1: Defining the Field

Defining the Field

My view of technology is comparable to those definitions that I have found in the textbook. Throughout the reading, the idea and term “educational technology” has changed with the times. In the 1960’s, it was seen as a process to get young students to work with emerging technology to better their understanding, especially with the launch of Sputnik by Russia. We were seen as behind the times and needing to immediately catch up. With the 1970’s, they saw a change in the definition move towards a “complex and integrated process involving people, procedures, ideas, devices and organization” for answering problems rather than applying and completing a single task (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012). I have found that my definition on educational technology fits more of the current definition of the ever changing and constantly growing field of educational technology contrary to the older definitions. I believe that it is important for students to not only use technology, but also be able to utilize it to evaluate, manage, develop and design technology correctly. Furthermore, I do not believe that it is just necessary that students need to know how to create, manage and innovate using and adapting technology. I believe, following the latest definition from the AECT committee, that students young and old need to understand how to facilitate, inspire and utilize appropriate technologies and resources. With the growing instantaneous world they are growing up in, best practices must be taught to all students to ensure their and other’s safety in an online world. I believe educational technology is best serving our students when interlaced with digital citizenship and safeguards that protect our teenagers, and adolescents. In my various secondary settings, I have seen good and bad uses of technology. Therefore, I believe my thoughts on how to facilitate technology education have changed due to the issues and misunderstandings my students have. Whether it be a snarky comment on a discussion board or a horrid picture on Snapchat, students do not believe and understands the dangers of technology if not used appropriately. While my definition has changed while reading the various definitions of our history with educational technology, my own experiences are the main producer of my views.

            As a history teacher, I have utilized technology in various ways to formatively and summatively assess my students understanding of the content. While it has not been a technology unit, I do believe I adhered to some of the six characteristics of instructional design. My assessment and technology activities were student centered, goal oriented and creates outcomes that change be measured (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012). However, in reflection on my utilization of technology throughout each activity, unit, and school year, I find my lessons lacking very important aspects of instructional design: team effort and self-correcting. Since I aimed to use technology as an assessment tool for a good portion of my activities, a team effort is lacking due to the nature of the assessment. My goal is to engage one student and determine if they are in need of remediation in a task, concept or skill. Because of that, I take teamwork and collaboration out of activities. While I do believe that technology can exist in the nature I have used it before, I do realize a big disadvantage I am placing my students by not allowing them to collaborate, discuss and grow together. Also, I do not utilize technology in ways that are self-correcting. I find my classroom stuck in a fixed mindset view on education, meaning students are focused on grades and their achievement of lack of achievement. Because of this mindset, students do not see the opportunity and growth available when they recognize what they do not understand and apply new knowledge to rectify the misunderstandings. In future lessons, I would re-design my lessons to allow more collaboration within activities and still providing the assessment, but focusing on collaboration and not on competition. Also, I would create a way that students can reflect on and recognize their misunderstandings and give them a change to correct their misconceptions.

Reiser distinguishes instructional media as “physical means via which instruction is presented to learners,” excluding the teacher, chalkboard and textbook from this definition (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012). Upon reading this, I disagreed with the exclusion of these three components because that is how I was taught. Not to sound all archaic, but technology did exist in the 90’s, yet it was not widely used or advanced as it is now. I believe that the current definition of instructional media should not include the chalkboard and textbook mainly because the advances our world has seen. From the beginning of instructional media, we have seen changes and advances in film, audiovisual, radio, communication and computers to fit the current needs. Therefore, in older times, chalkboards and textbooks were widely used because they were current to the times. There was no better way to instruct and present ideas to learners. However, as times have changed, what used to work does not work anymore. Therefore, what does not work must be left behind and more focus should be placed on what does work. On the contrary, I do believe that the teacher should be included as an instrument in instructional media. While technology is advancing, I do not believe we are at the point where teaching is done better by a robot or self-regulated computer as there is a personal dynamic that a teacher brings that no form of technology can touch. While the technology provides windows for students to look out, teachers give them the wonder to explore. As old folktales say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. However, you can provide a saltlick to make it thirsty. Teachers are the saltlick providing the need and desire to drink the water. I believe the intent and design of instructional media is to present the students with the tools and the necessities to accomplish their goals, but that cannot be completed without the teacher presenting these tools.

Works Cited

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.