To explore the history of educational technology, I first set out to define what technology is. My initial internet searches revealed that technology has a variety of dictionary and encyclopedia definitions. Beyond the basic denotations of technology as a “collection of techniques, skills, methods, and processes” (“Technology,” n.d.), I wanted a more human perspective, so I expanded my search to include videos and blog posts. Kevin Kelly, in a 2010 TEDxAmsterdam talk, shared his insights into what technology means, and presented a definition that I found relatable: “Technology is anything useful invented by a mind” (Kelly, 2010). Human Technologies, developed as a core subject at the International College Hong Kong (ICHK), expands on this definition to include cognitive, material, social, spiritual, and somatic technologies (ICHK, n.d.). For example, breathing may be innate to humans, but CPR, Lamaze, and meditation are each somatic technologies.
What does this mean for educational technology? Education, when seen as the “the process of facilitating learning” (“Education,” n.d.), doesn’t necessarily require tools and devices. Yet, throughout human history, we have increasingly applied our ingenuity to change the nature of education. Thinking of technology as not just a set of tools but also as a set of processes, I wondered: How have humans technologized education?
The Socratic method, from the classical Greek period, represents an example of early cognitive and social technologies in education. By developing a formalized method for debate, Socrates and his contemporaries created an educational technology that uses structured discourse as a way to facilitate learning. This form of debate inspired Plato’s Republic and led to the first concepts of universities (Smith, 1997).
The highly-criticized factory model of schooling—involving rigid systems and standardization—is a way of technologizing education to facilitate its application on a mass scale. Rows of desks, chalkboards, and school bells are each examples of material technologies, yet there are also social technologies at work: the teacher-student power structure of a classroom, and the timetable-oriented structure of a school day. Through my research on the topic, I was intrigued to find Watters (2015) offers a critique of how terms like industrialized education are often used “not so much to explain the history of education, as to try to shape its future” (para. 22).
The certification process is another way humans have technologized education. Receiving credentials through formal schooling can be seen as a social technology, one used to delineate a person’s knowledge into discreet units of education. These credentials are then recognized as interchangeable by many facets of society, which creates a “plug-and-play” form of education (Brown & Tannock, 2009).
Exploring education technology—not just as material tools, but also as somatic, social, and cognitive processes—presented an opportunity to consider how education itself is a technology. Is upgrading to “Education 2.0” (Vagelatos, Foskolos, & Komninos, 2010) such a new idea, or are we already many versions into this technological development?
References
Brown, P., & Tannock, S. (2009). Education, meritocracy and the global war for talent. Journal of Education Policy, 24(4), 377–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930802669938
Education. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved September 6, 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education
International College Hong Kong. (n.d.). Human Technologies | ICHK. Retrieved September 7, 2019, from https://www.ichk.edu.hk/home/learning/innovation/human-technologies/
Smith, M. K. (1997). Plato on education | infed.org. Retrieved September 7, 2019, from http://infed.org/mobi/plato-on-education/
Technology. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved September 6, 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology
TEDxAmsterdam. (2010). Kevin Kelly: Technology’s epic story | TED Talk. Retrieved September 8, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS1xL1qcBa4
Vagelatos, A. T., Foskolos, F. K., & Komninos, T. P. (2010). Education 2.0: Bringing innovation to the classroom. Proceedings – 14th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics, PCI 2010, (September), 201–204. https://doi.org/10.1109/PCI.2010.15
Watters, A. (2015). The Invented History of “The Factory Model of Education.” Retrieved September 6, 2019, from http://hackeducation.com/2015/04/25/factory-model
Attribution
Photo by Giammarco Boscaro on Unsplash
Sandra
Your definitions of technology as well as your description of the Socratic method helped me to see this in a different perspective. I think that we are many versions into Education 2.0 although I believe new information, processes and technology create an environment of change which many people may try to resist. The days of rows of desks and chalkboards have disappeared and replaced with rows of desks and iPads. Although there is standardization, we can help shape the future of learning and edtech through our knowledge, skills and abilities.
Caroline
Thank you Sandra for reminding us of the human factor when speaking about educational technologies.
I think as contributors in this field whether now or in the future, we always have to remind ourselves to always have the human factor in mind. Technologies may or may not assist learning, it depends on how we relate technologies to the way humans learn. this is why pedagogies and learning theories have been linked to educational technologies throughout history!