Poppa Rex,
(Going back many postings ago...)
I think ideally, one would combine CBT with other types of learning. Off the top of my head, I think some points for consideration about judging the merits of a specific instance of CBT vs. other format for learning are:
-- Is the learning differentiated or pre-packaged? Some software is very good at figuring out what kids know, and skipping over it, and what they don't, and reinforcing it with extra instruction and/or practice. Some software runs every kid through the same exercise. Some teachers (or what have you) can differentiate, and others treat everyone the same, for better or for worse.
-- Is the learning multi-sensorial? You can read on a screen, or you can read from a textbook. OR you can watch a multimedia presentation, be asked to do a virtual project, etc. (Or, at the very least, does the style of teaching/presentation at least somewhat match the child's preferred learning modality).
-- What is asked of the students? A lot of CBT stuff is multiple-choice, which I think is less than ideal for assessing knowledge, skills, and ability to apply. But a lot of "regular" teaching relies on multiple-choice, too. Some CBT (like ALEKS) has open-choice short-answer response, which is a definite step up. But most CBT is not going to have the ability to grade essay-type responses, lab reports, etc. unless there is a human on the other side of the interface. The other side of "what is asked of students" is that computer-based projects may often be replicating a 3-dimentional task in a 2-dimentional world. While sometimes it is advantageous to do this -- perhaps because the expense involved in doing the actual project is too great -- other times, it is less than optimal.
-- What sort of feedback does the child recieve, vs what type of feedback they'd like? What sort of incentives does the training/teaching offer? A lot of educational software gives kids points/coins/etc for getting the correct answer, or working for a certain period of time, so the kid can then go play. I think in many instances, if you do a good job of pairing a gifted child with CBT, the computer program is its own reward. Of course, there can be a lot of problems with what gets rewarded in the classroom, as well.
-- What is the level of expertise of the teacher? Most elementary school classroom teachers are expected to be masters of all, which is a tall order -- and they may not have sufficient background in something to fill a gifted kid's needs; CBT can be done cutting corners, or with lots of content experts using the latest, greatest information.
I'm sure there are other plenty of other factors, but hopefully that's some food for thought.
