Technology is often considered the be-all end-all solution to our problems.

In a recent Wall… Technology is often considered the be-all end-all solution to our problems.

In a recent Wall Street Journal editorial, for instance, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and Netflix founder Reed Hastings claim electronics can help resolve the intractable problem of floundering American education. The gentlemen note that South Korea has more technology in classrooms than we do, and the South Koreans kick our butts in education.

They’re right about one thing: American education is an abysmal state. SAT scores have fallen to their lowest levels in nearly 40 years, and the gap between whites and minorities appears to be growing. The 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress reported that only 21 percent of 12th graders scored at the “proficient” level in science nationwide, a designation that entails skills like discerning the difference between a star and a planet. In the same exam, 40 percent of students scored “below basic,” which is alarming considering that we’re entering an era in which science will intersect with public policy to a greater extent than ever before.

However, I didn’t graduate from a fine American public high school to not realize that the editorial’s argument commits the “post hoc ergo propter hoc” fallacy assuming that correlation is causation. I’d point out, for instance, that in Shanghai, China, there isn’t much technology in the classroom. Students don’t even typically type papers … and Shanghai’s students kick our butts in education, too.

I’m not about to argue that we should teach everybody how to add on abaci, that papers should all be written in Spencerian cursive and that the first time a student should see a computer is in graduate school. Every child should have access to a computer, and perhaps in low-income districts where children don’t have a computer at home, it would make sense to distribute laptops. But we’ve become enchanted with technology, presuming it to be the answer to all our educational problems when it is not.

Some skills cannot be taught through the use of technology. A word processor is good to have, but a word processor doesn’t make a writer. There’s no substitute for grinding through multiple drafts with a red pen and having students read examples of good writing. Similarly, although students can do arithmetic with calculators, if all they’re taught is how to blindly punch in numbers, they’ll sometimes find answers that are not only wrong but preposterously wrong. There is value in being able to estimate. There is also a need to be able to do simple arithmetic on pad and paper, or come to a rough estimate in one’s head while standing in the supermarket. Computers will not make obtaining these skills any easier.

One thing people often forget about computers and technology is that their output is only as good as the input. A computer program is only as good as its programming, and a program that seeks to use computers and technology is only as good as its underlying design. To make the most of technology, it would be useful to re-examine the curriculum so that there is more focus on harnessing technology itself. Otherwise all we will accomplish is a shift from flashcards written on index cards to the iFlash program that does the same thing but costs more.

This assumes that the teachers even use the technology at all. I remember the big deal one of my schools made about “cable in the classroom,” where every classroom got a TV hooked up to cable. We never watched the TV unless it was for a video, and the school spent a lot of money on an unused subscription. My high school also rolled out tablet PCs to great fanfare and hoopla, as it was expected that teachers would work magic with those touchscreens. One teacher of mine actually used his tablet in class for something other than entering attendance. All the other teachers, however, treated it as a second computer and continued using chalk and overhead slides. That was what the teachers were used to. Ultimately, it’s not enough to dump a bunch of technology into the classroom and expect results.

I do not blame people for supposing that technology is going to solve our educational problems, particularly because it’s a much easier solution than what really needs to be done: improving the pay of good teachers, firing incompetent ones, securing our schools from violence, making the desire for education something respectable in the inner cities and keeping parents involved and interested in the educational system. These changes are going to take time, effort and good faith from many parties. There’s no app for that.

Write [email protected]