Advances in technology re-contextualize educational psychology, and while cornerstones of psychology remain constant across contexts, the changes/re-framings necessary because of technology will be/are sweeping.
Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark’s (2005) article is influential, but outdated. Published at the beginnings of the explosive internet/social media expansion, the authors might not have considered how vastly technology would impact future learning. I am surprised that no notion of effects of/with/through technology are mentioned though, and this makes me suspect of the authors’ argument.
For example, when discussing problem-based learning (PBL) in medical schools (p. 83), the authors present research that suggests that more direct learning led to more skilled doctors. However, I do not immediately accept that this holds true today. If technology can now present an instant, accessible database of terms/medicines/symptoms, is direct instruction/memorization still more effective? Perhaps knowledge transfer problems in PBL situations still exist, but this part of pedagogy can be researched and improved; it is less concerning than the idea that doctors may not be trained in the problem-solving applications of their fields’ digital literacies. The impact technology has had on doctors’ practice is as expansive as the impact technology has had in the classroom. Meaningful educational research cannot be completed without acknowledging the role of technology as something integrated into all aspects of life.
Looking at educational psychology without the context of technology is no longer relevant. Mishra, Koehler, and Greenhow (2015) emphasized the reciprocal relationship between educational technology and educational psychology (p.38); this is no longer a near future, but a state of reality.
Hi Sarah,
I agree that technology certainly has the ability to improve PBL outcomes, and negate some of the arguments of Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) on the necessity of knowledge acquisition; however, I would like to add two ideas to the discussion.
1. Spiro and DeSchryver’s (2009) article mentions the difference between subjects that lend themselves well to direct instruction (science and math), and those which might be more suitable to PBL (some history and humanities ideas, like the idea of “justice”)
2. Technology has the power to reduce the cognitive load of learners, thereby decreasing the extraneous cognitive load experienced by learners, and freeing more cognitive power for use in problem solving and actual learning. This may enhance the usefulness of PBL.
Hi Sarah, I like that you mentioned ‘influential, but outdated’ and completely identify with ‘Meaningful educational research cannot be completed without acknowledging the role of technology as something integrated into all aspects of life.’. I think the problem, quite often, is that most people think technology is completely inert. In some ways, it’s true. The use of tech needs to be appropriate and so do the questions we ask about technology. But, we often forget that if we ask the correct questions and use tech properly, then there definitely are ‘media effects’. My favorite example is in ‘Mindstorms’ by Papert where he discusses how ‘the correct question to ask is not if something is right or wrong but if something is fixable’. This was an idea he got from seeing debugging in computer programming. As Ed Tech researchers, I sometimes wonder what are the best ways to ask right questions about technology so that we can 1) Make efficient use of tech in education 2) Address the skeptics.
—
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books, Inc..
Hi Matthew and Sukanya,
I think both of you are pointing to similar ideas that Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark’s (2005) missed. Technology expands potential horizons for how students learn, meaning we can no longer pass judgement on any type of pedagogy (whether it be constructivist or guided instruction based) without understanding how tech impacts student processes.
I love your comment about asking the right questions, Sukanya, and I think asking the right questions, with the right tone and open-mindedness is essential. So many opinions taint our perspectives about how/when/if tech should be used in the classroom that often times productive conversation is completely bypassed in favor of constant criticism and dogmatism. The problem remains though, how do we get practitioners and policy makers to put away their assumptions about “right” and “wrong” and engage in “fixing” the tech integration conflict?
Note: Of course not all teachers/policy makers are necessarily blinded by opinion and assumption, but given the current state of tech usage in our schools, it is clearly a problem for many.
Administrators:
Christine Greenhow
Diana
Rand
cainwil1
Ming
Top Posters:
galvins1: 51
richkat3: 50
albertsk: 43
moudgal1: 43
schellma: 41
liraamal: 39
Emilia: 35
zhumengd: 34
Forum Stats:
Groups: 6
Forums: 19
Topics: 97
Posts: 339
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 0
Members: 77
Moderators: 0
Admins: 5
Most Users Ever Online: 58
Currently Online:
1 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)