Does Technology Influence Learning?
What is the role of media in the educational process? Is it a major factor or just an interchangeable tool? Researchers Clark and Kozma took a deeper look into this subject and formulated two opposing viewpoints. Clark (1994) viewed media as “mere vehicles that deliver instruction” to which any related benefits could be effectively replicated in an instructional method that did not contain media. On the other hand, Kozma (1994) takes a stance that media is a design science, to which humans have the ability to steer the direction of its progress. To Kozma, the real question to discuss was “will media be designed with the intent to influence learning?”. He believes that media’s underlying structure can support the cognitive and social processes we know to be apart of learning. Kozma believes Clark’s determination to separate method and medium is unnecessary. Both are apart of instructional design and should be valued as having an integral relationship. “In good designs, a medium's capabilities enable methods and the methods that are used take advantage of these capabilities. If media is going to influence learning, method must be confounded with medium” writes Kozma (pg. 16).
After reviewing the arguments made by Clark and Kozma, I find myself on the side of Kozma, that media does have the potential to affect learning. I especially agreed with his opening idea that because media is developed by man, it can be advanced to meet decided upon objectives, such as affecting education. When we take into account the time these arguments were written, both before the 2000s, the media at hand was much more limited than what we have available today. Additionally, I agree that it not media alone that will lead to improved results but the pairing of media with appropriate pedagogy. Our goal as educators is to provide meaningful learning to our students, and while media can most definitely support this, it is also our responsibility to make the connection of content and its importance.
Though I will not be teaching high level math or science like mentioned by Kozma, I still believe in the value of media for my elementary classrooms. In particular, a common educational site used by elementary educators, “IXL” which provides grade level specific questions for a wide range of subjects. A teacher can assign certain question sets, depending on what content standards they are trying to meet. As students move through the questions the site will either advance them into more advanced questions if they are showing proficiency, or show easier concepts if the student is struggling and needs improvement on base concepts. A huge advantage to this site is that it continuously runs diagnostics on the comprehension level of students to keep them challenged. Teachers can easily review where each student is at and if they need additional support. Media designed specifically for educational purposes makes this possible. This ability to constantly see the level of student’s knowledge is in contrast to say, reading level, which is tested manually by teachers in most districts about three or four times a year.
After reviewing the arguments made by Clark and Kozma, I find myself on the side of Kozma, that media does have the potential to affect learning. I especially agreed with his opening idea that because media is developed by man, it can be advanced to meet decided upon objectives, such as affecting education. When we take into account the time these arguments were written, both before the 2000s, the media at hand was much more limited than what we have available today. Additionally, I agree that it not media alone that will lead to improved results but the pairing of media with appropriate pedagogy. Our goal as educators is to provide meaningful learning to our students, and while media can most definitely support this, it is also our responsibility to make the connection of content and its importance.
Though I will not be teaching high level math or science like mentioned by Kozma, I still believe in the value of media for my elementary classrooms. In particular, a common educational site used by elementary educators, “IXL” which provides grade level specific questions for a wide range of subjects. A teacher can assign certain question sets, depending on what content standards they are trying to meet. As students move through the questions the site will either advance them into more advanced questions if they are showing proficiency, or show easier concepts if the student is struggling and needs improvement on base concepts. A huge advantage to this site is that it continuously runs diagnostics on the comprehension level of students to keep them challenged. Teachers can easily review where each student is at and if they need additional support. Media designed specifically for educational purposes makes this possible. This ability to constantly see the level of student’s knowledge is in contrast to say, reading level, which is tested manually by teachers in most districts about three or four times a year.
I used a similar example of a program that I had used as a math teacher that also provided great assistance in helping students understand concepts. I agree that technology can be a great medium to come alongside of others in order to impact student learning, though I positioned with Clark and felt that while my program was a great resource for students, it is not the only way in which students could come to the same learning! - Jeff DeKuiper
ReplyDeleteVery well-written position statement!!! As you noted, at its heart of this debate is a realization that there is a different point of view on the role of technology in learning. Clark views that technology in and of itself can not be an independent variable that can explain the causality of the impact, but instead a mediating variable that can explain the relationship with the impact. On the other hand, Kozma views that technology can be an independent variable that causes a direct impact on learning because of its unique attribute. Drawing from a different position, we have a different approach to technology in learning. For those who side with the Clark’s position, they are not interested in the question: does a particular technology impact learning? They do not study a so-called media comparison study. But they are more interested in such research questions as how learning occurs within a technology-enriched environment, how technology supports learning as an intellectual partner. Yet, for those who side with the Kozma’s position, they do many media comparison studies as well as studies concerning finding the unique characteristics of the technology, thus making a case that the unique attribute that a particular technology has impacts learning. Teachers also hold a different perspective on this technology impact. One might be more interested in how technology mediates learning as an intellectual partner that helps students engage active learning, but the other might be interested in using a particular technology because they believe that its unique attribute eventually leads to an impact on learning. The bottom line is it’s a very different world and perspective.
ReplyDeleteThe point that Clark wanted to make is that the question, "does technology influence learning?,” is indeed unanswerable because so many confounding variables and the replaceability of the impact of the technology are always at play. He thus called for the research community to stop asking such an unanswerable question, but instead claimed that we need to dig into in what ways technology can support learning as a delivery vehicle. Yet, for those who side with Kozma’s position (mostly cognitivists), they have conducted so many studies regarding media comparisons, making a case that the unique attribute of X technology leads to Y effect and accordingly that we should integrate X technology in the classrooms for the sake of brining Y effect in learning. There are so many such studies and statistics out there. But, as Clark pointed out, we need to be cautious of examining these studies, since there are always questions whether such impacts are really due to the technology itself.