- I do agree with Oppenheimer that computers have not lived up to the expectations in education. This is mainly because the use of computer has led to children with hypertext mind. They do not reason concretely as those who learn without the use of the computer. Secondly, the children show a great desire to manipulate physical materials while they are learning through computers. Three, the computers do not give the children the hands on skills that are directly relevant to the employment opportunities and jobs available. The result is that student enroll in technical institutes to learn technical skills required in the job market. Fourth, the computers offer no any concrete basis to build emotions and experience that is necessary to interact with the society in general when one grows up. Even when the computers are used in education, they do not offer a total substitution of the needs to use manual learning systems in the schools.
Things are the same since 2007 when Oppenheimer wrote this article. It is a misguided idea to eliminate programs that offer hands-on skills in schools. It is because the computer-taught student shall not have these skills when they finish school. It would be wrong to assume that all the students shall proceed to higher education institutes and get white color jobs.
- Computers are not effectively being used in public schools today. It is because the same issues of artificial knowledge that is not directly applicable in the job markets remains the key characteristics of the computer aided learning even now. The disadvantages associated with exposure to computers at the tender age are enormous for the children. These learners gain very little of what is required in the society for either job or socialization.
- It would not be advisable for the schools to cut down their peripheral programs to keep up with the information technology advancements. The researches that inform the policy makers are not conclusive to make such critical decisions. It is worth noting that, these peripheral programs benefit the students after school more than the computers themselves. Therefore, the schools should maintain the programs for the good of their students in the future. A balance has to be found between the two and not at the expenses of the peripheral programs.
- The push to total online learning is not good for young children. This is beneficial for adults who have already developed fully such that they do not need to learn social skills. It is thus not a good idea to change the learning into an online platform for the young children who have not developed fully, but are developing. This shall deprive them the opportunity to learn social skills, as well as hands-on activities required in real life situations.
- Computers are meant to compliment learning processes, but not fully change all the core principles that education had developed. Considering that obtaining a doctoral degree is not for young socially underdeveloped children, a professor who obtains a doctoral degree from an online platform shall have no any significant difference from the one who obtained it from the traditional settings. The same applies to any one who studied in any university under the two modes of study. It is because; the basic parameters used to gauge one for awarding of the degree does not change simply because the mode of learning has changed.
- The most important things learned in this module are that, technology is important to the human lives today, but its application has to be well controlled so as not to lead to unnecessary experiences and water down the leaning processes. The peripheral program of the schools also needs to be maintained at all cost.
