Myths about Technology in Education

This section looks at the impact of technological changes on education. New technology is unlikely to cause a revolution in education, as the medium seldom influences teaching. The Internet has a role to play in the classroom; there is no solid evidence that it is making us more stupid. Students need to experience ICT as added value in terms of learning. The current generation of “digital natives” does not want or need a new style of education. Many young people still read for pleasure, although this is declining in many countries. The claim that computer games belong in schools as valid learning tools lacks evidence. Scientific studies on minimally invasive education, such as helping poor children to learn just by giving them access to computers, are nuanced. Technology in education is a hot topic, and educators can learn to make the best use of technology.

[1]  V. Evers,et al.  Investigating the effects of unsupervised computer use on educationally disadvantaged children's knowledge and understanding of computers , 2005 .

[2]  Payal Arora.  Hope-in-the-Wall? A digital promise for free learning , 2010, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[3]  Barbara Means,et al.  Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies , 2009 .

[4]  Ritu Dangwal,et al.  Limits to self-organising systems of learning - the Kalikuppam experiment , 2010, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[5]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: Ten Common but Questionable Principles of Multimedia Learning , 2014 .

[6]  Scotty D. Craig,et al.  Animated Pedagogical Agents in Multimedia Educational Environments: Effects of Agent Properties, Picture Features, and Redundancy , 2002 .

[7]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction , 1999 .

[8]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Toward a Framework for CSCL Research , 2013 .

[9]  R. Mayer,et al.  Cognitive Principles of Multimedia Learning: The Role of Modality and Contiguity , 1999 .

[10]  B. Gros,et al.  Beyond the Net Generation debate: A comparison between digital learners in face-to-face and virtual universities , 2012 .

[11]  H. Friedrich,et al.  Factors Influencing Pupils' Acceptance of an E-Learning System for Secondary Schools , 2010 .

[12]  Sugata Mitra,et al.  Children and the Internet: experiments with minimally invasive education in India , 2001, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[13]  Sue Bennett,et al.  The 'digital natives' debate: A critical review of the evidence , 2008, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[14]  Allison Littlejohn,et al.  Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students' use of digital technologies , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[15]  Erika E. Smith.  The Digital Native Debate in Higher Education: A Comparative Analysis of Recent Literature , 2012 .

[16]  S.J. Makinen,et al.  Empirically detecting the Hype Cycle with the life cycle indicators: An exploratory analysis of three technologies , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.

[17]  Daniel R. Anderson,et al.  The Impact of Television on Cognitive Development and Educational Achievement , 2009 .

[18]  Michael F. Young,et al.  Our Princess Is in Another Castle , 2012 .

[19]  A. Paivio.  Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. , 1991 .

[20]  Jonathan Robinson,et al.  Experimental Evidence on the Effects of Home Computers on Academic Achievement Among Schoolchildren , 2013, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[21]  Alexandre Pouget,et al.  Improved Probabilistic Inference as a General Learning Mechanism with Action Video Games , 2010, Current Biology.

[22]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Reading from paper versus screens: a critical review of the empirical literature , 1992 .

[23]  J. Nijenhuis,et al.  Were the Victorians cleverer than us? The decline in general intelligence estimated from a meta-analysis of the slowing of simple reaction time , 2013 .

[24]  A. Qayyum,et al.  Digital Learners in Higher Education: Generation is Not the Issue , 2011 .

[25]  K. Hew,et al.  Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in K-12 and Higher Education: The Search for Evidence-Based Practice. , 2013 .

[26]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Do Learners Really Know Best? Urban Legends in Education , 2013 .

[27]  B. Sparrow,et al.  Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips , 2011, Science.

[28]  R. Clark.  Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media , 1983 .

[29]  Jonathan S. A. Carriere,et al.  The way we encounter reading material influences how frequently we mind wander , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[30]  J. Nijenhuis,et al.  Controlling for increased guessing enhances the independence of the Flynn effect from g: The return of the Brand effect , 2014 .

[31]  D. Boyd.  Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life , 2007 .

[32]  Michael Z. Newman.  New media, young audiences and discourses of attention: from Sesame Street to ‘snack culture’ , 2010 .

[33]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke,et al.  Test-Enhanced Learning , 2006, Psychological science.

[34]  Susan M. Ravizza,et al.  Non-academic internet use in the classroom is negatively related to classroom learning regardless of intellectual ability , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[35]  Leslie Haddon,et al.  EU kids online II: final report 2011 , 2011 .

[36]  Brenda Hall‐Taylor.  The Corporatization of the Australian University , 2001 .

[37]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[38]  Angeline Khoo,et al.  Mediators and moderators of long-term effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior: practice, thinking, and action. , 2014, JAMA pediatrics.

[39]  David F. Feldon,et al.  Five common but questionable principles ofmultimedia learning , 2005 .

[40]  M. Prensky.  Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants , 2001 .

[41]  G. Salomon,et al.  Educational Psychology and Technology: A Matter of Reciprocal Relations , 1998, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[42]  Stephen R Mitroff,et al.  Cognitive pitfall! Videogame players are not immune to dual-task costs , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[43]  B. Kalpana,et al.  MEDIA AND CHILDREN , 2015 .

[44]  Amy I. Nathanson,et al.  Protective effects of parental monitoring of children's media use: a prospective study. , 2014, JAMA pediatrics.

[45]  R. Mayer,et al.  Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. , 2001 .

[46]  R. Clark.  Media will never influence learning , 1994 .

[47]  David B. Daniel,et al.  E-books or textbooks: Students prefer textbooks , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[48]  Herre van Oostendorp,et al.  A meta-analytic review of the role of instructional support in game-based learning , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[49]  David M. Kennedy,et al.  "Digital Natives": An Asian Perspective for Using Learning Technologies. , 2013 .

[50]  R. Mayer,et al.  Narrative games for learning: Testing the discovery and narrative hypotheses. , 2012 .

[51]  J. Kelley,et al.  Family scholarly culture and educational success: Books and schooling in 27 nations , 2010 .

[52]  J. Noyes,et al.  Computer- vs. paper-based tasks: Are they equivalent? , 2008, Ergonomics.

[53]  Mark Warschauer,et al.  Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide , 2002, First Monday.

[54]  M. Warschauer.  Literacy and technology: Bridging the divide , 2006 .

[55]  Ana Santiago,et al.  Technology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop Per Child Program , 2012, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[56]  J. D. Fletcher,et al.  The Multimedia Principle. , 2005 .

[57]  Neil Selwyn,et al.  The digital native - myth and reality , 2009, Aslib Proc..

[58]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Online multimedia learning with mobile devices and desktop computers: An experimental test of Clark's methods-not-media hypothesis , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..