The FlPSE Lectures

Technological Thrust vs. Instructional Inertia

G. A. Crosby Washington State University, Pullman WA 99164

The current thrusts in technological development are straining the structures of the educational systems in this country. Yet, despite the gigantic size of the total education- al enterorise and the normal institutional resistance to change, ;he process of adapting to technological advances is proceedine with deliherate speed. It is instructive to review the recenthistory of this adaptation to technological change, to assess where we are today in its evolution, and to attempt to peek into the future, both near- and far-term.

Educatlonal Response to Technological Change The forces that have been molding the educational sys-

tems in the United States since World War I1 are easy to identify. Generated by the G.I. Bill of Rights, an enormous influx of students caused unprecedented strains. especiallv in the higher educational components. The universities were not prepared for the sheer crush of the numbers of returnina veterans. Accustomed to admitting students with well-de- fined academic backgrounds, colleges and universities were also unprepared for the increasing educational inhomoge- neity of this new and different clientele, a trend that has persisted to the present. Contemporaneous with the explo- sions in the student populations and the increasing diversity of their backgrounds came the dramatic increase in spon- sored research, which, particularly in the sciences, inexora- bly removed professors from the classroom, thereby pushing the burden of instruction onto even fewer teachers. As the percentages of students aspiring to higher education persis- tently rose, often accelerated by national priorities and poli- cies, instructional methods dictated by educational idealism gave way to techniques designed to solve practical logistical problems. The blackboard yielded to the overhead and slide projectors; the multiple-choice exam supplanted the blue- book; the essay question rapidly disappeared. Technology began to help us, in the form of mark-sense scoring machines and, eventually, record keeping on mainframe computers. In fact, technoloeical innovations were welcomed. sometimes begrudgingly, by harried teachers huried under the weight of student numbers. The situation can be aotls described as "coping with circumstances", and, conco~it&tly, the great downward slide in the quality of instruction began. The nation was demanding educational services that the system could not provide. Emerging technology alleviated some of the burden, but, in general, instructional methodologies did not change fast enough to deliver services to so many with- out sacrificing quality. The problems seemed to defy solu- tion.

The Impact of the Personal Computer A genuinely new thrust of technological innovation in

education was sparked by the appearance of the personal computer. With this instrument came the first promise of fundamental improvements in educational methods. The personal computer was portable, it was inexpensive, it com- puted with lightning speed, it stored mountains of easily retrievable information, and i t finally became "user friend- ly". Although not universally celebrated in educational

ranks, the introduction of the personal computer into the educational milieu began to transform, irreversibly, what educators do and how they do it.

Computer Usage a t Various Educational Levels The pervasive influence of the computer in higher educa-

tion can be appreciated by detailing what graduate students in the sciences do with this ubiquitous machine. They write reports on it, they interface i t to equipment for data acquisi- tion, they employ i t for library sea&&, they use i t rou&ely for problem solving, for graphing, for computer modelling, and for searchine huee databases. Anv comnutationallv in- - "

tensive activity is carried out on the computer-the bigger the job, the bigger the machine-and many students use the computer routinely for personal notes and record keeping. Uses of computers by undergraduates parallel those of the graduate students, and the depth of involvement with com- puters by students of all levels is limited only b s the demee . . of their availability.

.

In high schools the range of computer literacy spans the gamut from those who are illiterate (do not even know how to turn one on) to those who display consummate computer skills. Hieh school students use word nrocessine Droerams. - ... .. employ computers for prublem solving and graphing, and in some schools carrv out olentv of "drill and oractice". There is no doubt that the computer is transforming both higher and secondary education.

As we follow computer usage down the educational net- work into the elementary school, we find a few places with teacher expertise and a heavy concentration of machines. In many elementary schools, however, there are no computers at all (I). This fundamental technological revolution in edu- cation has not yet affected them.

Reflection on the deeree of computer usaee as one de- scends the educational 'tree reveals'a subtle change in the wav these instruments are em~loved. The eraduate student . . - uses a computer as a sophisticated tool. The computer does not reallv interact with the human mind. But for the elemen- tary student the hope is that the computer will operate in an instructive mode-directly interacting and influencing the learning process. This is, one finds, precisely where the de- velopments have been the slowest. As an instructional tool the computer really has not lived up to its promise.

The disenchantment with the computer as a teaching aid is revealed in the ~ o ~ u l a r Dress. We read ( 1 ) that the her- alded revolution k i s shok due to lack df 'machines and training. "The computer-learning revolution predicted hack in the early 1980s just hasn't happened.'' Or "The computer revolution was supposed to he here bv now." The implica- tion of this last comment is, of course, that the predicted revolution in the schools has not occurred.

The Software Boitleneck The failure of the computer to live up to its promise in

instruction can he traced directly to the lack of suitable software. As anyone who uses these machines knows, a com-

4 Journal of Chemical Education

puter is useless without programs to run on it. Not only did educators quickly discover this generalization, but many small businesses discovered i t also. Eager to handle the ris- ing tide of paperworkassociated with commerce, many small businesses invested in hardware only to discard i t promptly, as a tax write-off, because of the lack of appropriate soft- ware. Educational institutions do not take tax write-offs, however. When an educational institution makes a had in- vestment, it is stuck with it. There is sound financial justifi- cation for moving slowly in the schools.

Creating software is expensive. This fact was also not fully appreciated in the early days of the computer. The cost of producing good software is underscored by a statement that appeared in the Wall Street Journal (1). "You need re- sources hefore vou eet a package as eood as a spreadsheet.'' That the educkionk es<ablisgment-is not a source of great profit for software developers is epitomized bv the amusine ;emark that appeared in-the same article: "YOU don't see venture capitalists trying to corner the market in third- grade histo&." herei is, quite simply, not enough money in education to attract the prime attention of profit-based soft- ware developers.

Not only did the cost factor retard the development of instructional software for education, but also t h e complex nature of the instructional process itself impeded progress. Tutorine students interactivelv is a eenuinelv soohisticated , . activity and the prophets of the educational revolution bad- Iv underestimated the comokxitv of the human mind. More- over, as all educators realize, &dents must be motivated if they are to learn. They need to interact with someone pos- sessing enthusiasm to instill in them a zest for learning that will sustain them during the boredom of knowledge acquisi- tion. No machine has yet been invented that can evoke the excitement generated by an enthusiastic instructor. The hu- man mind is a much more complicated instrument than the hardware salesmen ever suspected.

Further Technological Assaults In the field of science education in particular, the thrust of

technology can be felt as one listens to presentations a t meetings of groups such as the Division of Chemical Educa- tion of the American Chemical Society. Not long ago the electronic calculator displaced the slide rule for problem solving. Now the electronic calculator is being replaced by the sophisticated use of spreadsheets and math packaees that r;n on small computers. The audio tape recorder f;e- member the audiotutorial instructional technique!) has con- ceded defeat to the video cassette recorder, the computer- controlled large-screen projector is slowly overtaking the overhead projector, and hand-held electronic databases are supplanting the dictionary/thesaurus. On the horizon we see the CD ROM displacingreference books and tables and the computer-controlled videodisk eliminating filmstrips and slides. The recent introduction of the svmbolic electronic calculator presages fundamental changegin the teaching of eneineerine and the nhvsical sciences. changes that are onlv di;ly perceived by most of us.

"

On Research Technoloev has, in numerous wavs, ~rofoundlv influenced

the researchiunctions of universities: klready iidispensable for the conduct of research in the quantitative phvsical and mathematical sciences, the computer is beginning t o assume a central role in the development of modern biology (2) . 'Co remain a u courant, usingthe computer for searching the literature is essential, and many scientists are now receiving journals hy electronic means. To this list of technological advances that are redefining the university research scene we must add the networking of remote sites to central super- computers and huge databases.

On lnshuction In spite of the rapid advances in the use of technology in

education. both in research and in administration. the oro- . . gress in the field of instruction, particularly in science edu- cation. has been verv slow. This is emohaticallv true if we are referrkg to the direct interaction between machine and stu- dent, instruction in the sense that most educators under- stand their missions. A recent article relaces that computers have had little effect on how people actually teach chemia- try. Even for classroom demonst;ations the use is minimal hecause of lack of software and reliable projection systems - ~

and the long set-up times required (3). Why is the computer not being used extensively in an

instructional mode? Althoueh i t is temptine to blame educa- . tors, the answer to this queltion lies in the observation that the ao~lications of technolom in education will alwavs lae . . -- . - cornrnerciol usage. Even for research applications in the universities chemists see the impact of technolom that is already three or four years old ($. In high schoo6-many of the machines, principally Apple II's and IIe's, are approach- ing 10 years of age! The situation is underscored by the revelation that few colleges plan to trade PC's for newer, faster models. When i t comes to microcomputers in universi- ties, we are still a t the point where one person's trash is another person's treasure (4 ) . We can generalize this ohser- vation with the statement that the garbage heaps of the bastions of commerce, business, and finance are the gold mines of the schools and universities.

There is some wisdom in remainina well behind the cut- ting edge of technology. Not only is ittoo expensive to try to keep up with the latest developments, but an insidious dan- ger accompanies attempts to adapt fast-moving technology to educational purposes. Immense amounts of valuable time and effort may he-wasted on projects that will he obsolete before they are completed! Even the favorite languages of educators-turned-programmers may become archaicwhile they are developing their skills. The energy of those directly involved in teachine is too precious to be wasted on outmod- ed projects based o; soon-he-discarded technology.

On Communication Skills The availability of user-friendly, sophisticated word-pro-

cessing software is allowing educators to reemphasize writ- ine in the schools. The phrase "writine across the curricu- lu&" is in vogue. ~ o u ~ l i & word proce&ing with facile data reduction and graphics capabilities is permitting us to brine hack the wr i t tk iah report. The report can be turned in, marked up and eraded. returned to the student, resuhmit- ted, etc., &thou; requkng an enormous amount of tedious work. The ultimate impact of word processina on the educa- tion of future studentsis incalculabie.

On the Future of Education What is in the future for education, particularly with re-

spect to usahle and affordable technolom? To assess where &chnology will take education in the f&re we need only review where our current technology came from. A large part of it is derived from the entertainment industry. The univer- sal availability of television, audio tape recorders, VCR's, compact disks, and videodisks is a consequence of this enor- mously influential component of our culture. Educators can count on having this technology a t a reasonable price.

What did business and finance give us? Data storage and retrieval and spreadsheets come instantlv to mind, as one ohserves the developing educational usecof these tools. At the 10th Biennial Conference of the Division of Chemical Education of the American Chemical Society an entire ses- sion was devoted to the creative use of various commercial spreadsheet programs to teach chemistry 6). Business and commerce are also bringing us inventory programs and, of course, word-processing~oftware-not just one type of word

Volume 66 Number 1 January 1989 5

processing but a half dozen or more specialized systems for legal, scientific, engineering, and business applications. The r a ~ i d and convenient methods of maninulatine data. nro- u . . jecting graphs, and presenting information are becoming wonderful tools in the hands of educators, but they are certainly not being developed and maintained specifically for educational uses. The profit centers lie elsewhere. Even the school teachers' creative use of the game port on the A o ~ l e computer for data acauisition is a derivative aoolica- . . ti& of the ;ideogame!

To glimpse the future in education we need only chronicle where the information industry is going. The situation is summed up in a recent article in C & E News that relates how US. industry is striving to maintain a leadership role among world producers as global demand,continues to expand for semiconductors, optical fibers, magnetic tapes, and disks (4). That is the direction technology is going. We can antici- pate enormous progress in the methods of data storage and retrieval, because banks and businesses need these capabili- ties and will uav for them. I t is UD to the educators to adaot these packagel for their own uses after the development costs have been amortized. One can also foresee magnificent advances in the techniques of data manipulation. ~nsurance companies, banks, engineering firms, and financial manage- ment concerns have these needs. They also have the re- sources and are willing to pay for the continual improvement of both hardware and software.

Sophisticated pattern recognition techniques are rapidly evolvine. Thev are reauired for such diverse Duruoses as " * &

robotic vision and surveillance. As the commerical uses mul- tiply, the prices will fall and eventuallv reach the buvine range of a iniversity or, perhaps, a highschool. The curre$ rush to develop bigger and better image storage, processing, and retrieval systems for medical applications, for televi- sion, for blueprint reading, for aerial mineral exploration, and for the security industry will spin off great benefits for education. Educators will also be able to exploit the tecbnol- ogy of high speed data transmission by means of satellites, microwaveand infrared transmitters,and optical fibers. Ad- vances in these technologies are eagerly sought by news services, stock and commodity markets, the space industry, weather stations, and even drug smugglers!

On Networking and Information Dellvery Networking will also impact education mightily-the

networking of machines, of institutions, and of people. Elec- tronic mail and two-way interactive video will routinely cou- ple main centers to educational branches while local area networks (LAN) will tie together sprawling campuses. Wide area networks (WAN) are already connecting researchers to databases and supercomputers a t great distances, services that will eventually extend to teachers and students alike.

The basic concept of informationdelivery is alao changing. The emphasis isswitching from transporting people w infor. mation to delivering information to-peopie.Closed-circuit TV brings instruction directly into dormitory rooms; cable TV blankets entire regions. Inexnensive VCR's routinelv - record programs for later viewing, and, as the camera in- vades the lecture room, the home VCR coupled to the cable will make formal instruction readily accessible to all who want it. When the classroom is couoled to interactive TV and high-speed data transmission, the capacity for informa- tion transfer is awesome. By means of a terminal and a modem even teachers isolated in small rural districts can keep in touch with colleagues through electronic bulletin boards that are as close as the telephone. Add FAX trans- mission, on-line access of remote databases, and electronic publishing, and the capacity of a person for self-education appears limitless. This is not futuristic dreaming; what has been described is happening now.

Technological advances in information delivery are im-

pinging on the educational systems, and educators must learn to cope with these forces. Coping with change has a pejorative connotation. One can, however, view these devel- opments in a positive way. Technology is a t last achieving the level of sophistication that education has needed to solve problems that began to evolve almost a half-century ago. Technology is beginning to ease the enormous burden of mass education by allowing educators to reach more people with more information and to reach them with speed and reliability. A new age is upon us.

As these waves of progress rapidly engulf all educators, science educators in particular, we chemistry educators must begin to assess what is in store for us. A pertinent way to begin this exercise is to ask "In the year 2000 what will we mean by these statements: a chemist educated to the BS level, the MS level, the PhD level? What will we consider to be the proper education for a high school teacher assigned to teach chemistry in the secondary school?" One set of an- swers to these questions is a reformulation of Bloom's "Tax- onomy of Cognitive Educational Objectives" into the ter- minology of information science (6). In that conwxt chemis- try educators should strive to produce graduates who can access information, organize information, comprehend in- formation, synthesize information, apply information, eval- uate information, generate information, and communicate information. Only the first two tasks can be routinized. The others require higher orders of thought. And higher-order thinking is just what machines do not do. We have been too long, in my opinion, focussing on the details of knowledge something the machines handle very well-and neglecting the very facets of education that are most import&. NO; we have the technology to handle the details, a gift of free- dom that allows educators to focus on the essence of educa- tion. We have our opportunity a t last!

Recommendatlorn

Exploit Available Technology To caoitalize fully on this revolution in technolow mv "

principai recommendation for modern chemistry educators is to seek, we, modify, and adapt the technology that is commercially available in order to free ourselves for genu- ine instruction. Rather than spending valuable time teach- ing students how to do manipdations, we should allow the machines to take over such tasks. Educators should raise their intellectual sights and move up the scale of educational objectives, engaging students in the kinds of mind-expand- ina exercises that are orereauisite to achieving levels of edu- cation commensuratewith ihe demands of modern society.

This recommendation involves certain corollaries. Exceot as a definite career choice, educators should not waste time programming. The time of the teacher is too valuable to spend on that activity. A far better procedure is to adapt what has been develooed for noneducational ourposes and save time for other pressing needs. Chemistry eduiators can use this precious time to reintroduce inductive methods into the teaching process (something that disappeared long ago because i t is much easier to teach deductively than induc- tively, particularly when teaching large numbers of stu- dents), we can begin to individualize problem sets, we can neeotiate the return of the written labreoort. Eventuallv. we wiii be able to institute the ultimate open-book ex&,' an examination for which the student will be able to access any information needed-the entire library if necessary! The only limitation will be the degree of imaaination of the teacher.

- -

Adjust PsychologlcaNy Using technology that is already routine in industrial cir-

cles and adaptinRcommercial software for educational needs imply that educators must resign themselves to being out-of-

6 Journal of Chemical Education

cure for it. Its oriein mav iust lie in our nreoccu~ation with date. Trying to stay on the cutting edge of technological developments is not possible, given the very real restraints of educational system6 but the-objective is both unnecessary and unrealistic. Technological innovation is occurring so fast that iust beine aware of what is eoiue on is a strueele!

~ h c a t o r s L u s t also make ;the; psychologi~~l adjust- ments, since a fundamental change in the environment of the teacherlscholar, particularly his or her relations with colleaeues in the nrofession, is rapidlv occurring. The rela- tive isolation of t h e educator is disappearing. Soon the teacher will be linked electronically to the rest of the world. Not only must scholars reflect, they must also prepare to interact! Linking within institutions is already underway (7), and instant access to the world's knowledge from the private office is planned (8). The futurists even see us linked withall our students all the time 191! lNot exactlv a comfort- ing idea.] The interesting aspect'of most of these heralded olans for electronic connectivitv is that the most imnortant element, the individual scholar,;^ barely mentioned & them. I t is taken for granted that there will be human intellects- sentient, discerning individuals controlling these networks and using the information so rapidly conveyed. The required change in the behavior of the teacherlscholar who must interact with others through these electronic networks has not been fully appreciated-

As educators become preoccupied with the magnificent computer and rush to exploit the prodigious capacity of technology to advance education, we must neither underes- timate nor fail to appreciate the comnlexitv and the canacitv . . of the human mind:~here is still nocom~uter that matches what the brain cando. There is nocomouter with the brain's power to match patterns that are similar but not exact, draw scattered bits of visual data into a cohesive picture, and make intuitive leaps (10). Nature has had a long head start on the engineers and researchers. No one has encountered anything as complex and ingeniously designed as the three- pound lump of tissue inside the human skull. We dare not ------ - - -~ -

If educators are prone to worry about the enormous power of comDuters and fear that somehow the individual teacher wll be'hopelessly eclipsed in t h ~ s electronic revolution, they should reflect on the fact that each student walkinr! into a - classroom possesses a supercomputer right inside the skull, a comnuter far sunerior to anvthine that is found in the most advanced technblogy centers in t'he world. And the teacher has the opnortunity to interact with this magnificently de- signed organ everyday! This observation shoild evokein us a feeling of humbleness and certainly a reaction of awe. But the realTzation should also generate in us a sense of freedom and a sense of genuine importance. Good teachers interact- ing daily with these three-pound supercomputers is a pro- cess of unparalleled significance. To maximize their effec- tiveness. however. teachers must not onlv teach. thev must ~ ~

also be active learners and model for students a mind at work on sienificant intellectual tasks ( 11 ) . Moreover. aood teach- ers g u s t strive to solve the problem of studentipathy. No machine can do that. Apathy is perhaps the most pervasive problem of the modern educational scene. There is no patent

the trivial details of knowl;dge (tasks that machines can now handle) leadine to the neglect of the hieher elements on the - "

taxonomic scale of educational objectives. In short, we are not reallv challeneina our students. and tbev are bored. We are drillhg them at the lower level's of costive knowledge and not raising them to heights that will pique the curiositv and engage the energy of that magnificendsupercomputer inside the cranium.

Prospects for the Future The prospects of employing commercial technologies for

educational purposes are fascinating. Although educators are beginning to sense the magnitude of current technologi- cal advances. most are onlv dimlv aware of technoloev's ultimate potential for transforming educational methods and systems. As stated in the Carnegie Report (12). technol- ogyshould make it possible to relieve teachersof muchof the burden of imparting their information to students, therehy freeing them-for tutoring, diagnosing learning difficulties, developing students' creative problem-solving capabilities, and participating in school management. The substantial advances that will result from employing new methods and techniques will not result from replacing teachers with ma- chines but through greatly improved achievement by stu- dents when good teachers are augmented by properly used technology.

Current technological thmsts are effecting fundamental changes in educational methods and institutions. Mammoth as they are, the systems are responding, too quickly for some but not fast enough for others. As the forces of technological innovation mount, we can expect acceleration of the educa- tional changes. As the demands of research, industry, and commerce are met by the information industry, there will be a consequent rise in the sophistication of both hardware and software adaptable to educational uses. One can predict that, a t last, technology will attain the levels necessary to allow educators to solve some of the pandemic problems of mass education that have been with us for so long. Literature Clted 1. "ComputarsFsiling A8 Teaching Aids": WollStreat J. 1988, (Juoa 6). 21. 2. "Computers in Mal~mlrv Biology: Cunent Applications and Erne+& Trmds"; Sei-

enra 1988.240.47-52. 3. "Impact of Computers on Chemistry Examined"; Chem. Eng. News 1988. (June 27),

31-IR 1 "Few i~l lrdra Plan ToT~sdr P T i for Ncvn. Faster M o d c b Chnn lltyhsr Edvr

19hb. Jul) 2. . All; EffoM Fau* un Maerialr for lnformauon Slorsm and

New York, 1956. 7. "Univenity of ArizonaDcdaforISDN.Fiber DataNetnorWNetluark World 1988.5

(851.2. 8. "Plan for $5-Million Prototype of Electronic &search Library Announed"; Chmn.

Higher Edue. 1988. (June 1). A27. 9. Young,L.T.;Therviing,K.H.;Skiena.S.S.;Robinaon,A.D.;Omohuodro,S.M.;M~l,

6. W.; Wolfram, S. "Academic Computing in the Year Z W , Aeod. Computing 1988. (MayNunc). 8.

10. Allmen, W. F. "How the Blain Redly Worka Ita Wonders"; U S . New World Rep. 1988, (June 27). 48-54.

11. Class. K. P. "In Serveh ofZippers";Am. Assoc. Hi8herEduc.Bull. 1988,.10.3-7. 12. '"~NstimPrepared: Teachersfor thetlstcentury": TheReprt ofthr TmkFamron

Teochingos o Pmfefrion; Carnegie Forum on Education and the Eeonomy. 1986.

Volume 66 Number 1 January 1989 7