Monday, April 13, 2009

The Use of Technology in Education is a Means to an End and Not an End in Itself?

The Use of Technology in Education is a Means to an End and Not an End in Itself?
Question Details:
--------------------
The Use of Technology in Education is a Means to an End and Not an End in Itself?

It seems to me that we are losing sight of the basic purpose of Education; which according to me is 'man-making', learning to be' and learning to become'.
The entire process of education needs socialization with a peer group and experiencing what we are learning. We are adding Technology to Education without any consideration of the objectives and adding technology seems to have taken precedence over other major concerns.
I have seen the impact and the advantages of technology and am witnessing the disadvantages of leaving everything in Education to Technology.

Please give me your valued opinion based on your experiences.
Kindly allow me to use your answer and suggestions in my Blog.

On 3/21/09 3:50 AM, Prof Bhushan Lal Handoo added the following clarification:
I regret the spelling error in the word Technology in my question?

I am genuinely concerned about good education and sad to find a lot of gimmickry going on in the name of technology and the gullible parents and students being cheated not only of their money but also of their expectation of good education.

I am aware that proper use of Technology in education can have tremendous advantages in learning, in reaching out to more numbers, in bringing the best education to our students.

I would love to have some fearless and daring opinions from those especially, who have seen the good and bad use of technology in education.
Thanks.


Jo Aggarwal wrote:
I can see a lot of well crafted opinions in the responses so far, so I will keep my post to examples of good and bad uses of technology I have seen in education.

As someone who left eLearning for being tired of selling "snake oil" but still uses technology for specific inputs your question strikes a chord with me.

One of the best examples of technology in education I have seen is a site called mathletics - my son's school uses this site - On World Maths Day - children from schools across the world spent more than 6 hours online answering maths problems, competing with each other to do the most correctly in a minute.
They compete against others who are at exactly their skill level, and from at least 3 other continents - so each child feels challenged but also motivated at the same time. Teachers can give them exercises on the site.

I love this because it uses the two biggest technology advantages - connecting with others, and personalization to make a great instructional experience.

But all too often technology in education is introduced for the wrong reasons. I see in my work so often that technology is used to drive the cost of "teacher time" per student down by providing online lectures or elearning- working completely counter to the advantages of personalisation or learning from peers and mentors.

This also happens when you use technology to "scale" a learning solution - something I have been hearing a lot about lately. Organisations like the University of Phoenix online who have done this successfully know that you can only have about 8 students to an instructor online where you could have had 20 students to an instructor live, to create the same impact..

At the end of the day, to get great education, we need great educators - and if technology gives people an excuse to fewer, or less committed teachers, it is always counterproductive.

However, if it enables people to build motivation by creating virtual classes that are more homogenous and personalised- where people who have exactly the same style of learning or the same level in a subject can get together for a very targetted learning experience, it could be brilliant.

Links:
http://www.mathletics.com

David Rountree wrote:

Technology is an end in itself as well as an enabler, enhancer, motivator, and expansion of the classroom. The short answer is technology is both or it could end up being neither.

First, if a student is truly prepared for the workforce, then technology is a necessary part of that preparation. My view is that technology needs to be a tool that students use as well as a tool that they observe being used to enhance their education.

Second, technology can extend the teacher's reach. It allows the teacher to bring things into the classroom that have traditionally been out of reach. A french class that can actually read a current french newspaper. Or a science class that can observe an online video of an experiment performed halfway across the world. There are no limits to bringing global works to wherever. Perhaps a museum in Egypt instead of stale, outdated text photos. Maybe timely participation in a webcast. Maybe calculators to focus on problem solving and give temporary relief from the mechanics of arithmetic.

Third, technology can be used to supplement a teacher's efforts. I used to put my outlines, lecture notes, and assignments online to make them available 24/7. It released me from the drudgery of writing code on the blackboard and students scrambling to get it all down before I erased it. And I was able to demonstrate programming in action instead of well rehearsed snippets and algorithms repeated too often.

Finally, technology allows students to learn even when a traditional learning environment is unavailable. A small farm community that can still offer an AP calculus class. Or a single mom able to take accounting while watching the kids.

There is no substitute for a good teacher, but that teacher recognizes the value that technology offers and strives to bring it in. And even if technology occasionally becomes the end, students observe a professional coping with new technology and mastering it. A learning experience in and of itself.

Scott Byorum wrote:

Technology can deliver the message in various and convenient ways, but it fails to deliver the heart behind the message. It is one thing to read a book or interact with a computer program explaining a concept or premise. But it is an entirely different and richer experience to interact with a human teacher on the subject. The wealth of their heart in the matter is physically transferred into your perceptions and expands your ability to think and conceptualize.

Dr. James Brewer wrote:
When one is taught using technology as a tool, it can increase one's ability to absorb (or at least gather) information more quickly.

When one is taught the technology itself, one is learning "knowledge" that was hopelessly out of date before the teacher ever learned it. The poor student is doomed to instant obsolescence.

Education is the ultimate enabler. Generally, if one is not educated, one is not able.

Let's be forthright here; the "technology" of which we speak is computer software in most cases. All software, in my mind, falls into a few categories:

1. Smart software for smart people. This is targeted to a specific need, and helps people who are already productive and know how to think be ten times more productive. CAD programs, for example.

2. Smart software for dumb people. This is also targeted to a specific need, and helps people to do something they simply could not do without the software. A web browser or email program, for example, are software that allows people with no tech savvy to gain access to prodigious volumes of information. This serves a valuable role in "technology".

3. Dumb software for dumb people. The only result of software in this category is to allow dumb people APPEAR to be more productive. PowerPoint is an example of this category. The largest number of users of this are marginally-literate dead wood who don't know much, will never know much, and refuse to think. They can use this software to APPEAR to be churning out reams of beautifully-crafted documentation, when in fact the emperor has no clothes.

I once worked at a company where all presentations had to be made in black on a white background, with no graphics. The meetings went faster, and attendees paid attention to the speaker instead of bells and whistles.

Susan Shwartz PhD wrote:

I agree that there is a difference between using technology and being used by it. I don't like to see higher education being used to teach people expertise in specific programs, then chuck them out with degrees when they are not educated, but simply adept at a program. That used to be considered secretarial -- and while I couldn't do an executive secretary's job on a bet, you used to go to Katy Gibbs for it, rather than to College. (I have heard that Gibbs now offers a degree, but I haven't checked this.)

I am wondering if, in our rush to credentialize, we should be giving out certifications, rather than B.A.'s or B.S.'s, and requiring updates as new releases come on the market. One exception: the computer science major, whose education should exceed reading manuals and digital and visual expertise.

I think PowerPoint is a -horrible- way of communicating because it does not foster good writing and, instead, cuts to the chase without any kind of interaction aside from the person inflicting the slides reading the bullet point to his or her victims. It generates a "this is excess verbiage (usually spelled wrong)" mentality that masquerades as being efficient and businesslike, but that often takes the form of jargon-ridden, brusque phrases. Do we need "fine" language in our business communications? Possibly not: but we need clear, workable prose.

Last, however, I do need to point out one thing. "Man-making" happens in the womb, where the XY chromosomes fuse. By the time the XY has gotten to university, it's already done. The individual grows and matures. There are more female than male individuals in the population and, in the U.S., definitely more in college and university.

Please take this into account. Another aspect of education is growth and change. NOT subsuming the larger part of the world's population into the smaller part because of "natural gender" is part of this evolution toward a more thoughtful and inclusive culture to the extent that, when someone does -not- do it, I wonder what other assumptions need to be questioned.

Angela Monroe wrote:
There are actually two separate topics to discuss here. The first is utilizing technology IN the classroom; the other is using it AS the classroom. I will post in two segments.

1. Technology in the classroom: Students need to be comfortable with technology because in ‘the real world’ they will be expected to utilize, embrace, and enhance it.

People tend to be afraid of what they don’t understand, especially if it’s really expansive and can be broken—I remember trying to teach my mom how to program the VCR. Therefore, technology must be introduced in the learning process, the earlier, the better. That said, the manner in which it is introduced is key: it must be introduced as a tool—an aid in solving problems—and not the answer itself; students must understand what the technology is doing.

For example, it is absolutely necessary for students studying math to understand the theory and science behind it, and therefore every third grader must suffer through problem upon problem of long division and later geometry proofs. *bleh* However, if that same student chooses to become an engineer, he/she will be expected to get the job done quickly, efficiently, and accurately, and therefore must be well-practiced in industry-standard software and the biggest, fattest calculator money can buy. In the same vein, a college student writing a paper should know the proper use of English grammar because the auto-correct isn’t always right, but take away spell check/auto grammar from any professional and productivity would decline due to dictionary look-ups for each and every email written (even if that professional was taught spelling in school). *double bleh*

On 3/27/09 6:57 AM, Angela Monroe added the following clarification:
I think education through technology fails when it is presented as the end-all/be-all, and the concept is not taught along with it. A fifth grader working at a rummage sale should be able to count back change, without waiting for his brother to finish using the calculator. What happens when that fifth grader buys something at a store and a crooked cashier short-changes him because the kid can’t do simple math? As long as we continue to present the theories and reasoning behind concepts along with introducing how technology can make the task faster and help identify errors (key word there is ‘help’), our kids will be OK.

2. Regarding the utilization of technology for course delivery, I have strong opinions on this topic also. I was in the admissions department at the Online campus of Herzing University for several years. It was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life to watch my students, who couldn’t confirm to a traditional college schedule /experience, go through college, graduate, and score a fantastic new job, thanks to their education. Many of my students were single parents, tired of working two and three jobs to support their children, who needed the flexibility our online education provided. The difference going to college made in their lives, and their children's lives, is mind-blowing. Utilizing technology to provide access to education is definitely a good thing for society.

However, this also goes back to how that technology is utilized. As other posters have said, a PowerPoint show and simple multiple-choice exam does not constitute learning! The online student must still be engaged in the experience, discussing concepts and ideas with other classmates and the instructor; the student MUST remain challenged and stimulated.

In summary, technology in education can be very dangerous, if left in the wrong hands. If used as a crutch, society won’t move forward because no one will understand the thought process behind technology in order to enhance it. But, when used correctly, technology can help students save time performing menial tasks and allow them more time for creatively finding new solutions to problems. If the abacus or slide rule was the highest tech devices for math majors, would they still be able to solve engineering problems? Sure, but the time differential would be enormous.

(For this post, I would have had to look up the spelling of conundrum and abacus if it weren’t for spell-check. On the other hand, I overrode two grammar suggestions. I’d like to thank my teachers for utilizing technology properly.)

Allen Laudenslager wrote:
Since the true purpose of education is to improve our lives, how you deliver the instruction is secondary.

I think it was Plato who said "A school is a log with a teacher on one end and a student on the other". This theory has stood the test of time - 3000 years (aprox).


Nitesh Chandra wrote:
I find it difficult to see how one can disagree with this fact. Technology can be an enabler, a potential field-leveler for many learners from comparatively disadvantaged background. Yet, unless one is clear about objectives for using the technology/tools, it can be of no significant consequence.

Of late, having visited quite a few schools to understand the use of technology to enable students to realise their potential, one realised that it essentially is the story of the old wine in a new bottle. The approach and objectives remain highly outdated and unless there is fresh thinking on the objectives of education and using technology to achieve those objectives, things will remain as they are, despite superficial changes.

Benjamin Goh wrote:
Education, like business and other areas of our lives is human driven. Without the human factor, education will be like stale fish, never fresh enough! This means that technology like the computer is only a tool.
-
-
Let's take the analogy of hearing and listening.
-
"There is a real distinction between merely hearing the words and really listening for the message. When we listen effectively we understand what the person is thinking and/or feeling from the other person’s own perspective. It is as if we were standing in the other person’s shoes, seeing through his/her eyes and listening through the person's ears. Our own viewpoint may be different and we may not necessarily agree with the person, but as we listen, we understand from the other's perspective. To listen effectively, we must be actively involved in the communication process, and not just listening passively."
- extracted from the article, Tips on Effective Listening by Larry Alan Nadig, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist and Marriage & Family Therapist (http://www.drnadig.com/listening.htm)
-
-
As in the above analogy, "education" as the equivalent of listening while "technology" is merely hearing. An effective education can be achieved with or without technology but technology may not be able to effectively deliver a good education. This is how I see the relationship between education and technology.
-
Let's use technology the way it was intended by its inventors..that is, to make this world a better place to live in and embrace education as the means of acquiring knowledge and skills and more so, wisdom, with or without the help of technology!

Donald Philip wrote:
I would agree with you to a certain extent. Too many teachers are using technology without really knowing why or how. It's better to have a theoretical basis for the pedagogical use of technology. This supplies the rationale for why and hints at how.

To this end, I would recommend two books:
1. Jonassen (1996). Computers in the Classroom. Mind tools for critical thinking. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
The title pretty much tells it all here. Jonassen focuses on technologies that support critical thinking and deep learning.
2. diSessa (2000). Changing Minds. Computers, Learning, and Literacy. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.
diSessa introduces his theory of the pillars of literacy: material (signs, symbols, depictions or representations), cognitive (what we think and how we think in the presence of inscriptions), computational (new computer-based inscription systems, etc), and social (the basis in community for enhanced literacies).

From diSessa: "... an average ninth-grade mathematics student plus a particular inscription system [algebra] yields a material intelligence that surpasses Galileo's intelligence, at least in this domain of writing and "reasoning about" simple quantitative relationships" (p. 16). Why does he say this? Galileo did not have algebra–it hadn't been invented yet, and it limited his ability to communicate his mathematical ideas. The computational pillar is rapidly producing new representational systems that change the very way we think and learn. This is what teachers need to understand better. Jonassen's book provides a practical guide as to which software types are best for this.

Stephen Cottle wrote:

The different responses to this post reflect the various uses of technology in education. I don't think there's any one right answer.

My viewpoint is based on being a graduate of a real brick-and-mortar university (FSU) from an on-line program. Clearly, on-line programs make extensive use of technology. I've heard it said that graduates of on-line programs don't receive all of the benefits of full-time students on-site, and that may be true. They get the additional advantage of flexibility however. Even among full-time students, many are taking on-line courses because the in-person courses do not meet their needs or fit their schedule.

The key is the extent to which the use of technology is thought through. My professors used a variety of approaches to lectures, from delivering straight readings to slick presentations with voice-overs. They key was not the format so much as the content. I did the same group projects as my on-site peers, but had the advantage of working with classmates from different geographic regions and with wildly different experiences. I made friends that I'll have for life.

The exams that I took are the same ones that on-site students take. Some of them were administered on-line. Others were proctored.

There will always be a place for brick-and-mortar schools, but denying a role for distance learning is denying the future of adult education.

Alexandre Silva wrote:
The future of education is the same of others sciences and studys, whatever will happened depends of Technology. Paulo Blikstein, a visionary brazilian engineer, now Professor in Stanford, make a wonderful job in the impact tech pro education.

Links:
http://www.blikstein.com/paulo/

shubhranshu agarwal wrote:

I think 'man-making', l'earning to be' and l'earning to become' like mottos of education are not going to be affected by the use of technology but instead students are going to get benefit in many ways.

Adele Madelo wrote:

Technology is not the be-all and end-all answer. What matters above all is (1) a student's ability to read and comprehend different kinds of texts (inc. perspectives). Another useful skill is (2) critical thinking. Without the ability to look beyond surface level no technology will be able to rescue this child. **It still requires human-driven instruction.**

Here's one tech application: I have often used PowerPoints in the classroom because it allows my students (7th & 8th graders) to focus on something, not just my voice. The lights are also dimmed during this time, which as I've found, has lessened their anxiety.

While they like the PowerPoints, students in their evaluations emphatically said that discussion was the best way for them to learn and retain information. For them, that format made it meaningful.

In looking at technology in the classroom, it is important to put the application above all else. What do we want to achieve in our lesson? Students still need the scaffolding to give their projects life. So, they'll need the information, a teacher model, a rubric, and organizational skills to complete successful projects.

It is also important that faculty enter a workplace with basic tech skills. The knowledge to use them correctly is equally important. This includes etiquette--when to send e-mail, how to write effective e-mail messages--to the bigger question--how can technology be used to effectively deliver a lesson?

Like students, teachers must always be aware of how well they're using one of the oldest technologies: speech. This technology, when used correctly and followed through with diligent and mindful action, can cultivate an institution that holds clear and transparent communication at its highest. It should also ensure that our systems of communication and modeling for children do not break down as often. It will also serve as an example for our students, who, whether you know it or not, are always looking to teachers to do the right thing. Plus, like students, we've used discussions to find ongoing solutions for our hardest cases and for everyday practices.

Jay Mehta wrote:
Technology is certainly a means to an end and NOT the end itself. Primary purpose of education is to deliver knowledge/information from one person to another. While the knowledge remains the asset with human beings, it is only the way in which it is transfered from one person to another which has changed.

Time has evolved from the era when classroom (face to face) teaching was the only means to get the knowledge. In the internet age, various other channels have open up to deliver knowledge. Distance learning programs are the best examples. Besides that online education tools and online mentoring is the market that is rapidly evolving. With the kind of scarce resources India and perhaps many other nations as well are facing in terms of teaching staff vis-a-vis the number of students, use of technology has become imperative.

Even the classroom teaching itself has been so much revolutionized with faculty using audio-visual techniques and other technological tools to help in better understanding of the topic.

On the flip side I also agree that over-dependence on technology has relived the human brain from much of the work and thus to some extent lethargic as well. For example, a person today does not make much effort to remember any information since he knows that he can anytime google it when needed (at the time when internet is omnipresent). Why a student will make efforts to remember tables or percentages when he has calculator (not only stand alone but also in cell phones and watches). Spell-check and synonyms "Suggestions" by MS-Word has made people less concerned about their English grammar, vocabulary and accuracy in spellings. People prefer to peep into Wikipedia rather then looking for learned men in the concerned subject and get the right knowledge. Google has replaced the library for students community.

Thus, technology does have flips and flops. It depends on how we use it.

Subhas C Biswas wrote:

A teacher or a trainer is expected to transfer the learning to their audience. He must be a designer of the process. Technology often forms a part of the design or delivery or evaluation sub-process and should serve the purpose it is intended for, as designed by the teacher or trainer.

Teaching and training aids are now technology based. Technology also offers convenience and large population may be addressed by one or a few teachers and trainers using technology.

Trainees and learners often hate or dislike excessive use of aids and absence of personal touch or learning process facilitation.

Learning objective is not to show, impress people by using technology.

As a professional, we must use technology.
But use of technology does not make us a professional

1 comment:

  1. Dear Sir,
    Technology is no doubt a wonderful thing but it depends upon the user how it is used or misused
    The worst effect is on health for which new generation is not aware at all besides this they are going to miss the joy of nature which gives immense pleasure stored for life and can flash upon the inward eyes which is the bliss of solitude as the poet William Wordsworth had described in his poem The Daffodils
    The personal touch, emotional interaction and support of the motivator and facilitator are absent. Which makes them strong person to face all the challenges of life?
    with best regards,
    yatan singh rathore,school name- MSMSV,RAMBAGH CIRCLE,JAIPUR,call me on 0141-2350296

    ReplyDelete