The British Journal of Educational Technology (Impact Factor 2.588) has an upcoming special section on Immersive Virtual Reality in Education. For details see:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/page/journal/14678535/homepage/bjet_special_issues.htm#1
Searching for "educational technology"
The Overselling of Education Technology
By Alfie Kohn Mar 16, 2016
my response to ed tech is “It depends.”
Some people seem to be drawn to technology for its own sake—because it’s cool.
Other people, particularly politicians, defend technology on the grounds that it will keep our students “competitive in the global economy.”
But the rationale that I find most disturbing—despite, or perhaps because of, the fact that it’s rarely made explicit—is the idea that technology will increase our efficiency…at teaching the same way that children have been taught for a very long time. Perhaps it hasn’t escaped your notice that ed tech is passionately embraced by very traditional schools: Their institutional pulse quickens over whatever is cutting-edge: instruction that’s blended, flipped, digitally personalized.
We can’t answer the question “Is tech useful in schools?” until we’ve grappled with a deeper question: “What kinds of learning should be taking place in those schools?”
Tarting up a lecture with a SmartBoard, loading a textbook on an iPad, looking up facts online, rehearsing skills with an “adaptive learning system,” writing answers to the teacher’s (or workbook’s) questions and uploading them to Google Docs—these are examples of how technology may make the process a bit more efficient or less dreary but does nothing to challenge the outdated pedagogy. To the contrary: These are shiny things that distract us from rethinking our approach to learning and reassure us that we’re already being innovative.
putting grades online (thereby increasing their salience and their damaging effects), using computers to administer tests and score essays, and setting up “embedded” assessment that’s marketed as “competency-based.” (If your instinct is to ask “What sort of competency? Isn’t that just warmed-over behaviorism?”
But as I argued not long ago, we shouldn’t confuse personalized learning with personal learning. The first involves adjusting the difficulty level of prefabricated skills-based exercises based on students’ test scores, and it requires the purchase of software. The second involves working with each student to create projects of intellectual discovery that reflect his or her unique needs and interests, and it requires the presence of a caring teacher who knows each child well.a recent review found that studies of tech-based personalized instruction “show mixed results ranging from modest impacts to no impact” – despite the fact that it’s remarkably expensive.
an article in Education Week, “a host of national and regional surveys suggest that teachers are far more likely to use tech to make their own jobs easier and to supplement traditional instructional strategies than to put students in control of their own learning.”
OECD reportednegative outcomes when students spent a lot of time using computers, while Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) concluded that online charter schools were basically a disaster.
Larry Cuban, Sherry Turkle, Gary Stager, and Will Richardson.
Emily Talmage points out, uncannily aligned with the wish list of the Digital Learning Council, a group consisting largely of conservative advocacy groups and foundations, and corporations with a financial interest in promoting ed tech.
more on educational technology in this IMS blog
Modern Learning: Re-Discovering the Transformative Promise of Educational Technology
By Steve Hargadon (@stevehargadon) Survey and Report: modernlearning.com |
- When do you believe technology enhances learning, and when do you believe
it does not?
- How has technology impacted your own learning?
- Does your school, library, or organization have a specific learning philosophy that guides ed-tech purchases and implementation? If yes, what is that philosophy?
More than 450 responses were received (those that agreed for their answers to be
shared publicly can be seen at http://www.modernlearning.com).
For the purposes of this report, “educational technology” (often abbreviated as “ed tech”) is assumed to refer principally to the use of modern electronic computing and other high-tech, mostly Internet-enabled, devices and services in education.
Observation 1: There is general agreement that there are good and pedagogically-sound arguments or the implementation and active use of ed tech; and that technology is changing, and will change, education for the better.
Observation 2: There is general agreement that technology is not always beneficial to teaching and learning.
When it becomes a distraction.
● When there is little or no preparation for it.
● When just used for testing / score tracking.
● When used for consuming and not creating, or just for rote learning.
● When “following the education trends: everyone else is doing it.”
● When the tech is “an end rather than means” (also stated as, ”when I don’t have a plan or learning goal…”). We found this very significant, and it is the focus of Observation 6.
● When there is a lack of guidance in how to effectively use new ed tech tools (“when there is no PD”). This is the focus of Observation 4.
● Finally, when it “gets in the way of real time talk / sharing.” Forgetting that the tech “cannot mentor, motivate, show beauty, interact fully, give quality attention, [or] contextualize.” Also: ”outcomes related to acquiring the skills and attitudes cannot be enhanced by technology.” As mentioned in the introduction, this would be missing the “human factor.” One respondent
captured this as follows: “3 reasons tech innovation fails: Misunderstanding Human Motivation, Human Learning, or Human Systems.”
Observation 3: The benefits of ed tech to educator learning are described much more positively, and much less ambiguously, than are the benefits to student learning.
- reduced their isolation by helping them to connect with their peers;
● allowed them to feel part of larger educational movements;
● afforded them opportunities to become contributors.
Observation 4: There is a lack of good professional development for educational technology.
Observation 5: Educational technology is prone to grandiose promises.
Observation 6: Some significant percentage of educational technology purchases do not appear to have a pedagogical basis.
Networked information technology has rendered the words “teacher” and “student” more ambiguous. YouTube tutorials and social-media discussions, just to cite a couple of obvious examples, have made it abundantly clear that at any given moment anyone—regardless of age or background—can be a learner or a teacher, or even both at once.
more on educational technology in this IMS blog
Three lessons from rigorous research on education technology
Hope seen in “personalized” software for math
an August 2017 working paper, “Education Technology: An Evidence-Based Review,” published by the National Bureau of Economic Research with clear tables on which technology improves learning and which doesn’t.
1. Computers and internet access alone don’t boost learning
Handing out laptops, providing high-speed internet access or buying most other kinds of hardware doesn’t on its own boost academic outcomes. The research shows that student achievement doesn’t rise when kids are using computers more, and it sometimes decreases.
2. Some math software shows promise
math programs such as SimCalc and ASSISTments. One popular program, DreamBox, showed small gains for students, as well. Only one piece of software that taught reading, Intelligent Tutoring for the Structure Strategy (ITSS), showed promise, suggesting that it is possible to create good educational software outside of math, but it’s a lot harder.
One commonality of the software that seems to work is that it somehow “personalizes” instruction. Sometimes students start with a pre-test so the computer can determine what they don’t know and then sends each student the right lessons, or a series of worksheet problems, to help fill in the gaps. Other times, the computer ascertains a student’s gaps as he works through problems and makes mistakes, giving personalized feedback. Teachers also get data reports to help pinpoint where students are struggling.
3. Cheap can be effective
a study in San Francisco where texts reminded mothers to read to their preschoolers. That boosted children’s literacy scores.
more on educational technology in this IMS blog
Educational Technology and Faculty Development in Higher Education
The Potential of Mobile Devices for Teaching and Learning
From Books to Bytes: How Educational Technology is Engaging Students and Enhancing Learning
|Sponsored By: VitalSource|
|This presentation will begin on Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 11:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time.|
moderated by Linda Briggs
David Kent Director VOLSHOP (official bookstore) U of Tennessee, Knoxville
Lisa Kiefer, Managing Director Wakefield ResearchCindy Clarke Vice President Marketing, Vital Source Technologies
stats from presentation available here: http://web.stcloudstate.edu/informedia/blog/bytes_books.pdf or http://wcc.on24.com/event/10/30/13/9/rt/1/documents/slidepdf/vitalsource_campustechnologywebcast_finalslidedeck.pdf
methodology: 519 students from 4 years college and u/s
close to what keynote speaker at MN eSummit 2015 shared http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/07/29/mn-esummit-2015/ David Wiley, MN Learning Commons
students want formally taught life skills: interview for a job, balance checkbook and do taxes, how to take out and pay for student loans
traditional 4 year school. cost is part of the program, not charged as a course fee. all materials avaiable first day of school and available in perpetuity. way below rental books prices. via LMS (BB). no printed textbooks. few books through websites, for books, which do not subscribe for the program. ebooks offered at the store. increasing titles selection. cost, learning outcomes. the outlook for digital in the future: already digital, but open for further development. expand courses offered, launching more programs with materials bundled and online course.
digital is easier to work with, deliver to customer,
business partnership (this is different now from http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/07/29/mn-esummit-2015/ David Wiley, MN Learning Commons). working closely with provost, cio, vital source. working with publishers to make sure that content is available>
business model: program bundle all the content and deliver to students and advertise periodically to students
the course fee model: charged to student account semester by semester bases. also student-paid method. all access model is better for everyone.
ebooks are important for the interactivity, collaboration
Q and As:
what was the students’ reaction moving to digital books. how traditional faculty are accepting the change. A: pilot group of several faculty and gradual roll out. early adopters influencing others.
does the content open on all devices? A: yes, device-agnostic. dedicated apps for iOS, Android, and Windows
disability? A: enhanced apps, migrate all PDF format to proprietory platform. epub and PDF content. user added epub content. Center for accessible material innovation, American Foundation for the blind, Tech for All etc
libraries do not provide course materials for students. clean division between campus store and library
BB admin is loading the codes in the LMS, but the idea is to load the information straight into BB. cio in charge. helpdesk support for vital provided by the cio department.
cost savings in percent for students digital to print. student pay model, ebooks can vary to new book price. ebooks even more expensive. with the course fee, 70% off rental. 3rd party operator may add 30%. all parties must be looking for reasonable margin. greater digital adoption results in lower costs for students.
digital alleviates dropout rate.
what course which don’t fit digital materials. life sciences and mathematics, science and engineering is landing itself well
how much interactive content and links to social media is incorporated.
Teachers on Pinterest – A Great Resource for Teachers ~ Educational Technology and Mobile Learning
Excellent Videos Explaining BYOD for Teachers and Students ~ Educational Technology and Mobile Learning:
Bring Your Own Device/Technology is an initiative meant to increase students learning opportunities through technology.
A Resource of educational web tools and mobile apps for teachers and educators
The Role of Librarians in Supporting ICT Literacy
May 9, 2019,
Academic librarians increasingly provide guidance to faculty and students for the integration of digital information into the learning experience.
TPACK: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Many librarians have shied away from ICT literacy, concerned that they may be asked how to format a digital document or show students how to create a formula in a spreadsheet. These technical skills focus more on a specific tool than on the underlying nature of information.
librarians have begun to use an embedded model as a way to deepen their connection with instructors and offer more systematic collection development and instruction. That is, librarians focus more on their partnerships with course instructors than on a separate library entity.
If TPACK is applied to instruction within a course, theoretically several people could be contributing this knowledge to the course. A good exercise is for librarians to map their knowledge onto TPACK.
ICT reflects the learner side of a course. However, ICT literacy can be difficult to integrate because it does not constitute a core element of any academic domain. Whereas many academic disciplines deal with key resources in their field, such as vocabulary, critical thinking, and research methodologies, they tend not to address issues of information seeking or collaboration strategies, let alone technological tools for organizing and managing information.
Instructional design for online education provides an optimal opportunity for librarians to fully collaborate with instructors.
The outcomes can include identifying the level of ICT literacy needed to achieve those learning outcomes, a task that typically requires collaboration between the librarian and the program’s faculty member. Librarians can also help faculty identify appropriate resources that students need to build their knowledge and skills. As education administrators encourage faculty to use open educational resources (OERs) to save students money, librarians can facilitate locating and evaluating relevant resources. These OERs not only include digital textbooks but also learning objects such as simulations, case studies, tutorials, and videos.
Reading online text differs from reading print both physically and cognitively. For example, students scroll down rather than turn online pages. And online text often includes hyperlinks, which can lead to deeper coverage—as well as distraction or loss of continuity of thought. Also, most online text does not allow for marginalia that can help students reflect on the content. Teachers and students often do not realize that these differences can impact learning and retention. To address this issue, librarians can suggest resources to include in the course that provide guidance on reading online.
My note – why specialist like Tom Hergert and the entire IMS is crucial for the SCSU library and librarians and how neglecting the IMS role hurts the SCSU library –
Similarly, other types of media need to be evaluated, comprehended, and interpreted in light of their critical features or “grammar.” For example, camera angles can suggest a person’s status (as in looking up to someone), music can set the metaphorical tone of a movie, and color choices can be associated with specific genres (e.g., pastels for romances or children’s literature, dark hues for thrillers). Librarians can explain these media literacy concepts to students (and even faculty) or at least suggest including resources that describe these features
My note – on years-long repetition of the disconnect between SCSU ATT, SCSU library and IMS –
instructors need to make sure that students have the technical skills to produce these products. Although librarians might understand how media impacts the representation of knowledge, they aren’t necessarily technology specialists. However, instructors and librarians can collaborate with technology specialists to provide that expertise. While librarians can locate online resources—general ones such as Lynda.com or tool-specific guidance—technology specialists can quickly identify digital resources that teach technical skills (my note: in this case IMS). My note: we do not have IDs, another years-long reminder to middle and upper management. Many instructors and librarians have not had formal courses on instructional design, so collaborations can provide an authentic means to gain competency in this process.
My note: Tom and I for years have tried to make aware SCSU about this combo –
Instructors likely have high content knowledge (CK) and satisfactory technological content knowledge (TCK) and technological knowledge (TK) for personal use. But even though newer instructors acquire pedagogical knowledge (PK), pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) early in their careers, veteran instructors may not have received this training. The same limitations can apply to librarians, but technology has become more central in their professional lives. Librarians usually have strong one-to-one instruction skills (an aspect of PK), but until recently they were less likely to have instructional design knowledge. ICT literacy constitutes part of their CK, at least for newly minted professionals. Instructional designers are strong in TK, PK, and TPK, and the level of their CK (and TCK and TPK) will depend on their academic background. And technology specialists have the corner on TK and TCK (and hopefully TPK if they are working in educational settings), but they may not have deep knowledge about ICT literacy.
Therefore, an ideal team for ICT literacy integration consists of the instructor, the librarian, the instructional designer, and the technology specialist. Each member can contribute expertise and cross-train the teammates. Eventually, the instructor can carry the load of ICT literacy, with the benefit of specific just-in-time support from the librarian and instructional designer.
My note: I have been working for more then six years as embedded librarian in the doctoral cohort and had made aware the current library administrator (without any response) about my work, as well as providing lengthy bibliography (e.g. http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/08/24/embedded-librarian-qualifications/ and have had meeting with the current SOE administrator and the library administrator (without any response).
I also have delivered discussions to other institutions (http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/12/embedded-librarian-and-gamification-in-libraries/)
Librarians should seriously consider TPACK as a way to embed themselves into the classroom to incorporate information and ICT literacy.
more about academic library in this IMS blog
more on SAMR and TRACK models in this IMS blog
1 2 3 … 23 Next