Chris O'Hagan (C.M.Ohagan@derby.ac.uk)
Wed, 2 Dec 1998 18:59:22 +0000
From: "Chris O'Hagan" <C.M.Ohagan@derby.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 18:59:22 +0000 Subject: [ifets] As we approach the end, where have we got to?
We are coming to the closing days of this conference, which I think
has been very lively. Karen will be facilitating the summarising
and conclusions process over the next few days. So I am going to try
to identify the various threads to ease us into focusing down on some
conclusions.
On the theme of old v new, or as I would rather put it - are new
technologies hindering best use of the old, often more reliable
methods? George Free, Barbara Ross, Peter Kandlbinder found
resonances in this argument. Mike Collett spoke of 'a balance'
between new and old, though I would argue that such a balance
seems hard to establish. Bob Leamnson asked if new technologies work
better at educating students and thought it might have something to
do with familiarity and need - if books could get addictive for
some, would the same be true for the new methods? He also suggested
that no technology has ever lived up to its promise - to which I
would reply, precisely because new technologies distract from
enabling older technologies to achieve their full potential. In
fact, Dale Havill saw a level of pedagogical incompetence in the use
of conventional technologies like printed media, and implied that
this could cause equal problems as the new media drew upon these
methods - I agree, a lousy multiple choice question on paper is
equally lousy on screen. Bernard Harris pointed to the need for
appropriate teacher training - I would ask if this would include
better training in the use of the older media as an enabler to
understanding mixed media and multimedia?
If one way or another this group tended to a bit of pessimism about
the ease with which new technologies can be adopted in education,
there are also the optimists. Ken Kahn, Arun Tripathi, Richard Jones,
P Gantt, James Carr, Joe Beckmann offered various degrees of optimism
from computers completely replacing teachers, to stimulating students
who take to it like ducks to water, to enhancing the old processes,
to increasing teachers feelings of 'self worth'. But my original
question was about the people who intellectually author resources in
educational technology - teachers - and suggested that the bulk of
these are still close to the bottom of the learning curve, and
may have been deterred by poor initial forays caused by lack of
understanding of how to the use audiovisual media. We know that the
experienced and motivated teachers can make good use of old and new
technologies, and stimulate student use. We have always had pockets
of expertise. How do we get ubiquity?
Samantha Hobbs challenged Arun that teachers could be replaced by the
new technology - she argued for interaction with peers and teachers,
though she, perhaps with an ironical jab, was happy for loads of
research money to be spent on AI in education! Chris Eliot replied
to argue that although such interaction may be desirable, it may not
always be possible, and that support of the solitary student using
new technologies was a positive feature - and I would tend to agree.
The possibility to expand access to the geographically or physically
isolated has to be a plus. And a number of others pointed out that
the C in ICT (including Samantha!) enabled very positive interaction
over distance.
There was some discussion, set in motion by Ruth Crawley and followed
up by Martin Owen that addressed a philosophical/sociological level
of debate - pointing out learning is situated in social activity and
suggesting that technology can hide 'layers of management and
control', or that it can impose unintended changes on users and the
social world. I suggested that these views represented a kind of
technological determinism - was it avoidable or unavoidable, was it
inherent in technology itself? I think Martin's responses argued that
he was a soft determinist ie that although the subject is transformed
through interaction with the technology -the tool - he seemed
to imply that there is the possibility of control over this. Quite
a few interesting references were thrown up by this side of the
conference. Martin concluded with an excellent quote from one of
these "When we create new tools we create new conversation", but I
wonder if this maybe conflicts with another view he expressed, that
educational technologies do not greatly change the modalities of
learning, which I would tend to agree with. Are we talking about 'New
Learning Environments' or ' but old environments writ new'?
(apologies to John Milton).
Bob, maybe inadvertently, set up a new thread by asserting that 'No
technology has ever caused learning'. Bang! This was an
enthusiastically followed thread, and full of interest. Does the
cause of learning reside within the learner, or can technology cause
learning? The ball shot backwards and forwards. Mike Collett, Chris
Eliot, J Ure, Martin Owen, Samantha Hobbs, Bill Braun, Carol Rice and
Bob again and again, and me all had some fun. Feedback loops were
introduced, cognitive psychology, synapses, chemical changes in the
brain, reductionism and expansionism, buckets and searchlights. But
I think we teased out some very interesting points, and I hope these
will be 'converged' in the next day or so.
I hope I have not misrepresented anyone, and apologies if your
contribution has not been mentioned - it's nearly 19.00 and I want to
get home for a glass of whisky, so I may have taken a few liberties!
OK Karen, over to you - and all our conference 'delegates' - for I
hope an absorbing last few days. If you haven't joined in, it's still
not too late.
Best wishes.
Chris O'Hagan
---------------------------------------------------------
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 Wed 02 Dec 1998 - 20:44:54 MET