In the fast-paced world of educational technology, where new trends and breakthroughs rise on a regular basis, having a critical lens to evaluate the claims made in the industry is vital. This includes understanding the growing media discussion over the impact technology has on development and education. Clark’s, Media will Never Influence Learning, and Kozma’s Will Media Influence Learning: Reframing the Debate, publications in 1994 set the tone for a thoughtful discussion surrounding innovative technology. These articles presented opposing perspectives on the use of media and technology in education. Clark’s point of view was that media, by itself, did not ensure greater learning outcomes. As the key drivers of effective learning, he emphasized the necessity of instructional methods and content design. Kozma, on the other hand, reframed the issue by accepting that media can influence learning, but how it is used to engage with learners determines its impact.
Today, we find ourselves in the midst of a fast-changing educational technology world. There are numerous claims regarding the revolutionary potential of various tech-driven solutions. “Gamification is the future of innovation in the EdTech industry”, is one such claim made in the article, Gamification In EdTech: The Future Of Innovative Learning (Vatsyayan, 2022). The article claims that gamification improves concentration and cognitive stamina by making learning more fun and relatable to real-world application. It encourages engagement and implies high standards of productivity by allowing for self-paced learning opportunities. The article predicts that the integration of gamification with technologies like AI and VR will lead to advancements towards revenue and expansion opportunities in the EdTech industry. In retrospect, Clark would likely be skeptical of this bold claim. He might remind us that while promising, gamification is not actually the one-size-fits-all solution that the article is alluding to. It would not fulfill learning outcomes for all learners equally and effective instructional design and content quality are just as much if not more critical to the learning. Clark would argue that gamification in itself wouldn’t guarantee more efficient learning in the absence of thoughtful learning design. Kozma, on the other hand, would acknowledge the promise of gamification but suggest the importance of careful execution. When implemented wisely, gamification may improve engagement and learning, however Kozma would emphasize the importance of pedagogy and learner interaction.
Virtual Reality (VR) is another example of an up-and-coming technology that has the potential to be transformative in the world of EdTech. VR is envisioned to be the future of education where “Soon, teachers will be able to announce the ‘VR cart’ where every student can have access to a VR headset and its respective PC and experience lessons in STEAM unlike ever before.” as claimed in the article, PC-based VR can help enable rich learning experiences for the next generation of innovators (Intel, n.d). This article suggests that VR has the potential to revolutionize education in the coming years so much so that VR becomes a standard tool in classrooms. It highlights that VR allows for active learning, in which learners are more engaged and actively participate in the learning process. VR provides immersive, technology-enabled experiences that allow learners to increase information retention. Regardless, Clark may caution against the use of VR due to his perception that the availability of immersive technology such as virtual reality does not ensure greater learning outcomes. He would caution on the usage of VR as mainstream EdTech due to his advocacy for choosing “the less expensive way to achieve a learning goal” (Clark, 1994). The sheer cost of providing VR technology and supporting PC equipment poses the question of practicality due to budget constraints and ROI to implement this technology in classrooms. Conversely, Kozma would concur with the article’s claims about the participatory and immersive nature of VR learning experiences due to his understanding that, “learning is an active, constructive, cognitive and social process,” (Kozma, 1994). However, he would emphasize the importance of educators striking a balance between engaging experiences and ensuring that VR activities fulfill expected learning objectives. He would agree that this technology may innovate the realm of education, and with thoughtful implementation, VR would have potential to improve learner engagement and interactions.
For educators, instructional designers, and all developers involved in educational technology, the ongoing discussion surrounding EdTech that Clark and Kozma started in 1994 is still a valuable tool today. It serves as a reminder to ensure we do thorough research into industry claims and ensure we look past the appeal and mystery of new technologies. By putting the debate’s concepts into practice, we can ask ourselves critical questions like: Is new technology on its own the factor for improved learning experiences? How does technology interact with learners? And how might pedagogical techniques increase its effectiveness? Let’s embrace The Media Debate, as we explore the complex world of educational technology, using it as a guide to challenge and assess the claims made by key players in the field.
References
Clark, R. E. (1994). Media Will Never Influence Learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30218684
Intel (n.d.). PC-based VR can help enable rich learning experiences for the next generation of innovators. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education/transforming-education/vr-in-education.html
Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will Media Influence Learning? Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.167.4904
Vatsyayan, K. (2022, May 18). Gamification in EdTech: The Future Of Innovative Learning https://elearningindustry.com/gamification-in-edtech-the-future-of-innovative-learning
Note: Intel’s research and sources for their article are dated between 2019-2022