Customer Reviews

High-Tech Heretic: Reflections of a Computer Contrarian

5 star:		(18)
4 star:		(42)
3 star:		(45)
2 star:		(14)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

Stoll continues themes first begun in 'Silicon Snake Oil', this time focussing on the specific question of computers and the Internet in the classroom. He seems to especially question the notions of making learning 'fun' and 'exciting': he argues that effective learning is not generally 'fun', but is instead genuinely hard work. He goes further, and concludes that educational tools which are sold as 'fun and exciting' do so by ceasing to be educational.

Stoll questions the 'empowerment' of the Internet. Empowerment in what way, exactly? On the Internet, everyone is a de facto editor / publisher, and much material that would never be printed is given equal status with the greatest novels. As the most thoughful and well-researched works are equalized by the net to the grammatically fractured toss-offs of anyone, the net actually weakens critical faculties.

If empowerment means strengthening, then Stoll concludes that the Internet actually enfeebles. Being online is a solitary activity masquerading as a social one. Every minute spent online is another minute in which true opportunties for social contact and interaction have been lost.

Stoll has a real affection for libraries, and does not like changes involving purchase of CD ROMs and computers. He notes that computers and media technology are obsolete in five to ten years, but that many communities have incurred 30 year debts to purchase such equipment, frequently by reducing or eliminating new book acquisitions.

The problem in the end has nothing to do with Stoll. As a web engineer with a dot com, as a self-employed web designer, I shuddered when people wanted to put streaming video on a website. I would always ask, why not make a TV commercial?

This idea was met with distaste, but streaming video was exciting. Hmmm, aren't they the same thing? Somehow, those who wanted streaming video never actually defined where it would come from, and certainly never addressed actually making it.

I agree with Stoll, that the form of the net is such that people forget the content, assuming that quality content will follow. Follow from where?

The problem with this book is the same as with SSO: the people who most need to read and think and think hard about what Stoll is saying, are the non-thinkers who label him a 'Luddite' for questioning the technology - the very people least likely to be reading, period.

End of the day, Stoll makes a thousand times more sense than his detractors. Every educator, everyone involved with development of the Internet, everyone concerned about their childs education, needs to read Stoll, and to challenge the creeeping and by now almost invisible assumption that computrification is a priori good and useful.

As an educator with over fifteen years in the computer industry, I've "looked at life from both sides now." And the truth is, Stoll is 100% on target with his assessment of the primrose path down which computerization is leading education.

For those looking for a more scholarly work that addresses the false promises spouted by Gates and his ilk, look elsewhere (John Locke's "The De-Voicing of Society" is a prime example), as Cliff Stoll writes in a more popular style.

The amount spent on purchasing, maintaining, and updating both computer hardware and software borders on the criminal, with school administrators caught between the veritable rock and hard place. The populist idea that computer usage equals brighter students is a poison for which there is no antidote. Stoll is correct: the hard way is the only way. Nor can there be any substitute for excellent teachers and face-to-face dialog. The overemphasis on computers provides an easy out for all three points.

There is no sin in confessing that this path is a deadend. But with so much money riding on the decision, the outcome seems pre-ordained. Stoll shares this less encouraging belief.

I once encountered in Palo Alto a network specialist whose sole work was with two Silicon Valley school districts. His consulting and implementation fees earned him a cool quarter million a year - a quarter million that could easily have provided dozens of other more beneficial educational programs. It was his soulless laugh over the way he taking these schools for a ride that was the clincher for me.

Yes, the hard way is the only way. Take the time to read this book and you'll be a believer, too.

I absolutely loved this book. I read half the book the first day I got it. Stoll is so sensible about computers and humorous at the same time. He has written in this book exactly what I have felt about computers and their use in schools. I have used computers, and the net, in school projects for a long time and, even though I love the technology, I can also see how frustrating and time consuming it really is. Stoll brings this out so well in this book. We need a middle ground in this computer-crazy world. We need to rethink the importance of computers in the classroom, rather than just doing what is politically correct.

This review appeared November 7, 1999, in the Seattle Times and is available online at http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/entertainment/html98/stol_19991107.html

Clifford Stoll, author of "The Cuckoo's Egg" and "Silicon Snake Oil," now wryly examines the uses of computers in education and various related hype from the electronic marketplace. No cynic about technology, Stoll is a Berkeley astronomer and pioneer of the Internet who loves computers and computing. Yet he argues that the educational benefits of computers in schools are few: "A good school needs no computers. And a bad school won't be much improved by even the fastest Internet links." Nor do school libraries need much technology--the best libraries invest most heavily in books, periodicals, and the expertise of librarians (not "information specialists").

Stoll argues that computers actually retard learning. They waste time because technical difficulties continually interrupt computer-dependent instruction, and they make students who use them for more than word-processing or spreadsheets into passive recipients of unreliable information. 99% of the material on the Web is "inaccurate, out of date, one-sided, or no longer maintained," and the more dependable Websites tend to provide raw data instead of carefully distilled information. Besides, students are already overwhelmed with information. They need knowledge, which the Net fails to help them develop because its methods, pace, and style undermine the concentration, discipline, patience, and critical analysis required for learning. Stoll concludes that computers in schools are a terrible waste of educational funds.

Can a book like this one succeed in making educators across the nation think twice about their campaigns to wire every classroom or put a laptop in every kid's lap? Stoll's long experience with technology gives him authority, he cites reliable studies, and his claims are based on hard facts, clear logic, and plain common sense. But his argument is thinned by a digressive chatterbox style, folksy with nopes, yeps, hecks, heys, and the occasional ouch! or yee-ha! And no combination of facts, logic, or common sense has yet made much headway against America's worship of technology.

Clifford Stoll's exercise in bashing technology has come to a climactic realization in High-Tech Heretic. Stoll wishes to express that computers do not belong in the classroom, and that human interaction is the only successful teaching method. Students do need teachers, but they do not need mind-numbing lecture or lackluster busy work, which is the very thing that is provided by most contemporary teachers. Interacting through the internet and learning via computer allows students to temporarily escape the torture that is public education. Teaching is what needs to be reformed, not computers. We should be focusing on mundane lesson plans of uninspiring teachers instead of the overgrowth of computer activity in public schools.

Stoll's wit and humor throughout the book are entertaining enough, but soon become arid and repetitive. His focus on condemning technology is tiresome. He centers his argument on the theory that computers will replace teachers in the classroom, when such a thing could never feasibly be accomplished. His theoretical situations, while thought provoking, are simply the manifestation of his paranoia.

I am a student at a university equipped with several computer labs. I own two computers and do not consider them to be useless pieces of equipment only suitable for word processing. I use my computer for valuable research as well as communicating from friends around the globe, hardly a wasteful pastime. I not only collect information, but new and valuable experiences I will be able to use throughout my life. If Stoll influenced my computer exploits I could turn into the cynical, mistrustful person that Stoll appears to be in High-Tech Heretic. Clifford Stoll tries hard to be philosophical, but comes off as contemptuous.

High-Tech Heretic is not a book for the faint of heart. It should be considered with a skeptical eye and not taken literally. Computers are another part of life and education that are here to stay, no matter how hard Clifford Stoll tries to condemn them.

If you care about our education system, and you are inclined to think that computers are part of the solution, you should read this book. Stoll makes the case that computers are more likely part of the problem.

My favorite line is from p. 99:

"No pilot project in educational technology has ever been declared a failure."

This aptly characterizes the process of evaluating technology in education as utterly lacking in rigor.

Unfortunately, this book also is lacking in rigor. On that score, I cannot disagree with Stoll's critics. There is a lot more strong rhetoric than strong proof here.

But the bottom line remains: Stoll is probably right. The conventional wisdom vastly overstates the benefits and understates the costs of computers in education. If this book does nothing more than encourage people to ask questions about costs and benefits, it will have done a heroic service.

Without a doubt, tech-junkie Clifford Stoll is more than qualified to write a book concerning the overuse of computers in the classroom. His endless knowledge and love of all things technological definitely give him the credibility needed to persuade his audience. However, while his writing oozes experience, wit, and personality, his ideas and arguments fall flat when repeated with every chapter

After perusing the first several pages, I had high expectations for this book. Admittedly, I had not initially been too enthused about reading this book as a class assignment... and yet, the first chapters were a pleasant surprise; Stoll's writing is neither dry nor dull, but fresh and personal. He highlights many pressing concerns, such as the unnecessary introduction of computers into the kindergarten classroom, the misunderstanding that computer skills are equivalent with true learning and higher thinking, the computer's incapacity to provide children with pivotal hands-on experiences, and the decline in quality communication skills and relationships due to technology. In short, Stoll believes that, while computers can be extremely useful tools, schools are misguided in their moves to centralize the curriculum around glowing screens and keyboards. I must admit, he had me convinced.

Stoll's points are very valid. And yet, as I continued to examine the novel further, I began to feel as though I were reading the same chapter over and over again. His arguments quickly became repetitive and tedious. Many of my fellow classmates agreed with me in asserting that Stoll's book could have been cut down to a much shorter length and still have contained the same effective arguments.

Another aspect of this book was faulty: Stoll's use of insignificant footnotes. Stoll appears to have attempted to include every single shred of information that he could into this 240-page book. His frequent footnotes seem to be material that his editor had wanted to cut, but Stoll couldn't bear to part with... so he resorted to cramming this information into sentences at the bottoms of the book's pages. Too, some of these unwelcome footnotes contain information that is fairly irrelevant, such as a recipe for baking banana bread. Shouldn't footnotes provide insight, rather than second-thoughts or unrelated data?

Overall, High-Tech Heretic provides intriguing insight that brings many overlooked educational and technological issues to the surface. Nevertheless, while Stoll's book is undoubtedly persuasive, the reader should be prepared to continually become exasperated by his redundancy and odd footnotes.

From the onset of High-Tech Heretic, the reader must be prepared to hang on for dear life, as the completely one-sided slant of this work can easily slide the casual reader into a cold sea of technological cynicism. Now, Stoll has completely valid and often painfully true points, but his execution of these ideas are often somewhat sloppy, unfocused, and highly offensive. Having based his life around many aspects concerning both computers and education, paired with extensive research concerning the two topics, the author would seem to be quite the authority on the subject-which he is, yet he often seems to doubt his own persuasive prowess. This causes an immense portion of the book to fall victim to blatant namedropping that cites incessant and near-identical quotes from concerned parents, professors, and the like in order to assure credibility.
Now, the content is highly valid in today's society (though many of the technical terms are now out-of-date, proving one of his points), and expresses why and how too much technology can be truly harmful to our educational systems. Stoll is a strong advocate for critical thinking and personal development, and tells the cruel reality that too many computers do work to decrease our level of humanity; yet, he also fails to admit how computers can also enhance our lives. Many of his arguments degenerate into wispy tangents, only returning on-target to end a chapter.
In short, this book can be summed up by two words from Clifford Stoll himself: "Balance? Bah." (pg. 74)

In this book, Stoll is a complete computer nerd, and yet even he knows when and where computers should be used. He feels that is the teachers fault that the students of today world are so dependent on computers and that even some of the information that students come across these days isn't even accurate.
Teachers practically feed the internet to students and then wonder why all they do is play computer games. I feel that it isn't the teachers fault rather it is society's fault. We are all guilty of doing things the easy way. Computers are making the lives of people who have them easier and easier. But where should we draw the line? How many young children do you see everyday who spend so much time everyday on the computer, or computer games that are pushing obesity?
If feel that the old days of recess and children playing outside until dark are rarely seen anymore, and here are where the problems of our world start. Stoll whines in the book about children's ability to read and such, and yet does nothing to promote better ways to do so through a classroom. I believe children need to get outside more, and the things they learn there and from their parents will help each and everyone of them succeed.

Review of "High Tech Heretic" by Scott Warner.

On a normal setting you definitely wouldn't find me reading a book about computers and technology in the society we live in. This one however wasn't too bad. Stoll made some very good points when it came to how technology runs our society. I liked how he kind of trashed the school systems and how they really don't teach us anything about computers and how to use them correctly. They just throw us in front of them and say "OK, there you go now type something." It isn't until you are more grown up that you really begin your education in technology.

I think that for this book what Stoll did was he got angry one night, found a computer and started to write about things that he disapproved of. He basically just takes out his frustration on the keyboard and (...) for a hundred pages. It can be a little tough to follow at times because he jumps from one topic to another and then back to the original one. Many times each topic leads into another one but you have to go through two or three just to get his point.

I do like this book. Despite my critiquing, I did enjoy his humor used in this book. It's hard to just sit and read about computers and technology and I think he realizes this and added some humor along with the mix. I am a physical education major so reading about these things doesn't exactly float my boat. That's why this book was a little difficult for me to fully enjoy. I'm sure if I was in to computers and I.T. then it would excite me a little more. Other than that I recommend reading it if things like that interest you.