Is educational technology a waste of time?

Note: This post is in response to ESC407 Week 1 Module 1

To quote Antony Funnell in a podcast on 21^st Century Education:

"technology doesn't educate people, people educate people" (Funnell, 2012)

I agree with this statement, and whilst this - along with the quotation on this blog from David Thornburg - could be construed as my being against technology in education, this certainly isn’t the case. I certainly believe technology has a place in education, and depending on your definition of technology, it has been with us for centuries. In the same podcast, Greg Whitby is quoted as saying educational technology is a “waste of time” (Funnell, 2012). It is important to note however that Whitby is aiming that opinion at the discussion around which device/s we should be using rather than the use of technology itself. 

Whitby's point, and I agree with him, is that the device itself doesn’t matter – is the use of the device which is key. Punya Mishra in his keynote speech from the 21C learning conference (21CLI, 2012) supports this view, noting that most technologies are not designed for education but rather, we redesign the use of technology to suit our own purposes, just as we do in everyday life. Mishra argues that there is no such thing as “educational” technology – teachers repurpose existing technology to suit the classroom.

With this in mind, rather than a “waste of time”, technology can be viewed as “just another tool” in the teaching toolbox. Just as we use text books as sources of both information and practice, technology can be incorporated judiciously into classrooms. Technology can often be used to engage students but we must be cautious in understanding that engagement can be a poor proxy for learning (Coe, 2014) – students can be very engaged in a lesson that has poor content or pedagogical techniques. My initial research on the TPACK framework shown below:

Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org

developed by Mishra and Koehler (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) shows that the framework could be used to ensure technology is integrated into the classroom alongside both content and pedagogical knowledge rather than being the driving force behind or an afterthought to a lesson. It has been applied successfully in mathematics classrooms in both a secondary (Guerrero, 2010) and primary (Muir, Callingham, & Beswick, 2016) setting. Has anyone had experience with TPACK? It would be interesting to hear your thoughts.

References

21CLI (Producer). (2012, March 26). Punya Mishra - Keynote Speaker @ 21st Century Learning Conference - Hong Kong 2012. [Video File] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bwXYa91fvQ

Coe, R. (2014). Evidence informing practice. Retrieved from http://www.ascl.org.uk/download.71B0B25B-177A-4D21-81103676167E2CCE.html

A. Davies (Producer). (2012, August 19). Future Tense [Audio Podcast]. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/futuretense/21st-century-education/4197700

Guerrero, S. (2010). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in the mathematics classroom. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 26(4), 132-139. doi:10.1080/10402454.2010.10784646

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017.

Muir, T., Callingham, R., & Beswick, K. (2016). Using the IWB in an early years mathematics classroom: An application of the TPACK framework. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 32(2), 63-72. doi:10.1080/21532974.2016.1138913