An Overview of Progress and Problems in Educational Technology

Educational technologists have promised that great advances and improvements in learning and instruction would occur on account of new and emerging technologies. Some of these promises have been partially fulfilled, but many have not. The last decade of the previous century witnessed the consolidation of new approaches to learning and instruction under the banner of constructivism. This so−called new learning paradigm was really not all that new, but renewed emphasis on learners and learning effectiveness can clearly be counted as gains resulting from this constructivist consolidation within educational research. At the same time, technology was not standing still. Network technologies were increasing bandwidth, software engineering was embracing object orientation, and wireless technologies were extending accessibility. It is clear that we can now do things to improve education that were not possible twenty years ago. However, the potential gains in learning and instruction have yet to be realized on a significant global scale. Why not? Critical challenges confront instructional designers and critical problems remain with regard to learning in and about complex domains. Moreover, organizational issues required to translate advances in learning theory and educational technology into meaningful practice have yet to be addressed. The current situation in the field of educational technology is one of technification. New educational technologies are usable only by a scarce cadre of technocrats. Constructivist approaches to learning have been oversimplified to such a degree that learning effectiveness has lost meaning. As a consequence, education is generally managed in an ad hoc manner that marginalizes the potential gains offered by new learning technologies. This paper presents an overview of progress and problems in educational technology and argues that educational program management must be integrally linked with technology and theory in order for significant progress in learning and instruction to occur on a global scale.

[1]  Marc J. Rosenberg,et al.  E-Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age , 2000 .

[2]  Gustavo Stubrich.  The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization , 1993 .

[3]  Larry Cuban,et al.  Tinkering toward Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform. , 1996 .

[4]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  Integrating and Humanizing the Process of Automating Instructional Design , 1995 .

[5]  Peter Goodyear.  Environments for lifelong learning: ergonomics, architecture and educational design. , 2000 .

[6]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[7]  Jerome S. Bruner,et al.  Models of the Learner , 1985 .

[8]  Paul Wilson,et al.  Computer Supported Cooperative Work:: An Introduction , 2014 .

[9]  Allan Collins,et al.  Cognitive Apprenticeship and Instructional Technology , 1988 .

[10]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Teamwork in group model building , 1995 .

[11]  Kjeld Schmidt,et al.  CSCW: Four Characters in Search of a Context , 1989, ECSCW.

[12]  Liam J. Bannon,et al.  From Human Factors to Human Actors: The Role of Psychology and Human-Computer Interaction Studies in System Design , 1992, Design at Work.

[13]  Donald E. Hanna.  Higher Education in an Era of Digital Competition: Choices and Challenges. , 2000 .

[14]  M. David Merrill,et al.  Integrative goals for instructional design , 1990 .

[15]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The interdisciplinary study of coordination , 1994, CSUR.

[16]  B. Bloom.  The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring , 1984 .

[17]  Rob Kling,et al.  Cooperation, coordination and control in computer-supported work , 1991, CACM.

[18]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  Models and simulations for learning in complex domains: using causal loop diagrams for assessment and evaluation , 2001, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[19]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  Perspectives on socially shared cognition , 1991 .

[20]  J. Michael Spector.  Integrating Instructional Science, Learning Theory, and Technology , 1994 .

[21]  Jessica Beagles-Roos,et al.  Specific impact of radio and television on children's story comprehension. , 1983 .

[22]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  Transparency and Interaction in System Dynamics Based Learning Environments. , 1999 .

[23]  Peter L. T. Pirolli,et al.  Motivating the Notion of Generic , 1989 .

[24]  John Bowers,et al.  Studies in computer supported cooperative work: theory, practice and design , 1990 .

[25]  J. Lave.  Cognition in Practice: Outdoors: a social anthropology of cognition in practice , 1988 .

[26]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  Integrated and Holistic Perspectives on Learning, Instruction and Technology , 2000 .

[27]  Ellen D. Wagner.  Leveraging Technology in the Service of Life-long Learning , 2000 .

[28]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  The changing nature of instructional design for networked learning , 2001 .

[29]  Diane J. Hanson,et al.  E-Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age , 2003, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[30]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Integrating Constructivism and Learning Technologies , 2000 .

[31]  Cliff Konold,et al.  Network Science, A Decade Later. , 1999 .

[32]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  Automating instructional design : computer-based development and delivery tools , 1995 .

[33]  Dan Shapiro,et al.  CSCW: Discipline or Paradigm? A Sociological Perspective , 1991, ECSCW.