The Flickering Mind: Part I

In his book, The Flickering Mind, Todd Oppenheimer intends to sort out the debate regarding the integration of technology into the classroom. Does technology (the computer) represent an opportunity for education reform? Or rather, is technology a threat that is not only ineffective but also dangerous?


Oppenheimer describes the history of efforts to integrate technology into education, which he details as a series of false hopes and failures. Examples are provided of new technologies that would revolutionize education, beginning with the motion picture (1920s), strongly supported by Thomas Edison, the radio (1940s) (Cleveland), Skinner’s teaching machines (1950s and 1960s), and later the television and computers of the last several decades. Leading us to believe that this newest obsession may be just a passing fad as all the others. Oppenheimer also describes a series of federal government program failures regarding technology and education (examples include administrations of JFK, LBJ, Bush, and Clinton).

Oppenheimer next discusses how the federal government spent millions of dollars in futile attempts to try and close the gap between rich and poor schools in regards to technology. He tells the story of schools in Harlem where millions were spent on computers and the Internet, but no teacher training or technical support was provided. When reading this I felt this is one of the biggest problems in education, when you are given the tools there is not sufficient support/training. I just attended a professional development yesterday, the day before school, focused on collaboration and working across the grades. We sat for seven hours listening to all of these ideas and then told, go implement it this year. In my opinion, they have great ideas but do not give us the time to debrief after the sessions.

Oppenheimer then watched as computers distracted students and teachers from ‘teachable moments’. What did programs like I.S. 275 and Project SMART accomplish? Millions of dollars so kids could play computer games, draw pictures (not by hand), do ambitious projects that ultimately failed, and work on ILS packages and the LOGO program that dumb down education and are inflexible.

The author also describes the integration of laptops into a school in rural West Virginia. The school received positive attention and newspaper articles documenting their state-of-the-art wireless facilities. Oppenheimer takes a closer look and sees that (just like in Harlem), the computers have simplified learning at the loss of critical thinking for students. He describes how technology is not a supplement to education, but rather a replacement.

In Chapter Five, Oppenheimer focuses on New Tech High in Napa, California, a school that would be a model-training center for workplace demands. He found the same old problems of off-task students, but also explores problems with project-based learning and group-focused curriculum. Oppenheimer complains that the focus is on what you show rather than what you learn, and students must go off-campus to take classes in Art and languages.

Oppenheimer concludes the first part of the book by discussing how society has become too consumed with technology fads in education and that we must remember basic principles that guide how students learn. As an instructional designer reading this book, it is evident that I must also stay focused on student learning. Also, I must be careful in getting caught up with the latest fads, I must make sure that the learning objectives are truly being met.