Research Plan: Computer-Related Waste

Introduction: The amount of electronics in the waste stream is a global problem with local origins. For this project I will examine the issue of computer-related waste in Sitka. I will look at two specific aspects of electronic waste. The first is a simple estimate of how much computer-related waste is produced in Sitka. The second is an examination of how much a computer refurbishing program based at Pacific High School could affect the dynamics of this waste stream.

Question: How much can a high-school-based computer refurbishing program affect the dynamics of the electronics waste stream in Sitka?

Google: An hour on Google leads to many resources related to electronic waste, and a clear sense of the complexity and severity of the problem. For example, simply sending a computer to an electronics recycling firm does not guarantee the computer will be disposed of in an environmentally friendly way. Many companies take a few steps towards proper disposal, and then ship the largely unprocessed remains to disposal areas in developing countries. Proper reuse and recycling strategies are beneficial to the environment, and help people in a number of different ways.

Data: There are several kinds of data needed to answer my question. The first kind of data relates to how many computers are brought into Sitka, and where old computers go when they leave the island. The second kind of data relates to the amount of harmful or valuable substances in these computers.

Methodology: I will do some internet research to determine the kinds and amounts of harmful and valuable substances in computer waste. I will call several of the larger agencies in Sitka and find out how many computers they have, how often they are upgraded, and how the old computers are disposed of. I will then create a spreadsheet that demonstrates how a school-based refurbishing program could affect these numbers.

AnthroTech

One of the classes I am teaching this session has a technology focus. I am teaching students to refurbish donated computers by installing Linux on them, and then making them functional for specific use scenarios. Some of these computers will stay in the school, some will go home with students, and some will go to other families who need computers. Because of this project, I have been thinking a lot about the issues raised in this assignment.

In the process of making room for the computers we received for this project, I dug through all the existing technology in our school. It is amazing what schools fail to get rid of in due time. The oldest item I found was a 5 1/4 inch floppy disk, circa 1980's! There were a bunch of large camera batteries, parallel printer cables, huge scanners, and other technological artifacts. We have made a recycle pile and a pile that could feed into a technology museum, which may be an interesting project at some point.

My full AnthroTech can be found here.

Article Assessment #1: Prensky, Digital Natives

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. Retrieved September 28,2009 from http://www.hfmboces.org/HFMDistrictServices/TechYES/PrenskyDigitalNatives.pdf

Overview:

Marc Prensky writes of Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants. Digital Natives are people who have grown up surrounded by digital devices and are used to being connected to others in many ways. Digital Immigrants grew up in a time before everyone was connected electronically, and are learning to use digital devices and structures much as people learn a new language later in life. Prensky describes a divide between these two groups, and argues that Digital Immigrants must adapt their teaching styles to those of the Digital Natives they wish to teach, rather than expecting Digital Natives to learn in the style the Digital Immigrants are used to.

Reference Points:

• Digital Natives – People who are “'native speakers' of the digital language of computers, video games, and the internet”.

• Digital Immigrants – Those of us who were “not born into the digital world but have, at some later point in our lives, become fascinated by and adopted many or most aspects of the new technology”.

• Most Digital Immigrants are more used to a linear approach to teaching and learning, while most Digital Natives are accustomed to a nonlinear approach. (Prensky uses the word “random”, but nonlinear is a more accurate term.)

• Some of our methodology must change. We must facilitate a nonlinear approach to learning, that allows students to think in the style of hypertext they are accustomed to using.

• Some of our content must change. We must distinguish between Legacy and Future content, and determine a meaningful balance of each to focus on.

Reaction:

I enjoyed Prensky's articles about the difference in teaching and learning styles of “Digital Natives” and “Digital Immigrants”. I disagree with his use of certain terms for subtle but important reasons, and there are some overall thinking that I disagree with as well. However, the topics he raises are important to consider, and he has done a decent job of helping foster a discussion among educators and related professionals.

My thinking is flavored by a number of personal influences. I have a background in physics and technology so I have a deep understanding of some of the terms that writers like Prensky use rather loosely. For example, he speaks of “random access” such as hypertext. The invention of hypertext has changed reading dramatically, but it is not random. A much better term, and quite significant for the tasks which educators have to carry out, is “nonlinear”. It would be difficult for us to plan out a course in which students follow a random sequence of learning experiences. But giving them an overall course outline and facilitating a nonlinear passage through that course, is quite straightforward to plan. Distinctions such as these are important if we are interested in helping educators develop a new style of teaching. This is not a fault of Prensky, but it is incumbent on us to more fully articulate the points he has raised.

Prensky is very good at pointing out the difference between Digital Native and Digital Immigrant modes of thinking, but he seems to have a sense that the Digital Native way of thinking is superior. He also seems to think that Digital Immigrants need to adapt to a new style of teaching and learning, while there is a lot that unguided Digital Natives have to learn. For example, Prensky seems to think less of Digital Immigrants who read the manual for a program than he does of Digital Natives who simply play with a program and expect to learn its functioning. There is a balance here that both groups need to achieve. Playing with a game or program to become familiar with it works to a degree, and it is often how I introduce many educational activities. One of the best ways to teach math with manipulatives is to let students play with the manipulatives for a period of time before offering any guided or structured activity with them. But to understand any program or activity deeply, we often time have to read the manual. As an experienced technology user, I see this regularly. People come to me when they have trouble using their own technology. Most of the time I don't have an immediate answer for people's problems, but I know how to look through a manual efficiently and effectively, and I know how to conduct an efficient and effective internet search. Many Digital Natives are as deficient in these skills as Digital Immigrants are, and the consequences can be profound. The ineffective use of Powerpoint was determined to be one of the contributing factors to the space shuttle Challenger explosion.

Prensky says that some content, like Euclidean geometry, may become less important. This is an ignorant and alarming statement. A solid understanding of Euclidean geometry is required to create any graphics-intensive digital content. Knowing about basic shapes, angles, distance measurements, and coordinate systems is essential to creating meaningful graphics. To create high-quality graphics, an understanding of various higher-level coordinate systems is critical as well. Sure, there are programs (meta-programming languages) that allow users to click and drag shapes, and define behaviors of objects in a “programming” environment. But these meta languages have never been as powerful as true programming languages, and users of the meta languages will always be limited to playing with other people's ideas. People who understand the concepts of Euclidean geometry, and how to apply these concepts in the context of the Digital Native world, will be able to make the next profound leap in creating original content.

This leads me to an answer for how to deal with the problem of deciding between Legacy and Future (which interestingly leaves out the Present) content. Any approach to education that asks teachers to teach more content is doomed to resistance. Rather than teaching Legacy and Future/ Present content, we need to sort out what Legacy content is still important, and teach that content in the context of currently relevant topics that are meaningful to Digital Natives. And if we are to reach all students, we will also do this in a way that is meaningful to those who are growing up in homes without access to digital tools. A nonlinear, rather than random, approach to teaching and learning can reach all of these people in a meaningful way that is sustainable for educators.