Solving technical problems

Previously, computer literacy was discussed as a concept, which included the ability to solve technical problems associated with ICT and skills related to standard office programs. It should be emphasized that framing what one should solve in technical issues on a computer is very problematic and changes rapidly over time. While in the 1990s, it was common for a person to build a computer from selected components himself, and replacing RAM or hard disk was relatively trivial, today most people do nothing like that. If he uses modern laptops, the replacement of any component is very problematic. It often means losing the warranty, and it is not necessary to do it at home. This example shows that what we call solutions to technical problems can change quite significantly over time.

In contrast, in the 1990s, most people had no idea what a computer network was and how it worked, while today, a user can usually plug in their router, set up a small local area network, or configure a DNS address. It can be said that the solution of technical problems is increasingly shifting from hardware to software, i.e. from the manipulation of physical equipment to the resolution of the issues with the configuration of a specific system.     

The relevant question is whether one should be able to solve any technical problems. Just as it is inefficient for many people to paint an apartment or repair a dripping faucet in a bathroom and would rather invite an expert, this area can also be considered. We believe that such an approach is to some extent practical and authentic, even effective and functional. However, there are specific “buts" that need to be reflected in such a case.  

The first is a sense of security and safety in use. The ability to solve problems with technology gives a person a feeling (albeit largely illusory) of domination or power over a device that he can compel with his mind to perform the tasks he sets. The more technical problems a person can solve on a computer, the more they feel. This is not a kind of psychologization, but a reflection of the fact that if technology is to become part of everyday life processes, it should be associated with the ability of man to control and control it.

The second reason may be a better understanding of how the device works. If you can configure drivers for your printer, you may have more options for thinking about how the printer works or communicating with your computer. This can lead to a better implementation of the equipment in various activities and a deeper reflection on the possibilities of use or problem solving using technology. So it's not primarily about gaining insight into how a circuit and instruction works, but about understanding the world and the tools around us.

The ability to solve minor technical issues is necessary to use new technologies and implement them in practice. It is not possible to be an "early adopter" from the model of diffusion of innovations and not be able to cope with individual tasks related to such technological adaptability. This is a dimension that may be little aware of in education - the transfer of competencies that have a “service character" for a given scientific area. School informatics lessons do not teach informatics but only to work with technologies, which has the character of service skills for other subjects. Technical ability is necessary for the effective implementation of innovations.         

Finally, there is also an economic aspect - inviting a specialist to work with technology in every detail is too expensive. A possible prospect may be remote service in some areas, but it will not provide everything. It can be expected that this will be an area of ​​digital competencies that is socially accentuated. “A person with digital competencies should be able to deal with such simple things". However, we will go through rapid development and probably diminishing. Thus, although the solution of technical problems has its place in the model of competencies, it can be expected that machines and algorithms will broadly provide human work in this area.

One of the most interesting phenomena of the current Internet is manuals. Whatever you want to do - from tying a tie to analyzing data in R - you will find instructions for your work on the Internet. Prime in this area is undoubtedly YouTube, where you can find countless instructional videos. WikiHow, in the form of structured and textual-pictorial procedures, is closely related to this area.    

One of the accompanying texts at the Biennial of Graphic Design in Brno in 2018 touched on this fact by pointing out that today everyone has to learn to solve minor problems through video. Unless it's something extremely challenging, you should be able to handle it. From the narrow knowledge profile of engineers who know their field perfectly but see nothing around, we gradually move towards personalities much more broadly based, synthesizing. On the one hand, this may result in reduced expertise, but at the same time, it makes it possible to draw different knowledge into new contexts. This was perhaps one of the reasons why, in addition to languages ​​and law, part of the Habsburgs' education in the Austrian monarchy was, of course, a craft. 

These online guides create two critical areas of competence that one should acquire. The first is the ability to learn according to them. It includes the ability to identify the problem, name what one has to learn, find instructions, and, according to him, acquire the given competence. Although it is a relatively tedious process, it can be said that it is a specific competence for learning, which is highly applicable in the online environment.    

Such a learning process can be twofold. The first variant, which is related to problem-solving and which we have considered so far, assumes a specific ad hoc approach - we will find instructions for the identified problem, learn, solve the problem, and move on. This approach is probably the most common in everyday life. It is undoubtedly attractive that it does not correspond to how systematic and logically connected the curriculum that one acquires at school.  

Thomas Aquinas called such an approach to learn intellectual gluttony because it was a matter of skipping following thought interpretations in his time. The purpose of the scholastic textbook was to impart a thought and argumentative skill or cognitive structure, not to acquire a little knowledge that will be quickly usable in practice. We want to emphasize this difference in online learning.    

The second possibility is precisely what Thomas Aquinas considered to be his teaching, i.e. finding a specific comprehensive set of lessons (videos or instructions), which will give a person a suitable thought structure, which he can further use.

The second area of ​​competence that needs to be mentioned in working with online manuals is the ability to create them. Tutorials are typically a product of the community, and there are even products like Ubuntu based on the user creating the critical wiki tutorials. Starting a guide can mean two different levels or modes of progress, but they are not entirely separate. The first is structured writing or shooting videos to do something. Such a procedure requires specific technical competencies (mostly digital competencies to create content) and a didactic intention or view. It is necessary to know how to explain the thing, describe it in the context of other instructions, and so on.      

Creating guides can be both an individual and community activity. In this context, learning communities are built on the idea of ​​intensive information sharing and a willingness to help each other. The goal of such a community is to pass on their know-how to improve a specific knowledge, skill, service operation or help others. In this respect, the online environment offers new, more profound, and longer-term opportunities for collaboration than those offered by traditional learning communities. 

In addition to these tutorials, there are also discussion forums that typically focus on a narrower class of issues - it could be looking for an alternative to a tool or fixing a malfunctioning Wi-Fi adapter in Linux. Here, too, it is possible to consider the competence of asking a question or searching for the necessary information in already solved problems and the ability to create meaningful and functional answers.    

In this case, these are quick and easy answers that do not understand the nature of the problem or its causes but allow you to fix something quickly. Again, we believe that these are specific competencies that lie between solving and learning competencies, which one should pay due attention to. With proper leadership, it is relatively easy to achieve a reasonably advanced level in this area without seeking any explicit formal education.

The field of solving technical problems brings a great traditional dilemma of the philosophy of science, namely the discussion of the relationship between theory and practice. Previous sections have indicated that this is a highly complex topic that can be skewed in different directions into dysfunctional models that do not develop digital competencies but rather lead to specific cognitive distortions. In the words of Evagrius of Pontus - it is necessary for the virtues (in our case, theory and practice) to grow like fingers: with one long and one short finger, one does no good work.      

The first extreme is based on pure practice. Within the process of framing the topic into problem-solving, such a procedure may seem adequate - the goal of solving problems is their simple elimination. The key to progress is an experience - here in metaphysics, Aristotle already points out that an experienced person can be equipped to solve problems in some respects. Still, there is no guarantee that his procedure will be effective, correct, or otherwise advantageous. The deviation towards practice can result in one only asking effectively in discussion forums (and not logically contributing to them in any way) or a particular surface and fragmentation of knowledge.

On the contrary, escaping to theory logically cannot correspond to the requirement of learning through problem-solving because it will be too slow and too general. However, theorists are preferred and honored by Aristotle. He refers to “engineers who cannot work with a shovel." Logically, this is not a complete inability but a choice of an unnecessarily complex and inefficient approach to problem-solving.     

Problem-solving thus offers a particular compromise between the two eccentricities - it seeks to develop competencies on specific problems to be considered and reflected. It places emphasis on the issue and its solution, but at the same time, does not seek to choose a single mechanical procedure. Whether one is more established as a practitioner or a theorist, one should strive for a balanced solution.