The argument against using technology because of the time (and
experience) lost is valid and old. I am reminded of HDT's argument
against the use of trains rather than walking:
" One says to me, "I wonder that you do not lay up money; you love
to travel; you might take the cars and go to Fitchburg today and see
the country." But I am wiser than that. I have learned that the
swiftest traveller is he that goes afoot. I say to my friend,
Suppose we try who will get there first. The distance is thirty miles;
the fare ninety cents. That is almost a day's wages. I remember when
wages were sixty cents a day for laborers on this very road. Well, I
start now on foot, and get there before night; I have travelled at
that rate by the week together. You will in the meanwhile have
earned your fare, and arrive there some time tomorrow, or possibly
this evening, if you are lucky enough to get a job in season.
Instead of going to Fitchburg, you will be working here the greater
part of the day. And so, if the railroad reached round the world, I
think that I should keep ahead of you; and as for seeing the country
and getting experience of that kind, I should have to cut your
acquaintance altogether."
There are many things that are given up when we make use of technology.
Topics must be taught in a different order. I have found that, over
time, every minute that I "waste" teaching the technology is paid back
in two when the student is able to investigate, make and test
conjectures on his/her own. The experience of math is different than
when I learned it with no calculator at all, but I think ultimately the
student can be made stronger.