Barbara Ross (bsross@starnetinc.com)
Thu, 19 Nov 1998 17:38:34 -0600
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 17:38:34 -0600 From: Barbara Ross <bsross@starnetinc.com> Subject: [ifets] Re: ifets-digest V1 #50
At 01:53 PM 11/19/98 +0100, you wrote:
Hello everyone;
I am very new to discussion lists of this nature, but feel that I can learn
much from this forum. I am a doctoral student at DePaul University,
Chicago, IL, USA. The focus, thus far, of my dissertation has been
Technology and Education in K-12 schools. I am looking at how teachers
have historically percieved technologies that have been imposed upon them
via external forces, ie, superintendants, school site sdministrators, etc.
I am intrigued with some of the posts that I have read so far, particularly
those with historical significance. Afterall, wasn't the wall mounted
blackboard an advancement in technology at one time? The push to bring
every school in the United States & the world on to the "lanes of the
internet superhighway" makes this a very timely topic.
Any help in focusing on various theories, theorists, concepts, etc. would
be welcomed. I have already found a great deal of interest in Mr. James
Burke's commercial, but very informative writings.
Thank you for allowing me to participate with such learned individuals. I
hope I am not breaching any protocol of discussion lists.
Sincerely,
Barbara Ross
>
>ifets-digest Thursday, November 19 1998 Volume 01 : Number 050
>
>
>
>In this issue:
>
> [ifets] Old vs. New
> Re: [ifets] Fw: Discussion: Old vs. New Technology in Education
> [ifets] FYI
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>See the end of the digest for information about ifets-digest.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT)
>From: crawley <R.M.Crawley@bton.ac.uk>
>Subject: [ifets] Old vs. New
>
>Hi,
>
>I've recently joined this list and find this discussion regarding old
>versus new technologies in education very interesting. My research is
>inspired by the need to address the (justified) reservations educators
>have about implementing new learning technologies in higher education so I
>have looked at this issue in some depth.
>
>This discussion points to several issues for exploration and I have much
>(possibly too much) to say, but rather than make myself unpopular by
>overloading everyone's mailboxes I will restrict myself to commenting on
>the nature of the question of old versus new technology itself in the hope
>that you will find it interesting.
>
>***************************************************************************
>
>I am a great fan of Latour's writings on the nature of science. In
>particular, I find his Janus faces rather thought provoking so I shall
>begin by describing the Janus faces of science for you.
>
>Latour's (1987) depicts Janus as a man with two faces (it goes
>without saying, of course, that Janus could equally be a Jane). The
>first is the mature, confident face of learned, established science.
>The face of science that speaks of facts and discoveries and is secure in
>the recommendations it makes. This is the face of science which is most
>often presented to the public.
>
>The other face is young, immature, and less self assured in its
>recommendations. This is the face of science in action that shows itself
>before all the facts are known.
>
>The mature face of Janus (or Jane) is confident that the technology he or
>she develops will improve the lifestyles of the people for whom it is
>intended and will help them to do things more efficiently. The younger
>face worries that the same technology may impose methods upon its users
>which are inappropriate or which change its users and the nature of the
>social world in which they live.
>
>Janus senior and junior say very different things about their theories,
>problems, notations and representations. Senior believes that if we use
>the right representation of the world we will be able to manage its
>complexities and hence solve its problems. Junior doesn't know what the
>problems are and belives that if we could only identify them then the
>right representation could be found.
>
>Bowers (1991) believes that representation is the crux of the debate
>between established science and science in action. There is a persistent
>assumption, he says, in modernist thought that in explicitly representing
>something, people are made aware and given control over what they
>previously were unaware of and controlled by.
>
>Equally plausible, however, is the notion that once the world has been
>made explicit in representation, the anxiety of departure from that which
>has been represented may be so great that the world is forced to comply
>and behave in ways prescribed by the representation. In this case, says
>Bowers, "formalising something becomes and act of violence."
>
>I believe that these issues, rather than being mere philosophical problems
>that designers can dismiss, have very real implications for instructional
>design. Imagine the consequences which may result if higher education is
>placed under pressure (as it has been in the UK by various government
>commissioned reports) to make greater use of ICT if the necessary
>measures are not in place to ensure that these applications
>acknowledge the appropriate design requirements.
>
>Without these measures students and tutors could be forced into inflexible
>modes of thought and action ultimately detrimental to the learning process
>and to higher education itself. The clear need for these measures, for
>me, illustrates the importance and gravity of Rossen Rashev's question.
>
>Apologies in advance if I have waffled too much and said too little. I
>look forward to seeing how this discussion unfolds.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ruth Crawley.
>
>
>
>- ---------------------------------------------------------
>Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/
>Email address for sending message to everyone on the list ifets@gmd.de
>Forum's contact person ifets-info@gmd.de
>Join/Leave Digest or Normal List http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html
>- ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:17:46 +0000
>From: Martin Owen <t.m.owen@bangor.ac.uk>
>Subject: Re: [ifets] Fw: Discussion: Old vs. New Technology in Education
>
>It is noted that:
>
>>Briefly I would say that those who embrace the "tried &
>>true" methods should recognize the TOOL on which this forum exists. I
>>stress tool for a reason. "New technologies" are not an end unto themselves
>>with human attributes and capacities to do authentic deep and significant
>>philosophical cognitive functions.
>
>Two issues come to mind here
>a) Older forms are mediated by technology. The university was designed at a
>time of book scarcity. Handwriting was the order of the day. (vellum has
>such good lasting properties) . People had to move to where the books were.
>The books had to be shared/summarised and were read from the lectern. There
>are great spin-offs from this technology... like great public buildings
>(and the student drinking song and the original idea of a symposium < look
>it up in your etymological dictionary>).
>
>The "modern" University as a piece of technology probably owes its
>development to the railway system as much as anything. Homo railwayensis
>was able to agglomerate more easily and gave rise to the metropolitan
>University ( but that still fits in with the original year determined by
>argricultural technology).
>
>The UK Open University caught up with the invention of the printing press
>and the mail system.
>
>Its maybe adventurous to be iconoclastic but we do not sweep away cultural
>history so easily (unless of course we are Pol Pot). Let us remember there
>is a lot of good in the past.
>
>b) I am probably an unrecostucted constructivist, who believes that
>Vygotsky and the research and philosphpical thought which follows on from
>Vygotsky's work sems to map onto my understanding of the world. I do not
>think of technology as a neutral out there thing. This is not to suggest
>technology should b reified or given human attributes. however I think that
>the equation:
>
>Human + mediation system > Human
>
>mediation system= tools, community, language, rules , division of labour (
>and therefore we can have different mediation systems).
>
>In the collection of papers edited by Gavriel Soloman "Distributed
>Cognitions" (CUP), David Perkins ( I think) makes a very good case of
>thinking about "Person Plus". A human being with a tool acts in a very
>different way to a human without a tool. Ict is therefore not "JUST a
>tool", it (along with the wheel and fire) has powerful transformative
>effects on human action.
>
>
>Martin Owen
>T.M.Owen@bangor.ac.uk
>Director, Project REM
>
>School of Education Yr Ysgol Addysg
>University of Wales, Bangor Prifysgol Cymru, Bangor
>Normal Site Safle'r Normal
>Holyhead Rd Ffordd Caergybi
>Bangor Bangor
>Gwynedd
>LL57 2PX
>
>Voice/Llais +44 1248 382 943
>Fax/Ffacs +44 1248 38 36 40
>URL: http://weblife.bangor.ac.uk/rem/rem.html
>REM is a EC DGXIII Telematics Education and Training Project
>- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Technology is nothing more or less than a natural phase of the creative
>process which engaged man from the moment he forged his first tool and
>began to transform the world for its humanization"
>
>Paulo Freire : Cultural Action for Freedom
>- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>- ---------------------------------------------------------
>Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/
>Email address for sending message to everyone on the list ifets@gmd.de
>Forum's contact person ifets-info@gmd.de
>Join/Leave Digest or Normal List http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html
>- ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 12:00:39 -0500
>From: Constantin Ohanian <Cohanian@vuepoint.com>
>Subject: [ifets] FYI
>
> This is from a list serv on distance learning. One person wrote:
>
>I just returned from EDUCOM, WebNet98, and Asynchronous Learning Networks 4
>Conferences. I would like to share some impressions and questions I picked
>up. And I would like to hear from others on this list about where they see
>online education heading.
> 1. The interest in online learning among Universities and
>corporate training departments continues to grow unabated, but there is no
>single or even a set of "models" of effective online learning emerging.
>Every one seems to be trying out their own variation and calling it online
>learning. The idea of "online learning communities" is being widely talked
>about in the profession - but what exactly does it mean?
> 2. There is a great need for standards, evaluation tools,
>objectives based assessments. A number of efforts are underway. EDUCOM's
>IMS Project (Instructional Media Standards) that is developing very detailed
>technical standards on content to facilitate mass sharing of content is very
>prominent one. Are there others like that?
> 3. There is major trend towards joint ventures and mergers
>among large providers of online educational services. The Western Governors
>University is joining Britain's Open University, to form the Governors Open
>University System. Many countries are rushing to form their own Virtual
>Universities who will exchange online courses among themselves and with
>corporate providers. But where are the learners? I do not see big
>registrations for online courses. Am I missing something.
> 4. There is an explosion of online learning products and
>technologies.
>The US government education department project (America's Learning Exchange)
>expects to list over 1 million online courses from over 10,000 suppliers by
>next year (I find it hard to believe this number, but was told so by a
>representative of the Education Department see www.alx.org.) Tele-education
>Canada already lists 12,000 online courses in its data base and is expanding
>by a few thousand each month.
>
>- ---------------------------------------------------------
>Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/
>Email address for sending message to everyone on the list ifets@gmd.de
>Forum's contact person ifets-info@gmd.de
>Join/Leave Digest or Normal List http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html
>- ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of ifets-digest V1 #50
>**************************
>
>
>End of ifets-digest.
>To unsubscribe from ifets-digest, send a message to majordomo@gex.gmd.de
>with following in message body (no subject needed):
>unsubscribe ifets-digest
>
>
Barbara Ross
c/o Irving Park Middle School
3815 N. Kedvale Ave.
Chicago, IL 60641
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/
Email address for sending message to everyone on the list ifets@gmd.de
Forum's contact person ifets-info@gmd.de
Join/Leave Digest or Normal List http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri 20 Nov 1998 - 01:10:11 MET