Good Writing
Thoughts on Educational Technology
The Changing Dynamics of Education
Philosophical Underpinnings of Educational Technology *
Constructive Alignment: Redesigning the Design Process

Philosophical Underpinnings of Educational Technology

"It is theory that decides what we can observe..."
- Albert Eistien

In the last two weeks I have been focused on an overview of philosophy and educational theories as they relate to the field of educational technology.  The readings have been quite lengthy if only because I needed many resources to gain some intellectual traction on the enormity of the subject.  The following is an account of the main ideas I found most pertinent.

Of all the reading on the subject I found chapter 13 of the Blacker & McKie (2002) e-book  a deeply constructive exposure to the philosophical underpinning of educational technology.  In many ways it represented the most sweeping revelation of the implications of how knowledge of philosophy is shaping my perspectives on educational technology and pedagogy.  I have chosen to use this document as a guide to annotate the most salient ideas I have uncovered in my studies in recent weeks.  Where necessary I will infuse information from other sources to expand the relevance of my writing.  The information is meant as a reflection on topics I have reviewed and is depicted like a journal.  I have found this approach most effective for the purpose of reviewing and assimilating the knowledge.

The treatment of the subject matter in the readings was appealing and represented a clear, refined quality.  The thoughts were profound and relevant to contemporary issues.  The writing was easily understood representing a unique expertise by any standard.  The following are some of my thoughts on the relevancy of philosophy on the implementation of educational technology, and implications for the discipline viewed broadly through a summary of the chapter:

1.    From the onset the authors address the implications of educational technology by defining the moment for its potential qualitative value.  Educational technology, “…raises the stakes for education even more fundamentally through its effect upon basic questions of value.”  Educational technology, as an academic discipline, continues to play a pivotal role in contemporary institutionalized learning but I contend it is "capable" of much more. Therefore, how do I fit into this notion of the extraordinary value technology can bring to the fore of pedagogy? I think of this value to "ed-tech", not only as a reflection of my potential contribution to reducing the achievement gap but raising the stakes in terms of how technology is actually implemented in teaching and learning.

According to the authors, John Dewey and Martin Heidegger provide a perspective on the implements of change that are at the center of the function of educational technology today-the tools!  Dewey identifies the “tool” as a “…particular thing, but it is more than a particular thing,” because of some process of which it will invariable become a part of  (1981, p. 101).

The authors make clear however, as has Dr. Ross Perkins, (this resonates with me) that:
2.    The tools are not the technology-the ideas that rule their path are!  How then does philosophy create, facilitate or enrich this path?  Is philosophy the true teacher?  Am I supposed to just be a vessel advocating a given philosophy?  Do I become the tool for the philosophy?
Technology hides ”itself” in its function.  The point of seamlessly integrating technology so the function of pedagogy exists unabated is worth remembering!

3.  The idea of the "rationale" for using the tool becomes the ultimate question.  In the paper there is a suggestion that if we go back far enough the real motive for using tools presents from some moral challenge.

The authors reason, “We believe there are two main orders of business along these lines, and philosophy is crucial to both of them.”  The first concerns ontological assumptions (what exists) and the second how we are being influenced by the changing landscape of technology.  So I frame these as questions to myself:
i.    What assumptions underlie my understanding of educational technology?
ii.    How is the sense of what I do changing with the changing landscape of emerging technology?

I continue asking-What anchors me as an educator, is it fundamentally a moral question and should it be?

Decisions of what to teach and what to conceal from the learner, may, as the authors suggest be a moral question. Does the technology and tools we use arise from moral questions?

I propose the mode of transmission of knowledge is as important as the nature of the content. The authors purport that technology also “conceals and reveals” from us.  For instance, by virtue of the design of a computer game and to greater extent the use of a computer in general, one is predisposed to navigate along a narrow set of parameters. It is therefore conceivable that the effects of this limiting exposure reduce the quality of the educational experience.

Ontological Assumptions – the philosophical study of the nature of being

“Structural Ambiguity of Common Sense”
Fostered by ambiguity-The tools we use versus fostering and maintaining their perpetual occurrence.
On one hand technology is perceived as the manifestation of the tools humans create and choose to use and on the other hand technology is shaping us more than we shape it. I think of my neighbor walking his dog and soon as Rusty signals with a single bark that it is time to do his business the "master" reacts with Pavlovian precision. Religiously the dog is “walked” and picked up after. I query to myself who is the real master?

Much like my neighbor and his dog it is a facade to think we are in control of technology, we are slaves to it! I am therefore bothered by the manner in which we expose tools to learners with the misguided notion that simple exposure will result in some profound, obscure learning goal! The science and philosophical pillars I have been immersed in, suggest we can and should critical appraise tools for pedagogy.

Teachers sometimes take little stake in determining the nature of the tools required to facilitate predetermined learning outcomes. Ironically, the culture is so obsessed with erecting safeguards for manufacturing, food, drugs, flying, credit cards, and the like, yet little if any safeguards are being designed for the "technology" the learner consumes. Who should engage the learner in determining how to select these tools for learning or how to learn effectively with a given tool? If not the educator then who?

I concede, it is with a deeper understanding of age old philosophical inquiries, that I foresee a clearer path to rationally addressing some of the challenges endemic to the study, practice and business of educational technology. What has become evident is our obligation to "do no harm" to our learners, to build their capacity for civil discourse, and to encourage a productive lifestyle is embedded in the choices we make about the tools we use in education. It is truly a moral question.

References

10.1111/b.9780631221197.2002.00016.x