1. Computers should be in the schools. They have the potential to accomplish great things. With the right software, they could help make science tangible or teach neglected topics like art and music. They could help students form a concrete idea of society by displaying on-screen a version of the city in which they live — a picture that tracks real life moment by moment.
计算机应该出现在学校里。它们可以完成很多事情。选用正确的软件，计算机可以使科学变得有形化，并教学生被人们忽略的艺术和音乐等科目。可以通过在屏幕上对所在城市进行生动的描述—时刻追踪真实生活的画面，从而帮助学生形成对社会的具体理解。
2. In practice, however, computers make our worst educational nightmares come true. While we bemoan the decline of literacy, computers discount words in favor of pictures and pictures in favor of video. While we fret about the decreasing cogency of public debate, computers dismiss linear argument and promote fast, shallow romps across the information landscape. While we worry about basic skills, we allow into the classroom software that will do a student’s arithmetic or correct his spelling.
然而在实践中，计算机使我们最糟糕的教育噩梦变成现实。当我们哀叹学生的读写能力在衰退时，计算机对文字的运用大打折扣，取而代之的是图画，进而是影像。当我们对辩论中说服力的下降感到苦恼时，计算机消除了线性论据，而代之以快捷、浅显的信息表达。当我们对学生的基本技能表示担忧时，我们又在教室中引进了软件，帮助学生算算术、改正拼写错误。
3. Take multimedia. The idea of multimedia is to combine text, sound and pictures in a single package that you browse on screen. You don’t just read Shakespeare; you watch actors performing, listen to songs, view Elizabethan buildings. What’s wrong with that? By offering children candy-coated books, multimedia is guaranteed to sour them on unsweetened reading. It makes the printed page look even more boring than it used to look. Sure, books will be available in the classroom, too — but they’ll have all the appeal of a dusty piano to a teen who has a Walkman handy.
以多媒体为例。多媒体的概念就是将文本、声音和画面放在一个程序包中，我们可以在屏幕上浏览。你不仅可以 读莎士比亚的作品，也可以看演员表演，听歌，欣赏伊丽莎白时代的建筑。这有什么不对吗？通过向孩子提供糖衣包装的读物，多媒体使孩子们对无聊的书面阅读变得更加不感兴趣。它使印制的书籍变得比以前更索然无味。当然，教室里也有课本—但是它们对青少年的吸引力就像浮满灰尘的钢琴与随身听一样。
4. So what if the little nippers don’t read? If they’re watching Olivier instead, what do they lose? The text, the written word along with all of its attendant pleasures. Besides, a book is more portable than a computer, has a higher-resolution display, can be written on and dog-eared and is comparatively dirt cheap.
如果这些小家伙不阅读会怎么样？相反如果他们观看雾都孤儿，会失去什么呢？原作，文字以及与之相伴的所有乐趣。而且与计算机相比，书籍更便于携带，并且有更高分辨率的显示，可以在上面写字，可以将书页折起角，且价格非常便宜。
5. Hypermedia, multimedia’s comrade in the struggle for a brave new classroom, is just as troubling. It’s a way of presenting documents on screen without imposing a linear start-to-finish order. Disembodied paragraphs are linked by theme; after reading one about the First World War, for example, you might be able to choose another about the technology of battleships, or the life of Woodrow Wilson, or hemlines in the 20s. This is another cute idea that is good in minor ways and terrible in major ones. Teaching children to understand the orderly unfolding of a plot or a logical argument is a crucial part of education. Authors don’t merely agglomerate paragraphs; they work hard to make the narrative read a certain way, prove a particular point. To turn a book or a document into hypertext is to invite readers to ignore exactly what counts — the story.
超媒体是多媒体在进入教室的斗争中并肩作战的伙伴，它也很令人头疼。V超媒体是将文档在屏幕上展示的一种方式，而且不需要按照开始—结束的单一顺序。无实体的篇章段落按照主体连接起来；比如在阅读了关于一战的段落后，你可以选择另一个关于战场技术的篇章，或者关于伍迪·威尔森的生平，再或者关于20年代衣服的底边沿。这是另一个很奇特的想法，在小的方面很好，但从大方面来考虑就很糟糕。教会学生对有序的未展开的情节或一段逻辑论证有所理解是教育很重要的内容。作者不仅仅是把段落堆放在一起，他们努力把故事以特定的方式叙述出来，并表达一定的主题。把书籍或文档变成超链接文本使读者忽略了最重要的东西—故事本身。
6. The real problem, again, is the accentuation of already bad habits. Dynamiting documents into disjointed paragraphs is one more expression of the sorry fact that sustained argument is not our style. If you’re a newspaper or magazine editor and your readership is dwindling, what’s the solution? Shorter pieces. If you’re a politician and you want to get elected, what do you need? Tasty sound bites. Logical presentation be damned.
真正的问题在于已经养成了一种坏的习惯。把优秀的文章分解成段落只是另一种表达方式，它是建立在这样的观点之上：不间断的论证不是我们的风格。如果你是报纸或杂志的编辑，你写出的文章可读性在降低，那怎么解决呢？篇幅变短。如果你是政治家，想让大家选举你，你需要什么呢？电视或广播演说，而逻辑性很强的现场演说是不可能的。
7. Another software species, “allow me” programs, is not much better. These programs correct spelling and, by applying canned grammatical and stylistic rules, fix prose. In terms of promoting basic skills, though, they have all the virtues of a pocket calculator.
另一种“让我来吧”软件了不是很好。程序通过输入固定的语法和句式规则，可以改正拼写错误，也可以修改文章。尽管在训练基本技能方面，它们拥有便携式计算器的具备的所有优点。
8. In Kentucky, as the Wall Street Journal reported, students in grades K-3 are mixed together regardless of age in a relaxed environment. It works great, the Journal says. Yes, scores on computation tests have dropped 10 percent at one school, but not to worry: “Drilling addition and subtraction in an age of calculators is a waste of time,” the principal reassures us. Meanwhile, a Japanese educator informs University of Wisconsin mathematician Richard Akey that in his country, “calculators are not used in elementary or junior high school because the primary emphasis is on helping students develop their mental abilities.” No wonder Japanese kids blow the pants off American kids in math. Do we really think “drilling addition and subtraction in an age of calculators is a waste of time”? If we do, then “drilling reading in an age of multimedia is a waste of time” can’t be far behind.
据华尔街杂志报道，在肯塔基州，学校不管年龄的大小，将幼儿园到小学三年级的学生安排在一起上课，课堂气氛很轻松，效果非常好。是的，在学校算术考试的成绩下降了10%，但是不必担心。校长安慰我们说，“在计算器时代，训练学生加减法是在浪费时间。”与此同时，一位日本教育学家告诉维斯康森大学的数学家理查德阿肯，在日本“小学和初中学校里不允许使用计算器，因为之是为了让学生提高他们的智力水平。”难怪日本的孩子在数学上要远远领先于美国的孩子。我们真的认为“训练学生加减法是在浪费时间”吗？如果是真的，那么认为“在多媒体时代训练学生阅读是在浪费时间”也不远了。
9. Prose-correcting programs are also a little ghoulish, like asking a computer for tips on improving your personality. On the other hand, I ran this viewpoint through a spell-checker, so how can I ban the use of such programs in schools? Because to misspell is human; to have no idea of correct spelling is to be semiliterate.
修改文章的程序也有点可怕，就像是在向计算机索取培养个性的窍门。另一方面，我从拼写检查程序中得出这一观点，那么我怎么能够禁止这类软件在学校的使用呢？因为错拼的是人，不知如何改正拼写错误的就是半文盲。
10. There’s no denying that computers have the potential to perform inspiring feats in the classroom. If we are ever to see that potential realized, however, we ought to agree on three conditions. First, there should be a completely new crop of children’s software. Most of today’s offerings show no imagination. There are hundreds of similar readings and geography and arithmetic programs, but almost nothing on electricity or physics or architecture. Also, they abuse the technical capacities of new media to glitz up old forms instead of creating new ones. Why not build a time-travel program that gives kids a feel for how history is structured by zooming you backward? A spectrum program that lets users twirl a frequency knob to see what happens?
不可否认计算机具有很大的潜力，能够在课堂上发挥无与伦比的作用。但是如果我们让这种可能性变成现实，就必须基于三个条件。第一，孩子们使用的软件应该全部是最新的系列软件。目前提供的大多数软件都缺少想像力。有成百上千的阅读、地理和算术方面的类似程序，但是在电学、物理或建筑方面几乎是空白。而且他们滥用新媒体的科技能力，将原来的重新包装，而不是创造出新的。为什么不开发出时光探索软件？通过摄影机的镜头移动，将你带回到过去，让孩子们亲身感受历史是如何形成的。为什么不开发出光谱软件？使用者通过转动表示频率的旋钮来看看发生了什么。
11. Second, computers should be used only during recess or relaxation periods. Treat them as fillips, not as surrogate teachers. When I was in school in the 60s, we all loved educational films. When we saw a movie in class, everybody won: teachers didn’t have to teach, and pupils didn’t have to learn. I suspect that classroom computers are popular today for the same reasons.
第二，应该在休息或放松时间使用计算机。把他们当作是刺激，而不是老师的替代品。六十年代我在上学时，我们都喜欢科教电影。当我们在课堂上看电影时，每个人都从中受益：老师不用教，学生不用学。我怀疑现在课堂上广泛使用计算机也正是出于这个原因。
12. Most important, educators should learn what parents and most teachers already know: you cannot teach a child anything unless you look him in the face. We should not forget what computers are. Like books — better in some ways, worse in others — they are devices that help children mobilize their own resources and learn for themselves. The computer’s potential to do good is modestly greater, across the board.
更为重要的是，教育者应该了解父母和大多数老师已经知道了哪些东西：只有当你眼看着孩子，你才可能教好他。我们不应该忘记计算机是什么。和书一样 — 某些方面更好一些，其他方面更糟糕 — 他们是工具，激发孩子们运用资源，进而更好地学习。在某些领域计算机的积极作用要远远大于书籍，但是它的消极方面也是不容忽视的。