The book reviews educational technology since 1994, arguably since internet became more prevalent and common for home use. This accurately reflects the history of educational technology in respect to the digital age, however various technologies have been used in education since technology began. In various fields new tools and technologies are constantly used in practice and learning, suggesting that the use of technology in education is not new, rather the use of digital technology is. Weller accurately reviews the use of digital technology since its inception roughly 25 years ago. He self identifies that the review could also be referred to as the “internet years.”
One of the arguments in this book I found particularly interesting was the idea of a year zero mentality in the field of educational technology, that ideas and theories are being discovered in the field and presented as new, rather than looking at the complete history and building upon it. I found this interesting because it almost undermines the work previously done and possibly inhibits forward progress in the field. If every new researcher is claiming to have “discovered” ideas and methodologies, the focus shifts to WHO developed the theory rather than the theory or work itself. This theme shows up again when Weller speaks about learning objects in chapter 7. Weller identifies one of the challenges in the field is agreeing on the terminology itself, and how many researchers spend time debating the term or definition (in this case what a learning object is), rather than progressing the research. I found this perspective interesting and very reflective for someone in the field to identify a very real barrier to progress. Weller demonstrates a very comprehensive reflection throughout the initial chapters of his book.
Weller, M. (2020). 25 Years of Ed Tech. Athabasca University Press.
Great observation, Emma. Why do you think that may be? In other words, what may be some reasons that existing ideas are being “rediscovered?”
Hi George, I think there are many “restarts” in research because people are working in parallel in different fields, or they believe that previous research doesn’t apply to their field, or is not in line with what they are trying to build upon. In this case, there may also be some people that disagree with the previous work or definitions and feel they need to redefine the research
Hi Emma, your post on the concept of ‘year zero’ reminded me of a fun fact about dinosaurs. In hindsight, what researchers originally thought of as different species of dinosaurs, often turned out to be the same species but at different ages. For example, horn length and horn display may change throughout the lifecycle of a triceratops, but it is still the same genus.
Link here = https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/all-those-new-dinosaurs-may-not-be-new-or-dinosaurs/