At the Feet of the Rabbi

8. At the Feet of the Rabbi [Next | Previous | Contents]

The Senile Rabbi

Education is part of every organized community. It is the process by which a community passes to the next generation the traditions and concepts which are considered essential for that community’s survival. The Church, as a community, is no exception.

Early in the Bible we read that handing on the traditions was considered to be an important part of true religion. The LORD said: “Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is right and just.” (Gen 1.18,19)

From the days when the nation of Israel was being organized in the desert to the fledgling New Testament Church at the time of the Apostles, the members of the Church have been instructed to pass on the traditions to the next generation. (e.g., Deut 4.9,10, 11.19; Luke 1.4; Acts 1.1,2; II Tim 2.2; Titus 2.1)

That the purpose of education is to pass on the traditions of a community, seems to be self-evident. However, there seems to be increasing debate about even this fundamental why of education. To add to the complexity of the ‘problem of education’ there is also a great debate raging about the how of education. This can be considered from at least three different dimensions: material (content), method (philosophy, technique) and mode (format, structure).

Education reformers (from libertarian to Christian) may be concerned about one or more of these aspects of the how of education. For example, one reformer may be advocating that parents be provided with a choice of mode (e.g., private schools versus public schools), yet feel that a particular philosophy of education may be applicable to both the private and public schools. Or, a particular (Christian) educator may dislike the content (e.g., the theory of evolution) but accept the same philosophy and structure for teaching. Another reformer may be satisfied with the material which is taught but feel that it should be communicated in a non-traditional environment (e.g., school’s without walls).

There is confusion among educational reformers about how to solve the problems of education largely because they do not clearly distinguish among these different aspects of the how of education. And in fact they no longer have a clear definition of the why of education. It is probable that the main reason structured education (i.e., that provided in the elementary, secondary, and university programs) is in serious trouble is because it no longer has a clear understanding of why it exists. In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that education today is using material, methods and modes that are inappropriate for the needs of our society and economy, and in many cases are wrong both morally and didactically.

The roots for our current approach to structured education, are to be found in the monastery schools of the Middle Ages, and prior to that in the Greek model for training young men for public office. During the Middle Ages a standardized curriculum of seven liberal arts was developed. This curriculum has changed somewhat over the past 1000 years. For example, there is now a secondary emphasis on physical education and manual arts. Some courses have been dropped (e.g., Latin), some changed (e.g., rhetoric and dialectic), and others added (e.g., computer science). But these changes have been primarily in material (content) and not in method (technique) or mode (format). The approach to education is still largely structured around a formal setting where a teacher attempts to impart his or her knowledge to the students in a context removed from the dynamic of the world in which the knowledge is supposed to be used.

Changes have occurred in the past 100 years in the method of education as ‘progressive’ theories have come to prominence, but not as much in the material or mode. The formal development of these theories appears to have its roots with Rousseau (1712-1778). He advocated education based on a naturalistic approach which would allow children to learn ‘naturally’ through an interaction with their environment. These ideas were put into practice in various forms during the 18th and 19th centuries. Some elementary schools were organized around the concepts of experience and observation rather than verbalism and memorization.

These experiments have given way to philosophies developed from the writings of thinkers such as William James (1842-1910) and John Dewey (1859-1952). The approach to education which developed from their writings consists of two premises:

Education is not preparation for life; it is life based on experience.

Education cannot prepare for life unless it mirrors the realities of life.

According to this philosophy of education, the process of education, and the school, must reflect society in miniature. Thus education becomes a process of socialization through sharing and participating in group activities. This philosophy of education is at root flawed because there is no acceptance of moral absolutes and it makes no judgement about the culture but rather accepts is as normative. However, it is the next step taken in this philosophy which presents an even greater difficulty. According to this philosophy, the learning process must begin with the interests of the child rather than with subjects (content) imposed on the child as normative. The growth of the child is the end of education rather than a means to an end. Education has in theory no higher a goal than to help the child realize his potential and to become a socialized being.

Approaches to teaching based on this philosophy of education have been incorporated into North American school systems to various degrees, but have not proven to be successful. In fact it could be argued that this philosophy of education has been one of the major contributing factors in the decline of our public school systems.

From the early 1970s onward a great deal of dissatisfaction has been expressed over the declining quality of the schools in North America. James Coleman, John Holt and Ivan Illich were among the early authors who wrote about the failure of the schools and the need for radical changes. Some of their ideas were implemented, and a number of counter-culture adherents formed alternative schools or attempted home schooling. One author summarizes their concerns as follows:

The major themes of radical criticism have centered around the political, social, and economic power of the school. One concern has been that public schooling under the control of a national government inevitably leads to attempts by the educational system to produce citizens who will be blindly obedient to the dictates of that government, citizens who will uphold the authority of the government even when it runs counter to personal interest and reason. [1]

Illich in his book Deschooling Society [2] showed clearly how the institutional schools are an extension of the prevailing humanistic philosophy underlying North America, and that their primary purpose is to indoctrinate students in this philosophy. He also showed that teaching is confused with learning, that drill for skill-development was no longer being practised, that schools were acting basically as ‘baby-sitting’ services to keep young people busy, that they were not giving young people useful skills for living and working in the 20th century, that society is ‘schooled’ to accept service instead of value, and that certification by the institutional system is considered of more value than any learning acquired outside of school.

Illich suggested breaking down the institutions and replacing them with reference services to educational services and educators-at-large, skill exchanges in which people would be willing to train others, and peer-matching networks for discussion and learning.

However true his critique, his proposed solutions would not have dealt with the real problem of the humanistic philosophies underlying our whole society. In addition, setting up reference and referral services in 1971 would have produced as much bureaucracy as is found in the public schools which they were intended to replace. Finally, his proposed free-for-all approach rests too much on the belief that man is inherently good. Illich expresses the view that if given an unfettered opportunity to learn, young people and adults (through continuing education) will naturally seek out the best education for themselves. This is naive.

Although conventional education theorists do not agree with the proposed solutions of the radicals, they nevertheless have had to admit that there are serious problems with the current approach to education. One writer in an article entitled Deschooling? No! states:

Our schools are neither dead nor dying, but neither, unfortunately, are they marked by a degree of vitality and energy that befits the grandeur of their mission. Paradoxically, even ironically, the writings of those who would bury us may well stimulate ... an infusion of new life. [3]

Another has said:

Ways must be found to break the lockstep, the system by which all pupils proceed at the same pace through the same curriculum for the same number of years. [4]

After more than 25 years of criticism of the educational system in North America, there has been little progress in improving the system. In spite of various attempted solutions — programs initiated by presidents, states, and provinces — and millions of words having been written on the subject, the problems are still with us and looming larger every day. It seems clear that the public educational system in North America is only a few years away from colossal collapse.

Some of the critiques of the current approach to providing schooling include the following:

Schools are structured for a past era and are teaching content which is no longer relevant. [5], [6]

Schools are cheating our kids because they do not teach the basics, [7] or moral standards such as family values. [8]

Schools are not teaching content which is needed for life in our (technologically complex) society. [9], [10]

Schools are using outdated educational methods and modes which turn off students. [11], [12]

Schools are not held accountable to normative curriculum standards. [13]

Schools are plagued by too much bureaucracy and administrative overhead.

Schools are designed for failure. They emphasize the attainment of credentials rather than real learning and achievement of skills. Their approach to education is designed around norm-based testing which means, by definition, at least half of the learners will be a failure, rather than around certification-based testing in which every motivated learner can be a success. [14]

Schools fail to produce eminent achievers because the school environment is really oriented to socializing and not educating children. “Is it really a good idea to send your 6-year-old into a room full of 6-year-olds and then, the next year, to put your 7-year-old in with 7-year-olds, and so on? A simple recursive argument suggests this exposes them to a real danger of growing up with the minds of 6-year-olds. And, so far as I can see, that’s exactly what happens. Our present culture may be largely shaped by this strange idea of isolating children’s thought from adult thought.” [15]

Schools need to be challenged to perform by the requirement that students be able to pass national (or jurisdiction-wide) tests to “counteract the laissez-faire approach of the sixties.” [16]

Schools are under funded. A series of articles appeared in Fortune magazine dealing with the problem of the schools. In one article, the author provided a summary of what business leaders at a workshop suggested were some of the ways to improve the schools in U.S. They suggested many things such as the involvement of business in community programs especially with children of single parents, better marketing of educational reforms, better text books and curricula, more effective use of television, a reduction of administrative positions in school boards, and nation-wide exams in core subjects. But the primary thrust of their conclusions seems to be that what is needed is provision of more money to provide up-to-date technology for the schools. [17]

“Give us more money, and we will solve the problems of education,” is the cry of many in the educational establishment. But it is clear that more money does not solve the problems in the schools, in fact it seems to be almost the opposite: the more money a school board spends per student, the worse the education that student receives. [18], [19], [20]

State-run public schools do not have competition, and because of this have a monopoly on mediocrity. [21], [22], [23], [24], [25] Some critics of the schools who hold this view claim that if there were more competition, for example funded through a voucher program, there would be a marked improvement in quality in all schools. The Edison Project is an attempt to apply the belief that the best way to provide education is in a for-profit context. However, it is based on a new age philosophy and will likely be just as bad as what it is intended to replace. [26]

Obviously there are many, including most members of the National Education Association, who feel that a plan such as the proposed introduction of vouchers is not what is required to improve education.

Some Christian commentators are also not in favour of such a scheme. They argue that it would increase government control over education by making private religious schools subject to tighter government regulations. [27], [28]

Others such as Lewis J. Perelman, argue that to provide competition by giving students a chance to attend a different box does not go far enough. [29]

Schools are thought to be ineffective because they were designed for an original mandate (e.g., as sorting centers for the labour market, or to actively promote the Christian religion) whereas these functions have become outdated, outmoded or even illegal and now schools are being called upon to carry out functions (e.g., to be caretakers and child-advocacy agencies) for which they were not designed. [30], [31]

Schools are in trouble because education theorists have paid too much attention to the process of education and not enough to the product — students who meet specific threshold goals. Schools need to establish and meet these specific product goals which are defined in terms of their outcomes. But this concerns many Christians who see this as an opportunity for indoctrination in new age thinking of our morally bankrupt culture. [32], [33], [34]

Schools are based on a system of knowledge transmission which rewards students who can memorize facts, or more accurately isolated factoids where there is no context for, or connection among, the pieces of information. [35], [36]

Without a doubt publicly funded schooling in North America is in trouble. It suffers from bloated operational costs, is highly inefficient in providing learning to students, is not clear on what its purpose is, and suffers from the intrusion of government [37] (in ownership, compulsion, regulation and political manipulation). In addition current theories of public education (which deal with the method and mode) are grounded mostly on air. They are based on relativistic views of morality and a pluralism where all ideas are equally valid (except for those based on biblical morality), and they emphasize seeking rather than finding truth and self-realization rather than social responsibility. This is the reason for the cry for reform and renewal of the schools from every segment of society.

However, David Gordon, a self-confessed follower of Freud and Dewey, states that “to a large extent school self-renewal is an impossible idea.” [38] He argues that it is impossible for a school [and by extension a school system] to step out of its system of paradigms and renew itself on a new philosophical foundation. His arguments are similar to those of Thomas Khun, who in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions [39] argues that existing paradigms are used to interpret all data, and filter out any data which does not fit within the established framework. New paradigms are not developed by self-renewal but through revolution. [40]

Into this chaos come communication and computer technology with their power to change radically not only the techniques of education but also the philosophy underlying it.

Education is ... the last major activity in the western world yet to be mechanized. It is, essentially, hand labour, just as cloth-making was in the 1700s and farming in the 1800s. Because it is difficult to make profitable large-scale ventures out of hand labour, corporations have been content to let education remain part of the infrastructure. As mechanization in the form of electronics approaches, however, education will inevitably be looked upon as a potential commodity. [41]

The Sixty-Four-Thousand-Meter Question

The potential of the computer for creating a new approach to education and for supporting a new philosophy of education is enormous. The Electronic Highway, a conversational computer, and an econosis containing the world’s knowledge base in hypermedia form will produce a revolutionary environment for education. This new environment will make the current approach to schooling as obsolete as is the one-room schoolhouse.

It will be the Electronic Highway which will permit Computer-Aided Instruction (CAI) or hyper-learning to become widely recognized as an alternative approach to schooling. Fiber-optics cables will carry computer-based courseware from a ‘school’ (or econosis) to the students. A school will no longer need to be a place where students congregate, rather, it will be the source for courses, assignments and general information. In fact, teachers themselves will not need to be physically present either. [42] They will be able to communicate from their homes with students anywhere on earth. [43]

In Canada, Athabasca University has been operating, for a number of years, a program which uses satellite broadcasting to provide classroom instruction to students in the far north. In the U.S., the National Technological University (NTU) “claiming neither a campus nor a regular faculty” was formed a few years ago in Fort Collins, Colorado. [44], [45] The NTU broadcasts via a satellite to about 1200 graduate-level engineers and scientists working at over 80 corporate sites. About one third of the broadcasts are live from courses offered at Boston University, Georgia Tech, Purdue and other universities. The rest of the courses are videotaped for delayed broadcast.

This approach to schooling is not significantly different from the use of videotapes for instruction. Videotaped courses have been available for a number of years in areas ranging from history and language training to auto mechanics and computer language instruction. But the use of TV broadcast and videotaped courses for instruction has had only limited success. Marshall McLuhan summarized the problem:

Merely to put the present classroom on TV would be like putting movies on TV. The result would be a hybrid that is neither. The right approach is to ask, “What can TV do that the classroom cannot do for French, or for Physics?” The answer is: “TV can illustrate the interplay of process and the growth of forms of all kinds as nothing else can.” [46]

Television has failed as a successful medium of instruction in schools for two reasons. First, the unique character of the medium has not been used to its potential. [47] TV can be used to blend the voice of a lecturer with animation or video sequences of historical scenes or physical experiments. Sound effects and visual effects can also be used to enhance the presentation. The result will be very similar to a well produced documentary. However, it is expensive to prepare a course in this format. The average school or university cannot afford to produce hundreds of documentaries. So, they fall back to video taping a lecture. A video tape of a dull lecturer does not make exciting viewing.

Second, TV is a non-participatory medium. It fails in the classroom as a medium for learning when it is used to deliver instruction through knowledge transfer. [48] Students generally do not find it to be an engaging environment for learning. [49] At least in a classroom students can ask questions or interact with the instructor through body language. A videotaped lecture rambles on as the student becomes restless and then bored, unless he is highly motivated.

The Electronic Highway, in contrast, will make it possible to change the very nature of education. First, it will be easier to share the cost of producing expensive computer-based courseware over a much broader base, as it will be available from an econosis to thousands of students who will be charged a small fee for use.

Second, students will be able to interact with the instructor via the Electronic Highway (as has been proposed for schools in North Carolina [50]) through what is now being called ‘distance education’. [51] Where the course is being made available live, students will be able to ask questions. Their images will be picked up by their video phones connected to their PCs and spliced into the broadcast image of the instructor as an inset frame. Where the course is not live, it will still be possible for students to ask questions via their conversational computer. The question will be routed automatically to a mail box associated with the course. An answer may be available immediately from artificial intelligence software which will search the knowledge base in the econosis, or from human instructors monitoring the courses being viewed. Or an answer could be prepared off-line and mailed to the student via the electronic network.

A prototype of the Electronic Highway applied to education, has been in use for a number of years. A consortium of seven school districts in Minnesota has been formed to share courses via a two-way TV system. Specialized courses such as foreign languages and advanced mathematics are prepared by one school district and made available to students in other districts. This gives all students access to a richer range of courses. Administrators in the school district are also able to use the system to hold their joint meetings, making long-distance travel unnecessary. [52]

Going beyond the use of two-way television, is a degree program at the University of Phoenix. This program offers bachelor’s degrees through an on-line communications network. Students can attend the lectures in virtual classroom and contribute to the dialogue through their computers. Similar programs are offered by Purdue, Boise State, City University in Belleview, Washington and Nova University in Fort Lauderdale. [53], [54]

The Electronic Highway and the conversational computer have the potential to change the nature of schooling. [55], [56] In twenty five years it is likely a majority of students may be learning in home schooling environments. [57] They will be receiving much of their instruction over the Electronic Highway. [58]

The Computer as Tutor

The impact of the Electronic Highway and the conversational computer alone will be great. But far greater will be the impact of the conversational computer communicating over the Electronic Highway, and accessing computer-based courseware in hypermedia form from an econosis. Until recently much of the available courseware has had only limited. The software has been somewhat simplistic (e.g., spelling games and math quizzes) and has not had access to very fast computers with sufficient amounts of memory to supply a depth of information. “Critics of new information technology point out, with some justice, that the new courseware available so far for use in the new machines is inadequate in quality, quantity, and variety.” [59]

The IBM Personal Computer appeared just over ten years ago. Since then there has been a dramatic increase in the number of schools and homes with IBM PCs or PC clones (using the same operating system as the IBM PC), or competitors such as offerings from Apple. In 1981 18.2% of the schools in the U.S. had microcomputers. By 1985, 92.2% had them. [60] The current rate of penetration is probably approaching 100%. But are the schools using the computers, and how are they using them? A ratio of one computer per school or even one per every fifteen students makes a computer nothing more than a novelty, and not an integral tool in the learning process.

The lack of vision with respect to the use of the PC in education on the part of most teachers and educators, is a key reason for why the thousands of computer-based courseware offerings are largely ignored and under utilized. Because the market is so small, the production of courseware is still in its infancy. Why is it that computers and automation have been incorporated intimately into most other aspects of human endeavour from the office environment to games for children, but have been relegated to the back corner of the typical classroom?

The main cause is not the lack of money. It is the lack of competitive advantage for schools to acquire computers and computer-based courseware. The current system of education favours the inefficiency of the Middle Ages, and has not “changed discernibly since the Venetians taught fractions to groups of mercantile students in the mid-15th century.” [61] The educational bureaucracy seems to measure success purely in terms of the amount of money it can spend, and has little incentive to become more productive. In turn there is little financial incentive for companies to produce courseware. [62]

When the bloated publicly funded educational system crashes on the heads of its administrators, there will be a mass movement in society toward creating a totally new system of education which will be more productive and efficient in providing useful training. At the foundation of this movement will be the computer and computer-based courseware. In the next twenty five years we can expect to see developments in courseware which will dazzle even the most hardened skeptic.

There are a number of ways in which the computer is better suited as a tutor than is a human. The computer has unlimited ‘patience’ and can continue presenting exercises, examples and tests at the student’s own pace, until the student has mastered a particular skill. Computer-based courseware can be designed to vary the pace and direction of a course. It will repeat areas where the student is weak until they are mastered, or will jump over sections if the student is moving quickly. This will provide individualized instruction, providing the equivalent of a private tutor. Courseware using artificial intelligence and knowledge rules for decision making can incorporate the “best judgment and total experience of the world’s best educators.” [63]

In addition, a computer does not ‘forget’. Computer-based courseware can draw upon a massive file of exercises, examples, or test questions best suited to the needs of the student. For example, a courseware module could have 10,000 carefully formulated algebra problems with detailed explanations of the problems and how to solve them. These could be graded from simple to complex and made available to the student as needed. The average teacher/textbook combination could not compete with such courseware. [64]

Computer-based training can outperform most human instructors in many ways. For example, a system has been developed at Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa which can be used to help the deaf learn to speak clearly. The system includes a device which displays graphically the pattern of a word or phrase spoken by the student. This pattern is compared with a correct pattern, and deviations in pitch, pronunciation, intensity and frequency of vocal sounds are displayed. By repeated trials students can make their spoken communication conform to the correct visual pattern. [65]

Computer-based courseware can be grouped into the following categories of usefulness:

Drill and Practice — The computer presents drills to reinforce what has been taught in the traditional way, or is used independently to learn a new skill.

Examples: spelling tests, math quizzes, tonal matching when practising singing, learning to play a musical instrument through a MIDI interface (e.g., Note Play and Play it by Ear), typing exercises (e.g., Typing Tutor and Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing), geography tests where a map is displayed and the student is asked to point to a country or ocean, etc.

A controlled study at a school in Pittsburgh, of the use of computers to teach math with the aid of a computer (as a central resource), showed that students tended to spend more time at their work (coming early and staying late) and were more engaged in learning math. In addition the study showed that the teacher spent more time with each student and especially with weaker students. [66]

Tutoring — The computer presents a course of study and asks questions at appropriate stops in the material. It branches to in-depth review as necessary or skips to new material as the student masters what has been presented. Using hypermedia the computer would be able to present text, pictures, maps, voices, music, sound effects, animation, and video images.

Examples: self-paced automobile repair; geometry, statistics algebra, trigonometry, or calculus (e.g., the Platinum Set); grammar; history or language courses (e.g., Transparent Language).

Arthur C. Clarke in his sequel to 2001, 2010 saw the potential of computer-based coureseware for teaching languages:

The young Russian spoke the slow, careful English of a student who had had more lessons with an electronic tutor than a human teacher. [67]

Games and Simulations — These allow the student to experiment without having real consequences on the environment, and to learn by playing.

Examples: flight, automobile or other equipment simulators, computer software code walkthroughs, [68] counseling case-studies or scenarios, stock investment games, urban planning (e.g., SimCity) scientific experiments, games such as chess or backgammon.

One author has indicated that using a computer simulation game such as Life [69] students can learn to:

define a problem

distinguish between assumptions and observations

make observations

verify observations

make tentative explanations

make and test predictions

revise an explanatory system. [70]

“If there were good simulation building tools available, instead of reading about physics, students could build simulated rocket ships, or instead of reading about democracy, students could try running a country.” [71]

Problem Solving — The computer can be used by students for creative problem solving. While solving problems the students will be learning in an integrated context.

A notable example is the Jasper Series. In the Adventures of Jasper Woodbury problems are presented to the student such as an emergency call coming in to rescue a injured eagle from a mountain side. Learners must use a number of mathematics skills to come up with a creative solution to the emergency. They need to be able to calculate the amount of fuel it would take to get a light plane to a nearby meadow and what weight it can carry. They need to compare this option with others such as going in by jeep. Time and distance calculations are necessary. [72]

In this learning situation concepts are learned as tools and as by-products of the learning process rather than as arbitrary facts. There are now a number of episodes in the Jasper Series available on video-disk which provide opportunities for using algebra, statistics and geometry.

Another example of a software tool that falls into this category is the popular game Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? Many teachers are ‘sneaking’ this game into their classes because they find that it gets the kids interested in learning facts about geography while helping them learn problem solving strategies. [73]

Dialogue — Artificial intelligence systems can carry on conversations in a Socratic mode. They can present large bodies of information and query students on this information. Or the student can ask questions and be led into new areas of discovery. [74] The computer can analyze the logic used by students, assess their understanding or their knowledge and direct them to areas where they are weak or need additional study.

On the Electronic Highway students can collaborate on work and share their experiences world-wide. Some American students at the elementary level have been using the Internet to communicate with students in England and in Russia. [75] Communicating on the ‘net’ has far more appeal to children today, than does letter writing, and yet it accomplishes the same purpose.

Another instance of the use of the Electronic Highway was in the Eratosthenes Project. A number of students around the U.S. participated in this project to measure the circumference of the earth. By measuring the angle of the sun at exactly the same time in various locations they were able to obtain accurate data for the calculation. [76]

Discovery — Using hypermedia in an econosis students can explore the world’s knowledge base either in structured or unstructured mode. They will have access to powerful query, searching, abstracting, sorting, and processing utilities which will make the process of learning and discovery almost as exciting as the exploration of a new continent or a distant planet.

An excellent, although already dated, example of a discovery tool is the Beethoven product developed by Robert Winter and distributed by Microsoft. It is a CD product with a recording of the 9th Symphony, images of the score, and commentary. Encarta, another product from Microsoft is an interactive encyclopedia which encourages learning by ‘wandering around’.

So many other titles are now available that a large catalogue would be needed to list them all.

Creative Work — A computer can be used for analysis and creation of original work in art, literature, and music. The machine can help teach perspective drawing and explain the concepts behind isometric projections. Artificial intelligence programs can be used to show thousands of pictures by masters with an analysis of them (e.g., the focal point, perspective lines, use of colour, shading, etc.) In addition, students can use their computers to create their own artwork.

A computer can also be used to present an analysis of written or musical compositions. Students can also use their machines to write essays, books, newspapers, and journals and for musical composition.

CAI Anxiety Syndrome

Teachers in general have not been very supportive of the concepts behind computer-aided instruction. And to a large extent the lack of use of computer-based courseware is due to the fact that the courseware has not been able to get past the ‘gate-keepers’, [77] the teachers who seem to have a vested interest in keeping technology out of their classrooms. “Criticisms are rife among teachers, at all levels.” [78] Their criticisms can be summarized as follows:

The writers of courseware are generally not educators. Teachers and students have not been involved very often in the preparation of the software.

The courseware has little relationship to what is taught in the schools.

The content is not kept up-to-date.

The courseware is of poor quality and does not sustain student interest. [79]

There is not enough variety in the offerings.

Computers in classrooms have brought a lot of frustration, there is no reason now to believe “the promise of a technology miracle.” [80]

There is a serious lack of standards for copyrights and portability, making it difficult to get sufficient copies and to operate them on different machines.

The courseware does not take full advantage of the medium.

Programmed instruction is dehumanizing.

There may be an over-dependence on mediated learning. [81]

There may be increased educational elitism among those who have courseware against those who do not. [82]

The public educational system may be weakened by students’ access to educational opportunities outside of the schools. [83]

Many of the complaints made by teachers about computer-based training are currently valid. However, some of the complaints are similar to those heard among other groups of employees as they were first experiencing automation in their industries. David Hawkridge in his book New Information Technology in Education stated: “Teachers’ unwillingness or inability to change roles when new information technology is introduced is paralleled by similar attitudes among industrial workers, office staff, farmers, priests and many others.” [84]

There is now a lot of computer-based training and educational courseware available. But as yet it is seen as an inferior adjunct to the educational process rather than as an important independent means of education. This attitude to the role of computer-based training is similar to that toward the book when it was first introduced. “In the past ... the creation of the book was considered an impediment to education because it broke the pattern of memorization and personal ownership of knowledge represented by the Socratic tutor. Few would now consider general education viable without books.” [85]

Putting In the Beef

Eventually the computer will fulfil a major role in education, and may actually replace many teachers, or change their role significantly. [86], [87]

Teachers have roles as providers of knowledge, diagnosticians, tutors, judges of achievement, disciplinarians. ... New information technology may change that situation, putting students in control and asking new roles of teachers as technicians, selectors of course ware, individualisers of instruction, managers, schedulers and advisers. [88]

Where are the teachers? They are in school, working with small groups and meeting with individual students. They are teaching courses that do not lend themselves to technology-mediated instruction. They are supervising mentors. And they are developing new curricula. Teachers remain the heart and soul of the institution ... [89]

Bill Graves, Director of the Institute for Academic Technology at Chapel Hill, compares the teacher’s new role to that of a guide: “Learning becomes an exploration — like a rafting trip. You’re the explorer, and you have along a guide who has organized the event, and lines up the resources — the equipment and the maps.” [90]

This role change may be hard for some to believe and accept. But if present trends continue, teachers will soon be looking for new jobs, if they have not adapted to CAI. Computer-based courseware will replace many of them because it can do at least as good, and in many cases a better job of teaching than can most teachers, [91], [92] and at a lower cost. For example:

[T]here’s a growing volume of hard evidence that shows that heavy doses of interactive multimedia delivered in schools can dramatically raise reading and knowledge levels ... [93]

At one conference for manufacturers of compact disks, one commonly heard complaint was “Where’s the beef?” The developers of interactive compact disk products were promising interesting uses, but “when pressed for descriptions of early CD-I products, the software developers fell back again and again on vague generalizations — ‘creative products with vision.’” [94] This criticism applies mainly to CD-I products targeted for the entertainment market, but the need for creative products with vision applies also in the computer-based courseware field.

There is a lot of software available for the educational market. Hardware manufacturers (e.g., Apple and IBM PC), software manufacturers (e.g., Microsoft), book publishers (e.g., Grolier) and entertainment companies (e.g., The Children’s Television Workshop — the producer of Sesame Street) are all producing computer-based courseware. As the market for courseware grows, many new jobs will be created for people who can prepare and maintain quality courseware. The preparation of courseware will require a large work-force of creative and skilled personnel.

The role of teachers will change early in the next century. Some will be employed as preparers of computer-based courseware. These ‘teachers’ will first have to determine the best ways of meeting the needs of students. [95] Then they will have to prepare courseware using the full potential of a hypermedia environment. This will require creativity, skill in organizing and communicating information, and skill in all types of media. [96]

Others who would have become teachers will become instead advisers to students. They will help them pick the best computer-based courseware for their needs, and will be available to answer questions which go beyond the capabilities of the software. In addition, they will develop means of assessing the capability of courseware, and will provide feedback on the success of courseware to the developers.

The role of teachers will change over the next twenty five years. For those willing and able to adapt to CAI, there will be new opportunities in the field of education.

Mount Ebal

CAI will permit students to learn at home and at their own pace, [97] if they have the discipline. [98] This will undoubtedly result in problems because of the general lack of discipline among young people, and the lack of educational structure in many homes. In addition their being at home (i.e., not in school) could lead to additional social problems. Our society is structured around having most children up to about age 18 ‘locked-away’ in school for 9 months of every year. Many parents would not be able to cope with having their children around all day. This problem would be compounded if the parents also begin to work from home.

Computer-based courseware would permit most students to acquire a year’s worth of education in a couple of months. This would produce a population of children and teenagers with unstructured free time. Our economy is not organized to provide employment for people in this age-group, nor are there currently other ways to keep them busy.

In general:

CAI promises to break down the lock-step approach to learning wherein all learners, grouped by age instead of by aptitude or achievement, learn the same material at the same pace. But this promise may cause problems the experts don’t foresee: CAI threatens the traditional role and authority of teachers, threatens the institutional role of children, threatens the modern routine of family life ordered around a nine month, full time involvement by offering children the possibility of learning at home whenever they please. CAI still has a large mass of societal inertia to overcome. [99]

Because of the chaos which could result under this scenario, the humanistic and atheistic school boards may actually strengthen their hold on children. Legislation will be ‘required’ for keeping children ‘off the streets’. This legislation will appear under the guise of providing social contact and social skills for children.

Even if the cable replaces the schoolroom so children can be taught at home, the kids will have to go to school two or three days a week just for the social contact. [100]

Education (and society) will exploit new information technology selectively, not universally and indiscriminately. Many traditional values, such as personal contact between teacher and learner, will be upheld ... Schools will not be deinstitutionalised ... because children will still need them and so will their parents. [101]

Thus, the most significant factor which will cause resistance to CAI will be the fact that most people in western societies want the schools to play ‘nanny’ to their children. Most mothers are no longer at home to be with their children, and most parents could not cope with their children being home most of the time.

Another problem is that CAI will increase the amount of learning that is done through mediated means. At present, the average child spends a considerable amount of time learning from TV. With CAI the computer display will become the primary means of education. Learning by doing and by seeing reality will become less common. “What will happen as educational spending is shifted from other areas? Some fear that children will grow up imagining that the only significant information is the kind that can be stripped from a text, stored on a database, and retrieved. What of narrative, fiction, poetry, and the spiritual dimensions of life?” [102]

The Church may have a role to play in finding ways to employ children and teenagers in activities which provide them opportunities for social contact, learning by doing and the challenge of meaningful pursuits. For example, as the population ages over the next twenty five years, there may be opportunities for children and teenagers to be actively involved in geriatric outreach programs. This would provide young people with useful ‘educational’ activities and help reduce the loneliness of the elderly.

A lot of thought must be given to the coming impact of CAI on education and society. There will be an impact whether or not we want to face it. The Church should be at the forefront shaping and guiding this new adventure.

Mount Gerizim

The three areas in which the Church will benefit from the application of CAI:

The increasing availability of high-quality computer-based courseware.

The use of distance learning.

A dramatic re-evaluation of the nature and role of education in our society.

Sunday School computer-based courseware is available which can be used for instruction of youth. [103] This material currently includes drills, quizzes, games, stories, and tutorials. As courseware becomes more common, it will be used by the Church for providing the best of Bible instructional material to anyone on the Electronic Highway who wishes to access the material.

The availability of a broad-range of Christian computer-based courseware may mean that average Christians will have a better understanding of the Bible, theology, and church history than they do at present. It may also provide non-Christians with an opportunity to learn about the Bible and Christ in what they consider to be non-threatening ways. It may be that the Holy Spirit will use courseware as a means of bringing many into the Kingdom of God.

Those wishing more in-depth material will have access to advanced computer-based courseware at the Bible school or seminary level. For example, courseware is available to assist those learning the biblical languages. [104] This general availability of theological educational materials will have at least two effects. First, it will increase the level of serious consideration of theology. Second, it may provide alternatives to the current approach to seminary training:

There is nothing wrong with this ideal [a well-trained ministry], but it has always been seriously flawed in its Calvinist version: a bureaucratically trained, academically certified ministry ... The theological seminary as an institution is a dinosaur ... The institution has outlived its usefulness in its traditional form ... Formal certification is the today model for all education ... This worship of academic certification has always been the weak link in Calvinism as an institutional phenomenon ... Almost everything that a seminary imparts academically could be achieved much more effectively by a notebook computer and a 5-inch CD-ROM laser disk that contains 350,000 pages of printed materials ... Requiring students to come to a central campus is ridiculous. This requirement tends to eliminate married men with families — the people specified by Paul as those qualified for the pastorate. [105]

CAI on the Electronic Highway will permit those working in other professions to pursue a theological education from their homes at times convenient to them. Some schools are already providing computer-based theological education [106], [107] and “[m]any of the 224 members of the Association of Theological Schools (ATS) are investigating how to use new technology in educational settings.” [108] This will make the qualification of pastors more dependent on godliness and the ability to preach than on educational certification. [109]

Although the Church will probably find CAI useful for biblical instruction, many Christians may be more concerned about the impact of CAI on general education. They will undoubtedly agree with many of the criticisms of the public school system presented earlier in this chapter. Both the libertarians and Christians [110], [111] have identified the same problems, even though they start from different philosophical bases. Unfortunately, the libertarians (and many Christians) have ultimately no better a solution than the conventional educational theorists.

As educators have argued among themselves in the twenty years which have passed since Illich wrote his book Deschooling Society, the public school system has become more tightly controlled by government, and has continued to deteriorate. During this period evangelical Christians have been very active in forming separate schools and in home schooling. But this has not always gone smoothly.

You may have heard of the problems in Nebraska, in some counties in Michigan and in other states where Christians have been harassed for opting out of the public school system. Also, you have probably heard some of the debates about whether tax money should be used to provide vouchers for students enrolled in private (religious) schools, or whether a person should have to pay taxes to fund the public schools while the children are enrolled in private schools. From a Christian perspective, the stranglehold of the government and public school system has tightened beyond acceptable limits. Some Christians are advocating non-violent and (even violent) civil disobedience.

I believe that CAI may provide an opportunity to break the stranglehold of a humanistic government and school system. Here are some ideas on how the CAI is going to change radically the nature of education as we know it:

But what if there were a third way, one that does not rely on permission or tax dollars from the government, or large amounts of private money to subsidize non-public education? I have seen the classroom of the future, and it is in space. [112]

Many believe that the new information technology will be cheap and will so increase opportunities for learning ... that existing educational systems will be irreparably damaged, even rendered obsolete. Learning will be moved, to a far greater extent than at present, from schools and colleges to homes and places of work. [113]

Technology can make life-long learning a reality. With electronic tools, people can learn virtually anytime and place they chose without obstacles such as poor transportation, fear of street crime, or lack of expert teachers. Technology makes learning a private and personal experience and seems to motivate learners. [114]

Used well, [educational] technology presses for longer and flexible work periods, more complex relationships among the disciplines in learning, the creation and maintenance of considerably more diverse and personal relationships in and outside the school, and activity structures which necessitate management skills unfamiliar to many. [115]

In fact, CAI is going to make necessary a reevaluation of the fundamental questions regarding the purpose of education, the philosophy of education, the best methods and techniques to be applied, and who should be responsible for education — parents or government-controlled school systems. [116], [117], [118] All this will take time since reorganizing (or dismantling) the existing public school system to utilize fully the educational resources of technology will require vision and persistence, and involves much frustration fighting the political and education establishment.

James Coleman, writing in 1972, did not then see how computer communication and CAI could have an impact on education and the schools. But he still understood from the trends that he saw then, that electronic media would reshape the purpose and role of the school.

Throughout their history, schools have been the community’s gateway for information. Schools have been a source of, and guide to, books — and books were the principal door to the world beyond one’s own experience ... Schools as they now exist were designed for an information-poor society, in part to give a child a vicarious experience through books and contact with a teacher. Obviously that function is altered radically by television, radio, and other media outside the school ...

Two aspects of the communication structure of information rich, open societies are destroying two classical functions of the school. Information richness removes the functions of the school in extending the child’s horizons through vicarious experience; and information pluralism removes from the school the function of shaping the child’s values through selectivity. [119]

Christians can have an opportunity to shape the philosophy and content of education under CAI. If they can formulate a biblically-based philosophy and get on with the production of computer-based courseware, they will have an opportunity to have a Christian influence on our culture.

Free men do not wait for the future; they create it. The difficulties and problems in that venture are to them not a hindrance but a challenge that must be met. Those critics of the schools who wait for the state or society to act work on the same premise of the primacy of the group. The futility of their cause is thus foreordained. Free men do not look to the state for the opportunities and results of freedom. [120]

A key question is: who will take the leadership in the creation of biblically based CAI environment for learners of various ages and learning needs?

Endnotes [Next | Previous | Contents]

[1] Joel Spring, A Primer of Libertarian Education (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1975), p. 13. Back

[2] Ivan Illich, Deschooling Society (New York: Harper and Row, 1971). Back

[3] Philip W. Jackson, “Deschooling? No!,” Challenge and Choice in Contemporary Education, Christopher J. Lucas (ed.), (New York: Macmillan, 1976), p. 448. Back

[4] Robert Maynard Hutchins, “The Role of Public Education,” Challenge and Choice in Contemporary Education, Christopher J. Lucas (ed.), (New York: Macmillan, 1976), p. 451. Back

[5] Elliot Soloway, “Technology in Education,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1993. Back

[6] Donna Jean Mackinnon, “Schools Train Kids for 19th Century: Educator,” The Toronto Star, April 26, 1993. Back

[7] Victor Dwyer, “Are we Cheating our Kids?” Maclean’s, March 14, 1994. Back

[8] Jennifer Lewington, “Turning to Private Schools for Family Values,” Globe and Mail, August 30, 1994. Back

[9] Arthur Fisher, “Crisis in Education — Part 1,” Popular Science, August, 1992. Back

[10] Willard R. Daggtt, “High Schools the Wrong Road,” IEEE Spectrum, September, 1993. Back

[11] Robert F. Johnson, “Hitting the Road with Manufacturing Know-How,” IEEE Spectrum, September, 1993. Back

[12] Arthur Fisher, “The End of School?” Popular Science, January, 1994. Back

[13] Lamar Alexander, “Toward World-Class Standards,” advertising supplement in Business Week, November 25, 1991. Back

[14] Lewis J. Perelman, School’s Out: Hyperlearning, the New Technology and the End of Education (New York: William Morrow, 1992), pp. 294-304. Back

[15] “A Conversation with Marvin Minsky about Agents,” Communications of the ACM, July, 1994. Back

[16] Jennifer Lewington, “NDP Learns to do About-Face,” Globe and Mail, April 29, 1993. Back

[17] Nancy J. Perry, “What We Need to Fix U.S. Schools,” Fortune, Nov. 16, 1992. Back

[18] Cal Thomas, “Politics, Money, Power: As Government Spending Increases, Literacy Decreases,” World, October 9, 1993. Back

[19] Perelman, op. cit., pp. 87-114. Back

[20] Andrew Nikiforuk, School’s Out: The Catastrophe in Public Education and What We Can Do About It (Toronto: Macfarlane, Walter and Ross, 1993), p. 55. Back

[21] Joel Belz, “Modest, But No Basement Operation,” World, March 21, 1992. Back

[22] Garry J. Moes, “Free Enterprise in California Schools Sought in Education Ballot Initiative,” World, April 4, 1992. Back

[23] Maria Puente, “School-Voucher Plan Hits Snag,” USA Today, September 28, 1993. Back

[24] Paul Wallich, “The Analytical Economist: The Business of Education,” Scientific American, October, 1992. Back

[25] Susan Olasky, “Private Vouchers are Golden,” World, November 21, 1992. Back

[26] Cal Thomas, “Do We Need ‘New Age’ Education? Whittle’s Cure may be Worse than the Disease,” World, July 18, 1992. Back

[27] Kenneth Orr, “Triple-Edged Sword,” World, September 11, 1993. Back

[28] David Chilton, “Fatal Attraction,” World, September 18, 1993. Back

[29] Perelman, op. cit., pp. 183-214. Back

[30] Sally J. Ball, “Why Today’s Schools Are So Different,” Globe and Mail, May 5, 1992. Back

[31] Nikiforuk, op. cit., pp. 10, 27. Back

[32] Dale D. Buss, “Parents Edgy Over Classroom Groupthink,” Christianity Today, September 13, 1993. Back

[33] Ruth M. Jarvis, “Mail Bag: Naiveté or Politeness,” World, September 18, 1993. Back

[34] Perelman, op. cit., pp. 169-182. Back

[35] Harvey Wheeler, The Virtual Library: The Electronic Library Developing Within the Traditional Library (USC University Library, 1987), p. 27. Back

[36] Perelman, op. cit., pp. 149-155. Back

[37] Ibid., p. 277. Back

[38] David Gordon, The Myths of School Self-Renewal (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1984), p. 1. Back

[39] Thomas S. Khun, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd Edition (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1970). Back

[40] “Revolution in the Schools,” IEEE Spectrum, November, 1988. Back

[41] David Godfrey and Douglas Parkhill (eds.), Gutenberg Two (Toronto: Press Porcepic Ltd., 1985), p. 141. Back

[42] “Revolution in the Schools,” op. cit. Back

[43] Randall Neff, “The University of the Air,” IEEE Computer, May, 1988. Back

[44] Salvatore Salamone, “Earning Degrees Via Satellite,” High Technology, April, 1987. Back

[45] “National Technological University: Four Years Old and Still Growing,” IEEE The Institute, January, 1988. Back

[46] Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: the Extensions of Man (New York: Signet Books, 1964), p. 289. Back

[47] Bill Roberts, “Channelling the Power of Educational TV,” The Toronto Star, June 18, 1992. Back

[48] Elliot Soloway, “Log On Education: Ways of Seeing,” Communications of the ACM, February, 1994. Back

[49] Patricia Nealon, “Kids Tune out Classroom TV,” The Toronto Star, April 24, 1993. Back

[50] Robert Fox, “Newstrack: Class Act,” Communications of the ACM, September, 1994. Back

[51] Doris K. Lidtke and David Moursund, “Computer in Schools: Past, Present, and How we can Change the Future,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1993. Back

[52] Hughes Aircraft Company, “Science/Scope,” advertisement in IEEE Spectrum, July, 1987. Back

[53] Ellen Muraskin, “Electronics Newsfront: On-line Colleges,” Popular Science, March, 1992. Back

[54] “Newstrack: By Computer only,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1994. Back

[55] Alan C. Kay, “Computers, Networks and Education,” Scientific American, September, 1991. Back

[56] Wheeler, op. cit., pp. 21, 28. Back

[57] “Revolution in the Schools,” op. cit. Back

[58] Vivian Smith, “‘School without Walls’ Starts,” Globe and Mail, September 28, 1993. Back

[59] David Hawkridge, New Information Technology in Education (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983), p. 105. Back

[60] Theresa Barry, “PCs in Education: Reading, Writing and Algorithms,” Datamation, December 15, 1987. Back

[61] Bernard R. Gifford, “The Future of Technology in Education: An Organizational Theory Perspective,” advertising supplement in Business Week, November 15, 1993. Back

[62] Perelman, op. cit., pp. 262-266. Back

[63] Godfrey and Parkhill (eds.), op. cit., p. 83. Back

[64] Ibid., p. 148. Back

[65] Timothy Ehrgott, “News From Medicine: Computer Tutor,” Reader’s Digest, October, 1987. Back

[66] Jan Hawkins, “Technology and the Organization of Schooling,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1993. Back

[67] Arthur C. Clarke, 2010: Odyssey Two (New York: Ballantine Books, 1982), p. 37. Back

[68] Scott M. Stevens, “Intelligent Interactive Video Simulation of a Code Inspection,” Communications of the ACM, July, 1989. Back

[69] Martin Gardner, “Mathematical Games: The Fantastic Combinations of John Conway’s New Solitaire Game ‘Life’,” Scientific American, October, 1970. Back

[70] Hawkridge, op. cit. Back

[71] Roger C. Schank, “Log On Education: Tractor Factories and Research in Software Design,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1994. Back

[72] Brigid Barron and Ronald J. Kantor, “Tools to Enhance Math Education: The Jasper Series,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1993. Back

[73] Larry Armstrong, et al., “The Learning Revolution,” Business Week, February 28, 1994. Back

[74] Ted M. Lau, “A Catalog of Liberating Home Computer Concepts,” Byte, May, 1977. Back

[75] Gary Stix, “Domesticating Cyberspace,” Scientific American, August, 1993. Back

[76] Dick Ruopp and Shahaf Gal, “The Labnetwork,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1993. Back

[77] Elliot Soloway, “How the Nintendo Generation Learns,” Communications of the ACM, September, 1991. Back

[78] Hawkridge, op. cit., p. 144. Back

[79] Nikiforuk, op. cit., pp. 74-75. Back

[80] Armstrong, op. cit. Back

[81] Hawkridge, op. cit., p. 151. Back

[82] Ibid., p. 157. Back

[83] Ibid., p. 158. Back

[84] Ibid., p. 156. Back

[85] Godfrey and Parkhill (eds.), op. cit., p. 148. Back

[86] “Revolution in the Schools,” op. cit. Back

[87] A. Desai Narasimhalu and Stavros Christodoulakis, “Multimedia Information Systems: The Unfolding of a Reality,” IEEE Computer, October, 1991. Back

[88] Ibid., p. 156. Back

[89] Bernard R. Gifford, “Tomorrow’s Classroom,” advertising supplement in Business Week, November 15, 1993. Back

[90] Gifford, “The Future of Technology in Education: An Organizational Theory Perspective,” op. cit. Back

[91] Jerry Peournelle, “Why Johnny Can Read,” Benchmark, Winter, 1989. Back

[92] Arthur Fisher, “Crisis in Education — Part 3,” Popular Science, October, 1992. Back

[93] Roger Karraker, “Crisis in American Education: Can Multimedia Save the Day?” Newmedia, January, 1992, quoted in The International Multimedia Report, October, 1992. Back

[94] “I On Technology: ‘Where’s the Beef?’ in Interactive Compact Disks, Conferees Ask,” IEEE The Institute, July, 1987. Back

[95] Mary S. Esparza, “Personalizing CBT: Developing a Good Computer-Based Training Program Requires an Author Who Considers the Needs of the User,” Infosystems, January, 1987. Back

[96] Diane Butler, Future Work: Where to Find Tomorrow’s High Tech Jobs Today (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1984), pp. 73,75. Back

[97] Gifford, “The Future of Technology in Education: An Organizational Theory Perspective,” op. cit. Back

[98] Joel Belz, “What Machines Can’t Do,” World, October 23, 1993. Back

[99] Lau, op. cit. Back

[100] Marvin Cetron and Thomas O’Toole, Encounter with the Future: (A Forecast of Life into the 21st Century) (New York: McGraw Hill, 1982), p. 220. Back

[101] Hawkridge, op. cit., p. 213. Back

[102] David Lyon, The Silicon Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), p. 93. Back

[103] E. V. Clemans, Using Computers in religious Education (Nashville: Griggs Educational Resource, Abingdon Press, 1986). Back

[104] John J. Hughes, Bits, Bytes and Biblical Studies (Grand Rapids: Zondervan), 1987. Back

[105] Gary North (ed.), Theonomy: An Informed Response (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics), 1991, pp. 333-337. Back

[106] Dean Vinson Synan, “Letters to the Editor: Earn a Ph.D. on the Internet?” Christianity Today, April 29, 1996. Back

[107] Cal Thomas, “The Missing LINC New Technology Could End-run the Education Monopoly,” World, February 3, 1996. Back

[108] Ken Walker, “Virtual Education — Cyberseminaries are Wiring for Long-distance Learning.” Christianity Today, February 5, 1996. Back

[109] “Revolution in the Schools,” op. cit. Back

[110] Rousas John Rushdoony, The Messianic Character of American Education (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1963). Back

[111] J. Gresham Machen, Education, Christianity and the State (Jefferson, Maryland: The Trinity Foundation, 1987). Back

[112] Thomas, op. cit. Back

[113] Hawkridge, op. cit., p. 158. Back

[114] Carol Edwards, “Life-Long Learning,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1993. Back

[115] Hawkins, op. cit. Back

[116] Godfrey and Parkhill (eds.), op. cit., p. 150. Back

[117] Peter J. Denning, “The University’s Next Challenges,” Communications of the ACM, May, 1996. Back

[118] Elliot Soloway, “Log On Education: Beware, Techies Bearing Gifts,” Communications of the ACM, January, 1995. Back

[119] James S. Coleman, “The Children Have Outgrown the Schools,” Psychology Today, February, 1972. Back

[120] Rushdoony, op. cit., p. 332. Back