eachers don’t want and student’s don’t need. And look at the appalling state of our libraries’ book-acquisition programs! Computers and their accoutrements cost money. Big heaps of moola-whole swimming pools overflowing with bills and coins, bilked from people who’ve paid zillions for equipment, software, and network connections, from which they may never get their money’s worth The money that is being spent on computers, could be better spent on teachers, new acquisitions for libraries, and more importantly, new textbooks and laboratory equipment. Many have expressed dismay over this development, such as Kevin Major. Even proponents of technology in the classroom, like Harvey Weir, have pointed out that “computers are not the end all be all of education, and that the teacher is the best resource we have.” This mad stampede to get classrooms ‘wired” has led some to believe that the student teacher relationship is suffering. Rex Murphy has referred to this as the dynamic nexus. In his article of the same title, he believes that it is the teacher not technical devices that make a student want to learn. He maintains that the computer is simply a tool, and cannot compare to a teacher, or a good old-fashioned field trip. Kevin Major expresses similar concerns in that “computers are inhuman, and lacking the emotions and care that a real teacher would have.” The lack of this human element in computers is another concern. Some feel that there are adverse social impacts on those who use computers frequently. One only need to think of the stereotypical “computer geek”, to see that there is a glimmer of truth to this statement. There are several key areas to this issue, some view computers as dehumanizing and places their commitment and compassion to humanity in jeopardy. . This means that students lack the opportunity to interact with “...
