1. Technology cannot be a substitute for the teacher. Although new advances in computer technology make distance education more feasible, there is no substitute for a teacher who guides and inspires his student.

2. Today's teachers have a tremendous resource in the worldsideweb and the internet for use in the classroom but there needs to be a balance between knowledge and information delivered through computer technologies and the face to face instruction by a teacher and interaction with other studewnts in a classroom.

3. It will always be the responsibility of the teacher to provide the wholeness for every lesson, so that the students don't get lost in the parts. The teacher also can act as a filter and guide through the diversity of knowledge and information available in the world today and ensure that the most nourishing and evolutionary information is what is presented to the student to be metabolized by them.

DISCUSSION

Since the Van Horn article was written 10 years ago it is easy to see what came true and what didn't. First of all, what he predicted is happening alot more slowly than he thought,, i.e. the wide use of the new delivery systems of computer technology and resulting growth of hope in the nation's schools.

I especially liked his analogy of his friend with all the power tools for working on a Ferrari and comparison with today's educational system and the poverty of tools available to both teachers and students. He felt that computers were the answer to all education's problems and would enhance learner productivity. I agree that more technology is needed but that we need Maharishi's technologies of Consciousness as used in today's CB schools.

He quotes Sculley as saying we need to focus the power of information technology on the individuals inside the institutions, not on the institutions themselves. This parallels the inphasis in CBE on expanding the container of knowledge and the focus on the individual, the idea that knowledge is structured in the consciousness of the individual.

He points out the need for instructional delivery systems which individualize instruction. This also corresponds neatly to Maharishi's idea of self-referral, but technologies like Tmn and the TM-Sidhi program are perhaps more likely and on a deeper level, above to do this, that is provide the self referral component for the learner.

I do think that computers and computer program could very nicely help with teaching people sanskrit, at their own pace and thus more quickly fulfill Maharishi's program for enlightenment and ideal education: "Close the eyes and meditate, open the eyes and read the Vedic Literature."

Van Horn summarizes that "increases in productivity can come about through the introduction of new tools that let workers do exponentially more work....some instruction must be delivered by educational power tools." I agree with this whole heartedly but make the clarification that this includes the technology of CBE. When schools take advantage of Maharishi's technologies for consciousness, the teachers who meditate wil be even better able to "assume new roles as academic coaches, group leaders, instructional designers and innovators." P. 533

The second article might even have been written by the first writer 10 years later since the author, Aric Johnson admits he started out sold out to computer technology and taught for years in distance education. However, he ended up feeling that people are taught best by people and there are always technical problems with internet classes. Also he comments that students don't like internet courses and professors who teach them get tired and frustrated because they don't get to see their student's learn.

I think that MIU and MUM has used technology very well throughout the years. I enjoyed taking core courses with video tapes but what made it work was small groups and lots of teacher contact afterwards to really digest and metabolize, integrate the material offered.