Technological Literacy
Why Kids Need Time to Explore, Not Computer-Based Testing
I was in elementary school right as computer labs were becoming the norm. I remember the room off the library that housed a class set of large desktop computers where, if I was lucky, I would get to play around with Microsoft Paint or make my own PowerPoint presentations. As a kid in the early 2000’s, that was about the coolest thing in the world! It wasn’t until high school that I took a class to explicitly improve my typing speed and other specific skills.
My students have had a different experience. They are digital natives and have had unprecedented access to technology practically since birth. In schools, kids are now typically given 1-to-1 devices. Despite my graduate degree in STEM education, my students can do things on the computer that leave me scratching my head. Last week they figured out that by sharing a Google slideshow I had assigned, they could message each other during class. I certainly didn’t teach them that! However, there are still technological skills that are challenging for my kids. Typing in particular is something they find tedious and frustrating due to their current lack of speed.
With New York State Tests all now mandated to be completed on a computer, there is a very strong emphasis on explicit technology instruction occurring earlier and earlier in a child’s education. As such, we need to reflect on a few critical questions: How do kids learn these technological skills? What roles should schools play in developing technological literacy? What can evolutionary ideas tell us about technological literacy and computer-based testing?
Hole-in-the-Wall Computers
At first glance, it seems weird to be talking about teaching technology using evolutionary ideas. Early humans (think thousands of years ago) did not use computers… duh! As a result, the ability to type and navigate the web was not something that was selected for through natural selection. However due to the evolved mechanisms for learning evolutionarily novel skills, kids today do have the ability to learn to type and navigate technology.
In some of my favorite studies on what the authors call minimally invasive education (the media refers to these studies as hole-in-the-wall experiments), large outdoor kiosks with computers were placed in rural India (Mitra, 2003). Many of the children in the local area either did not attend school or attended poor-quality schools. None of the children had been previously exposed to computers. When the computers were placed and turned on, no instructions were given to the local people as to their purpose or what they were.
Despite this, engagement with the computer by children was very high. In short periods of time, the children were able to figure out many of the functions of the computers by working collaboratively. In the original experiment, it took just a few days for kids to learn to use the PC for browsing the internet and drawing. Within a month, they were able to create folders, cut and paste, use shortcuts, move and resize windows, and use MS Word to create short messages (Mitra & Rana, 2001). They developed basic computer literacy skills despite the lack of formal teaching by an adult—hence the name minimally invasive education. These results have been replicated and expanded upon many times (see Dangwal & Kapur, 2009; Mitra, 2003).
In our 21st century world, digital literacy is critical to a child's later success. Their future careers, relationships, hobbies, and lives in general will undoubtably require a fairly comprehensive understanding of technology. However, the lesson from the above studies is that kids will learn to navigate technology through evolutionarily-relevant learning conditions such as opportunities for collaborative play and exploration. As such, teachers need to provide the time and space for children to engage in this type of learning in schools.
One of my favorite ways to do this is through projects. My kids have an opportunity during the day to create slides about something they know a lot about or have researched. Past topics have included information about rocks, animals, the California wildfires, celebrities, Irish Step Dancing, and even Indian folklore. During work time, the kids spread out with their computers. It is not a quiet time of the day. They are talking, sharing ideas, and teaching one another. When they share these projects, the first question is almost always, “how did you make X?” or “can you show me how you did Y?” Despite their 1-to-1 devices and individual projects, they are learning collaboratively to navigate their digital world, much in the same way the children in Mitra’s studies learned to navigate the hole-in-the-wall computers.
Downsides of Computer Based Testing
All that said, I strongly disagree with the idea of computer based testing (CBT) in elementary schools. Like all secondary skills, learning to use technology takes time and practice (Geary, 1995). In many classrooms, test prep now includes skills such as reading and highlighting passages from a screen, using virtual math equation generators, and increasing typing speed in preparation for typing essays. Think of what has to get cut when so much of our classroom time is being dedicated just to getting kids ready to take tests on the computer. This is time that could be devoted to instruction in content, projects, experiments, or play.
All CBT does is take something already difficult and evolutionarily unnatural for children (high-stakes tests) and make it more complicated by piling on additional difficult skills. Creating a rush and pressure to learn these skills in time for a test makes the skill burdensome and takes away the intrinsic motivation to engage. Mitra and his colleagues show that kids will learn fundamental technology skills independent of instruction and in their own time. I have no doubt that my third graders will eventually learn to type. However, this will not likely happen before their ELA test this year regardless of how much time I force them to practice.
My proposal, for what it's worth, would be to go back to pen and paper tests (or ditch the tests completely) and let kids develop technological skills in a more self-paced and low pressure type of environment. Technology ticks all the evolutionary boxes for a highly motivating skill: kids see the real-world importance of the skill, they can discuss and explore with their peers in playful ways, and it is something they are motivated to learn about because they see it every day. In other words, kids can and will learn technological skills given the time and opportunity. Later instruction when they are older can be dedicated to teaching the nuances of technology and it’s proper use. However, the time for exploration now will set the stage for them to approach those later lessons with confidence and meaning.
Takeaways
I do think kids need to learn digital and computer literacy skills—they live in a digital world. However, I don’t think we need to further complicate state tests by having some of our youngest learners take them on the computer. Doing so only adds roadblocks to something that is already difficult and rushes kids to develop skills that are developmentally inappropriate and that they will likely learn independently given ample time and opportunity.
It is not within the power of teachers to say no to computer-based testing. That change must come from administrators and educational policymakers. However, teachers do have some control over how to expose kids to technological skills.
Below are just a few ideas:
Make it fun. There are a lot of programs that use games to teach kids to type and improve their speed. The more fun the kids have, the more willing they will be to engage with the practice.
Give kids a purpose to practice skills. It is not motivating to type essays just for the sake of doing so. But, kids love to write messages and notes to each other. Teachers can leverage the social motivator to get kids to practice their typing.
Allow practice to be collaborative and project based. Use time during the day to have kids to sit in groups and talk as they create slides about something that interests them. Allow them to present these projects to their peers. This not only leads to excitement and motivation, but it also shows off the different skills that kids already know and clues them in on who to seek help from to learn more.
Overall, I firmly believe that kids’ technological skills will develop naturally if they are given time and opportunity to practice. I learned to use a computer by typing my name over and over in word art and I consider myself to be computer literate. I have no concerns about the kids in my classroom learning to navigate a computer, but I am concerned about the burden that we are placing on them at an early age with CBT. By rushing them to quickly develop technology skills, I worry that my kids will actually be less motivated to do so.
At the end of the day, our goal is not to just develop the next generation of test-takers. We instead need to inspire children to approach technology with interest and excitement rather than with fear and frustration. That is how we prepare children for success in the 21st century.
References
Dangwal, R. & Kapur, P. (2009). Learning through teaching: peer-mediated instruction in minimally invasive education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00863.x
Geary, D. C. (1995). Reflections of evolution and culture in children’s cognition. Implications for mathematical development and instruction. American Psychologist, 50, 24 –37.
Mitra, S. (2003). Minimally invasive education: a progress report on the “hole-in-the-wall” experiments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 367-371. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00333
Mitra, S. & Rana, V. (2001). Children and the internet: experiments with minimally invasive education in India. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00192