In my previous blog about the history of educational technology, I commented how the definition of educational technology has evolved and still is. Different authors had emphasized the importance of technology, or the importance of the learning process while others considered both aspects. Reiser (2001) pointed out that “technological advances, new ideas and theories regarding the learning process, and new views of how to promote learning and performance in classrooms and in the workplace” has influenced the field and demonstrates the ever-changing environment.
After reading the articles by Weller (2018) and Reiser (2001), one can see how their viewpoints differ. Weller (2018) chose to examine and strictly focus on technologies when looking at the history of EdTech while Reiser (2001) looked at and discussed the two perspectives of design and technology.
Reiser (2001) gave a very comprehensive definition for instructional design and technology. His definition included the six categories of activities/phases which are analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation (ADDIE) and management (these phases are still being used by instructional designers and training developers), as well as looked at the importance of research and theory in the field (Reiser, 2001, p. 57). Additionally, Reiser (2001) not only looked at the incorporation of media but noticed that the learning process and the promotion of learning and performance is of importance. When exploring the topic of research and theory in educational technology, one will see there is a remarkable growth of research which looks at how technology influences students’ learning and interactions between themselves and other learners as well as with their educators and resources/instructional content as shown in the four editions of the Handbook of research on educational communications and technology by J. Michael Spector (2014). In his books, Spector (2014) “provides one small glimpse of the revolution that is unfolding”. For these reasons, I find that Reiser’s claims are still relevant in today’s world of innovation.
Although Weller (2018) showed dissatisfaction when looking at the history of educational technology and the overall incorporation of technology in education, he made a very good point when he stated that “education is a complex, highly interdependent system”; therefore, it would not be easy to use technology from a different industry and apply it to education. Core functions of education such as content, delivery and recognition need to be considered first before a technology is implemented (Weller, 2018, p. 48).
One lesson from the past applied to the present
When reviewing the readings from Reiser (2001), one of the developments which resonates with me is the instructional principles related to constructivism. This requires learners to collaborate and solve real-life, complex issues from different perspectives and take responsibility in their own learning and knowledge construction processes (Driscoll, 2000, as cited by Reiser, 2001). When considering this concept, I feel that this can be applied where students from different disciplines such as dentistry, medicine, nursing, pharmacy and speech language pathology can work on a case scenario together. Currently, we do this during face-to-face discussions when everyone is able to attend; however, if we were to incorporate this by using a platform like Collaborate Ultra, this would enable students from different professions and different locations to learn from each other, see the different perspectives in treatment recommendations and recognize the importance of their roles in patient care and how they can work together towards a common goal of helping the patient.
One lesson from the past, but having a concern
When considering the other developments that Reiser (2001) discussed, knowledge management is one that would be a challenge. “[K]nowledge management involves identifying, documenting, and disseminating explicit and tacit knowledge within an organization in order to improve the performance of that organization” (Rossett, 1999, as cited by Reiser, 2001, p. 64). Although, we have the technology to support this at work i.e. intranet, groupware, content management systems (CMS), etc. and can organize and disseminate the knowledge, having the time to use them efficiently and effectively is very difficult in our day-to-day hustle and bustle of work. As pointed out by Greg Hughes, a contributor on a panel discussion on EdTech, there is a “[l]ack of time for effective CPD [Continuing Professional Development] and training. Regular use is the best way forward, but any introduction of new technology needs careful planning and regular time for practice and training” (Vickers, 2017). Some educators find that to use this technology, they need the time for proper training; however, this can be difficult with a heavy workload of preparing and teaching courses for face-to-face or online delivery (using a learning management system, LMS) and meeting with students before or after classes. Unfortunately, there never seems to be enough hours in the day.
References:
Culatta, R. (2018). ADDIE Model. Retrieved from http://www.instructionaldesign.org/models/addie/
Spector, J. (2014). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed. ed.). New York, N.Y.: Springer.
Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 53-64.
Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 57-67.
Vickers, H. (2017). Edtech: keeping up with the pace of change. Retrieved from https://edtechnology.co.uk/Article/edtech-keeping-up-with-the-pace-of-change
Weller, M. (2018). Twenty years of EdTech. EDUCAUSE Review, 53(4).
Wow great post Joyce, I really enjoyed reading this. I completely agree with your point on constructivism, as discussed by Reiser (2001). The ability to work with a vast group of people to solve real world problems is such an amazing learning opportunity, and something that is or at least becoming much more realistic. I also agree with your point about the constant struggle against the clock. There always seems to be more ProD one can do, but what about work life balance. As well as time, I often find funding to be another obstacle. Thanks,
Amanda
Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 53-64.
Hi Amanda,
Thank you for your comment! I definitely agree with you. Funding can be a big challenge. There usually is funding to implement a technology, but unfortunately, a lack of funding to train the end users to use and sustain the technology.
Cheers!
Hi Joyce, great post. You really got me thinking about constructivism in the online environment and how Weller in his article introduced the different technologies available to education. When considering the different elements you explain how you would get students to engage with real life problems using Collaborate. I have also found that sending online students away from their computer and out into the community to complete projects is a useful strategy. I wonder if you could see yourself doing this in the courses you are teaching and the field you are working in?
Hi Anita, thank you for your comment and sharing your thoughts. Great question! Currently, our students do have field placement opportunities with Toronto Public Health and some hospitals. They also have a mandatory placement at our offsite clinic in the Community Health Centre. Although they have these opportunities, the interaction between them and other professions such as the dentist and dental assistant is quite limited and not as robust as we would hope due to the busyness of the environment and thus, not built into the schedule.
There is an event that happens twice a year where our students can participate in the Appreciating Roles and Collaboration to Improve Care (ARCTIC) program where they can work face-to-face with other professions from the medical field i.e. nursing, social work, radiation therapist, etc.; however, this is offered as an additional learning activity and not what they are required to achieve – not built into the curriculum.
When I worked at the hospital, I had an amazing opportunity to participate as a facilitator in the Collaborative Online Interprofessional Learning initiative. Here, a few professionals were able to work asynchronously and synchronously to learn more about traumatic brain injury and diabetes. It was a great project; however, again, one of the challenges was lack of availability of the participants, since they all worked different shifts (morning, afternoon, evening, night, 12 hour) at the hospitals. There is always a challenge of time – time for opportunities, time for planning, time for implementation and time for evaluation to ensure that it is successful.
Cheers!
Hi Joyce – I really enjoyed your post! Your concerns surrounding the challenges of implementing knowledge management training really resonated with my own experience in CPD (continuing professional development) in education. The context of knowledge management sometimes seems at odds to the actual infrastructure supporting organizational knowledge in educational institutions. Given the factors you mentioned (time, training, competing priorities), the reality of managing knowledge, even with the tools, can be challenging. In the case of an education setting, I wonder if sociocultural factors (ie. higher education culture, decision-making hierarchies) perhaps play a significant role in the effectiveness of adopting knowledge management technologies/concepts in an education setting?
Hi Mel,
Sorry for my delayed reply.
Thank you for sharing your experience with knowledge management. You ask a very good question and I unfortunately, do not have an answer or a solution. Hmmm…this may possibly be a good research paper? 🙂
Cheers!