is a need for such prestige? Does the prestige affect the teaching and learning process in schools? Quite obviously, it doesn’t. What it does affect is the image of the school. This is important for the owners of the schools, the parents of the students and the student themselves. What it does give to all three groups is bragging rights. For the owners of such schools, it means that they hope bragging about the introduction of ICT will bring about more “customers” for the school. For the parents, it assuages their fears about not giving the best for their children’s future. And for the students themselves, they can brag that they come from a “technologically sophisticated” school.

Whose problem is it also that schools are expected to use ICT to teach students the so-called 21st century skills like collaboration and problem-solving? Are students and teachers supposed to be test pilots of every new technology? Does this come under the ambit of the schools? Where is the line drawn with regards to what is considered to be suitable as part of a school’s goals? School teachers and administrators need to ask these questions so they do not become saddled with other people’s problems. Schools as they are, are already crammed with all kinds of new initiatives to overcome all of society’s ills. Currently everybody’s agenda has become the schools’ agenda. A more discerning approach can help to reduce the overload that is happening in schools and bring back some semblance of sanity.