However, the same has left far behind the concept of in-depth learning, leaving majority of students in confused state. As rightly stated by MacGillis (2004), the marketing efforts of various vendors to sell their products for annual test preparation and evaluation are resulting in a ‘digital divide’ between poor and rich students.
While billions of dollars from public fund have been invested to enhance the learning skills of all students, it is observed that needy students find it difficult to learn the advanced skills, as they are still trying to cope-up with the computer basics. Software industry leaders, having their own vested interests, highlight the advantages of such advanced learning and testing software, while they try to suppress the criticism related to same. However, major causality in such software drills remains the concepts of constructive learning. Using human brains is much more important than being entirely dependant on computers. Computer programs may provide intelligent information and solution, but using the same requires diligence, on the part of students.
Solutions for ending such digital inequity cannot include discontinuing with subject software drills or other ‘compass learning’ programs, while we need to find viable resolution to this man-made divide. MacGillis (2004) has rightly given the example of schools in Howard County, where students use ‘open programs’ instead of closed ones, as offered by such software drills. The open programs help students to be creative and learn through analytical thinking. This can be one of the solutions for this problem.
I do agree with the author of this article that the educational administrators may not have closely examined the issue of gender equity, while pushing for information technology-aided learning programs. The following observations need to be noted, in this direction.
To help students with getting accustomed to learning through ...Show more