Will Computers Dehumanize
Education?
Many educators worry that computers may
dehumanize the quintessentially human process of education. The gravest threat
to man’s well-being now as in generations past, is not the machine qua machine
but those persons and institutions that applaud and support a mechanistic
approach to human affairs. I chose dehumanization in preference to other
widespread concerns such as inequality of access to computers, socially harmful
misuse of computers, or relinquishing control of education to a technical elite
because it seemed at once more nebulous, and hence difficult to pin down, and
more momentous, implicating more fundamental values. The use of computers in
primary and secondary education, I think, their use will de-emphasize human
exchange and the forms of knowledge that go with that. For instance, to use
computers in the teaching of reading and writing is akin to a doctor
prescribing poison for a dying patient. Students need human contact; they need
to hear human voices. They need teachers.
Since most fears of dehumanization are
about what may happen, the best we can do is to make plausible inferences. We
can reason by analogy from what has happened in similar situations to what may
happen when computers are used in schools. We can look for present signs of
changes that may represent early signs of worse to come. And we can examine the
logic and plausibility of the reasons advanced in favor of the likelihood and
fearsomeness of various dangers.
I am worried mainly about some distinct possibilities that I
considered dehumanizing.
·
Children may withdraw from other people and from society.
·
The teacher-student relationship may break down.
·
The teaching of important human values may be jeopardized.
The use of computes in education may
lead children to withdraw from people and interact with computers instead.
Students’ attention and interest will then become centered on computers,
estranging them from peers, teachers, and family. The use of computers in
school could lead to social isolation. Children who work at computers much of
the day may be deprived of time and opportunity to learn social skills. In
addition, children who are socially awkward may find social interactions less
rewarding than activities with computers and therefore avoid them. Computers
offer people a new compromise between loneliness and fear of intimacy. Children
could also withdraw from social interaction because they are so impressed by
the power of computers that they come to prefer them to humans.
Who would be harmed if children withdrew
from social interactions for any of these reasons? The children who withdrew
would lose the benefits of socializing. Social support
plays a vital part in maintaining psychological well-being and even health and
longevity. How likely is it that students would
withdraw this way? Some students already show a preference for working with
computers. For instance, students in one computer education program are quoted
by saying they liked to use computers because: “My mistakes aren’t
embarrassing,” “It doesn’t talk back,” “It doesn’t yell at me,” “It calls on me
every time”. One of the attractions of computers for these youngsters seems to
be that computers are less socially demanding than teachers.
We know that computers are used in
different ways in schools. Some computer applications are highly social, like
working together to produce the school newspaper. In contrast, other computer
applications—like educational games, drill and practice programs, programming,
and word processing—are mainly used by individual students who work alone at a
computer. Therefore, using computers in school may lead to social isolation.
Some new ways of using computers, such
as distance learning and virtual schools threaten to reduce direct social
interaction drastically. Although this analysis does not entirely resolve
concern about social isolation, it suggests some key characteristics of
computer use that make this concern more plausible: the amount of time students
spend with computers, how much of this time they spend in individual work, how
much social interaction is constrained when using computers, and the quality of
these social interactions (to the extent this can be appraised). As these
indicators worsen, concerns about the student-teacher relationship should rise;
as they improve, concerns should ease. Moreover, there is a risk that some
students who spend a great deal of time working on computers may be harmed, and
the risk would spread if the use of computers in schools expands markedly while
nothing is done to guard against this danger.
Computers threaten the educational
benefits of the human relationship between student and teacher. They fear that
computers may displace teachers from their respected place at the hub of
classroom activity. Whereas teachers now serve as the social and intellectual
leaders and the ultimate arbiters of both academic standards and standards of
good conduct, they may be relegated to less powerful roles becoming mere
facilitators, attendants to the computer. Will the student-teacher relationship
be harmed by computerization of schooling? Why should we care if it is? We take
up the second question first.
Educators concerned about the student-teacher
relationship say we should care because the human face of teaching is
irreplaceable. Although computers may succeed in some limited aspects of
teaching, such as in developing skills and conveying knowledge, they fail in
the social aspects that are most crucial to the growth of human beings.
Teachers motivate students to learn, guide their learning, and advise them on
academic and social decisions. Teachers serve as role models for students. For
less-advantaged children, teachers may be the only models of well educated
persons they encounter. Except for parents, teachers are often the adults who
know children best. Teachers serve as a social and emotional bridge for
children in their passage from the intimate world of the family to the impersonal
public world. They are the first representatives of society at large that a
child encounters frequently enough to get to know them as human beings. And,
importantly, this first relationship with adult authority outside the family is
centered on learning.
A less obvious reason to be concerned is
loss of educational accountability. Teachers serve as the human face of a
school that can at times seem like an inhuman bureaucracy. When parents or
children have questions or problems at school, a teacher is usually the first
person they turn to for answers and help. Where computers are responsible for
teaching and evaluation; to whom to questioners turn? Even though people build
computer systems, parents and children have no way to reach computer system
designers. If schools replace teachers with computers, we are left with a less
accountable system of education.
What reason do we have to suspect that
the use of computers in schools might undermine the student-teacher
relationship? To the extent that computers free students from dependence on
teachers, they diminish the teacher’s importance in the student’s life. Also
students might lose respect for teachers if they saw teachers as less competent
and trustworthy than computers. Many teachers worry that their ineptness with
computers will cause students to lose respect for them. Children view computers
as more like teachers than books, videos, toys, and other educational
materials, and thus that computers could actually be serious rivals for
teachers in students’ eyes.
How seriously at risk is the
student-teacher relationship? At the present time computers are used so little,
for such a limited range of teaching tasks, and so much under the control of
the teacher, that the risk seems remote. But if schools ever do begin to
substitute computers for teachers then student-teacher relationships will be
seriously threatened. For the present, the key indicators of risk to the
student-teacher relationship seem to be: reduced exposure of students to
teachers, less favorable student perceptions of teachers, erosion of the
importance of the role of the teacher, extent of role conflict between
computers and teachers, reduced satisfaction of teachers and students with
teaching, and lack of teacher control over the use of computers.
For most students and teachers, the
student-teacher relationship does not appear to be in any imminent danger from
computers. Computers may strain students’ relationships with teachers whose
computer competence is low, especially if they teach math, science, or other
subjects where students except them to use computers.
When students know more about computers and use them more fluently than the
teacher, the traditional image of the teacher as the expert in the subject is
more difficult to sustain. But I think this is good challenge for teachers’
community.
Some educators fear that computers will
interfere with the teaching of values. Computers are inherently incapable of
teaching values. Computers are designed to solve problems that can be codified
in precise rules, and are therefore inherently unsuited for dealing with value
questions. Computers will cause us to see codified rules as the model for all
true knowledge and lead us to abandon efforts to teach and learn about values.
Schools that use computers widely may give less weight to value-laden content
like social studies, Islamiat, ethics and literature
and to goals that cannot be expressed computationally, like judgment,
intuition, creativity, or basic postulates. Computes will weaken the implicit
teaching of values that take places as part of day-to-day life in classrooms
when students share, take turns, listen, show respect for others, and reconcile
conflicts with peers. Students glued to computers will face fewer value-laden
situations. Also, using computers could change the nature of classroom
activities, focusing them more on technical matters and less on people and
deeds, and therefore leaving school activities poorer in moral content. Computers
may implicitly teach questionable values. For instance, playing games with
serious subjects on the computer may lead students to feel less responsibility
for the real consequences of their actions.
Serious harm could result if computers
do jeopardize the teaching of values. Widespread failure to acquire basic
social and moral values would widen and worsen social conflict and might
overload basic institutions like the courts. Failure to sustain these value would break centuries-old cultural traditions
and introduce social and institutional instabilities whose consequences would
be impossible of foresee. Most teaching and learning done with computers is
technical or practical rather than humanistic. The explicit teaching of values
already receives much less emphasis today than formerly, and the implicit
teaching of values could easily slip away because it is all done off the
official curricular books. Excessive use of the computer that leads students
and teachers to focus on narrowly technical learning at the expense of more
value-laden goals and content raises the risk of this form of dehumanization.
In my opinion, none of these risks is
widespread now, and none of them poses as grave or tangible a threat to
students as, say, smoking, violence or drugs. But the risks are real, some
students and teachers are almost certainly suffering from them now, and they
could easily become widespread and serious if nothing is done. Our minds could
be changed by better evidence of several kinds. For example, that
children who use computers excessively actually manage by doing so to
avoid emotional damage from negative experiences with other children, such as
teasing, bullying, ridicule, or rejection. If these students then go on to use
computers to form constructive, albeit attenuated, on-line relationships, and
grow up to live satisfactory social lives as adult, we would conclude that the
dangers of social withdrawal are minimal. In short, although my opinion about
the severity of these risks rest on the best evidence I could find about what
actually happens when students and teachers use computers, the evidence is not
nearly as rich or comprehensive as I would have hoped.
Note
The views expressed in this article
(Will computers dehumanize education?) must be seen as of the author and not
necessarily of the official documents concerning Information Technology
education in Pakistan whose progression will continue to evolve reformation
over a period of time. Having said this, the author has been actively involved
in the academic quality assessment activities, and the article does provide a
snapshot of his views. In this capacity, the author has benefited from
involvement with the faculty members teaching computer education, social
sciences and soft skills over a period of time and discussion with colleagues,
IT experts, student body and notably academicians.
Bibliography
1.
Asghar Javed, “Impersonalizing the relationships”, The Nation,
2.
Christine Kenneally, “An Internet
Home Away from Home”, Herald Tribune,
3.
E. M. Tittnich and N. Brown, Positive and Negative Uses of
Technology in Human Interactions, in Young
Children in a Computerized Environment, M. Frank, (ed.),
4.
Ghulam Haider, “Impact of Information Technology on Society”, The Nation,
5.
H. Bromley,
Thinking About Computers and Schools: A Skeptical View, The Journal of Computing and Society, 1:2, pp. 147-164, 1991.
6.
Iqbal Latif, “Moeen Qureshi’s
$50 million IT Fund and rich/poor divide”,
Business Recorder,
7.
J. Rothschild, Teaching Technology From
a Feminist perspective,
8.
Mike Clough, “Limits of Internet Freedom”, Khaleej Times,
9.
N. Postman, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology,
Alfred A. Knopf,
10.
R. M. Hutchins, The Learning Society,
11.
R. Muffoletto and N. N. Knupfer
(eds.), Computer in Education: Social,
Political, and Historical Perspectives,
12.
S. Turkle, Life on the
Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet, Simon and
13.
S. Turkle, The Second Self:
Computers and the Human Spirit, Simon and
14.
Shafqat Munir, “Darkness Online”, The News, March 2001.
15.
Shahid Mahmood, “Will computers dehumanize education?” The News,
16.
Shahjahan Akhtar, “Do you freeze with your computer?” Dawn,
17.
T. Lewis and C. Gagel,
Technological Literacy: A Critical Analysis, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24:2, pp. 117-138, 1992.
18.
T. Roszak, The Cult of Information, Pantheon,
19.
Tracy McVeigh,
“Computer games stunt teenagers’ brains”; Dawn,