An April 19 letter to the editor piqued my curiosity. Turns out this letter was itself a response to an even earlier letter I hadn’t seen, so if I am missing some context, I apologize.
The letter contained some thoughts about the interaction between computers and “The Three Rs”.   It ended as follows: “. . . I can’t help but wonder, would we fall behind by concentrating most heavily on the ‘three Rs’ during kindergarten through fifth grade, then begin pushing technology hard beginning in junior high?  How much good does it do to have a computer teach them spelling when they can use voice-recognition to get answers?  Not every child is going to become (a computer expert).  But they all need to be able to function in a society that requires basic reading, writing, and math skills.”
I doubt that any of us would disagree with the need for students to ‘be able to function in a society that requires basic reading, writing, and math skills.’  Still, let’s explore the perspective of the entire comment a little further.
First, I’m personally pleased that the writer (intentionally?) changed the wording from ‘(a)rithmetic’ to ‘math skills’.  I think that’s a vitally important distinction, but we’ve sung that tune so many times now (without success?) that I’ll move on. In the same vein, I think I’d prefer ‘communication skills’ rather than the more traditional ‘(w)riting’, but let’s not linger there either.
Finally, I think we can all certainly agree that “Not every child is going to be a (computer expert)”!  But I think that’s where we need to begin, as I don’t think that’s the real issue at stake here.  I’m not sure a child’s eventual computer skills, per se, are at all related to how he/she might learn spelling (or any other subject, for that matter).
The writer seems to worry that a voice recognition issue is at play if a computer is used to help a child learn to spell.  But think about this:  IF voice-recognition usage is a problem here, won’t that problem exist whether the child learns to spell from a human teacher (or a book or a DVD)?!  It’s certainly possible I’ve misunderstood.  But this doesn’t seem like a technology issue – it seems like a learning (and teaching) issue. 
I want to say this very carefully, but, while we’re here, shouldn’t the real educational question in the case above be this:  IF voice-recognition is really an issue or a shortcut, do we even need to teach spelling memorization?!  Please:  Relax.  For one thing, those of us who use voice-recognition for our texts know how unreliable the spelling there can be, so, for a variety of reasons, my own answer is YES, of course. For now.  But eventually . . .?  We can’t answer the down-the-road question wisely if we aren’t prepared for it emotionally.
When it comes to technology, the question is not “should we use it?”.  The pertinent questions, at ANY level are ALWAYS “What do we want them to learn”, and then “how do we help them learn it?”.  If technology doesn’t help, fine.  But if it does, why object?  The ultimate goal is authentic learning, no matter what enables it.
As always, a final perspective reminder.  This column is absolutely not about downplaying basic skills!  On the contrary, it’s about our learning to adapt to evolving changes and circumstances that alter the nature of those very skills.