Emerging Technologies for Learning

Research

From Emerging Technologies for Learning

Evaluating the effectiveness of technology use in teaching and learning brings to mind Albert Einstein’s statement: "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted". When we begin to consider the impact and effectiveness of technology in the teaching and learning process, obvious questions arise: "How do we measure effectiveness? Is it time spent in a classroom? Is it a function of test scores? Is it about learning? Or understanding?"

Much research has been conducted on how modalities, distance, and models of education influence the quality of learning. This research is commonly cited as the no significant difference phenomenon. Joy and Garcia argue that the research is fundamentally flawed - the emphasis on technology and media is misplaced.

Instead:

"[P]ractitioners should adhere to their time-tested instructional design strategies, regardless of the medium they choose. It is widely accepted that learning effectiveness is a function of effective pedagogical practices. Accordingly, the question for researchers, instructional designers, and consumers of ALNs ought to be: 'What combination of instructional strategies and delivery media will best produce the desired learning outcome for the intended audience?'"[1]

Carol Twigg, suggests education technique is lagging behind technological development.[2] As McLuhan has stated, we use new tools to do the work of the old. The challenge with this often repeated assertion - namely that we are on the precipice of a complete shift in our framework of education - is that research, by its nature, is not necessarily concerned with trends. Research is intended to describe phenomenon occurring now and ways to unearth or discover important principles on which we can base subsequent action and research.

It is clear that teaching and research in fields of educational technology have yet to achieve required balance. Arthur Levine provides perhaps the most comprehensive analysis in recent memory in his systemic exploration of the research failings of education in general.[3]

Randolph[4]views learning and technology research across a full spectrum of resources and approaches, indicating the need for educational technology researchers to broaden their view of research as well as improving the quality of activities within the field. Numerous other researchers and organizations have emphasized the concerns of research on the use of technology in education. Terry Anderson has similarly called for a significant shift in the research methodology of technology-enabled learning, focusing on design-based models.[5] He details the need for quality, relevant research:

"An essential component of effective strategic change is an active research and development component of the system designed to insure that pedagogical, technological, sociological, political and commercial changes and opportunities are both developed and exploited within that system. These insights from effective research and development, originate both from within education domains as well as being imported from related disciplines".[6]

Design-based research (DBR) has been suggested as a solution to the difficulties facing research quality, relevance, and impact. DBR is particularly appropriate for exploring emerging educational technologies because:[7]

  1. It focuses on interventions in real contexts
  2. it involves partnerships between practitioners, students and researchers
  3. It is iterative as context and technology changes
  4. It is emergent as insights are gathered and developed into principles and patterns.

Distinctions between traditional (predictive) research and DBR are detailed in Image 17.[8]

Image 17 - Design Based Research
Image 17 - Design Based Research

Additional important readings on research in educational technology include:

  • Toward a Pan-Canadian e-Learning Research Agenda[9]
  • International Perspectives on e-Learning: Mapping Strategy to Practice[10]

References

  1. ↑ Joy II, E. H., Garcia, F. E. (2000). Measuring learning effectiveness: A new look at No-Significant-Difference findings. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 4(1).
  2. ↑ Twigg, C. (2002) Innnovations in online learning: Moving beyond no significant difference. Retrieved on February 20, 2009 from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/Abstract/InnovationsinOnlineLearni/37926?time=1235941985
  3. ↑ Levine, A. (2007). Educating Researchers. Retrieved on February 20, 2009 from: http://www.edschools.org/EducatingResearchers/educating_researchers.pdf
  4. ↑ Randolph, J. J. (2008). Multidisciplinary methods in educational technology research and development. Retrieved February 1, 2009, from http://www.archive.org/details/MultidisciplinaryMethodsInEducationalTechnologyResearchAndDevelopment
  5. ↑ Anderson, T. (2007). Research models for Connectivist Learning. Presented to Online Connectivism Conference, University of Manitoba. Retrieved February 20, 2009, from http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/wiki/Anderson
  6. ↑ Anderson, T. (2005). Design-based research and its application to a call center innovation in distance education. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(2), 69-84.
  7. ↑ DBR use in education provided by Terry Anderson in personal correspondence, March 3, 2009.
  8. ↑ Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 167-175.
  9. ↑ Buell, T., & Anderson, T. (2006). Toward a Pan-Canadian e-learning research agenda. Available from http://scope.bccampus.ca/file.php/56/Background_Reading/Pan_Canadian_E-Learning_Research_Agenda.pdf
  10. ↑ Conole, G. (2008). International perspectives on e-learning: Mapping strategy to practice. Retrieved February 20, 2009, from http://scope.bccampus.ca/file.php/56/Background_Reading/conole_international_perspectives_elearning.pdf
Retrieved from "http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/wikis/etl/index.php/Research"


Personal tools