Anita Knox

Science is the study of phenomena in the physical world.  Knowledge is drawn about the phenomenon by observation and systematic experimentation (Encyclopedia Britannica). Scientists strive to gather this information without bias.  Types of science can be grouped by earth science and social science.  Earth science encompasses many subcategories like biology, astronomy, natural, and medicine.  Social science encompasses subcategories like psychology, anthropology, and economics. 

There has been an ongoing debate whether social science is an actual form of science.  To answer this we must consider if social science is capable of a systematic approach to observing and analyzing phenomena in the physical world. The answer is yes, and it is proven true in methodologies used like research design, data collection and validation.

Research design includes development of study goals, the rationale behind the research, developing conceptual and theoretical frameworks, and planning the trustworthiness of the information or data gathered.  The processes within the design have systematic approaches.  For example, establishing the rationale for the study would include an exhaustive review of current literature to identify how formal theory is situated and to identify common research gaps. 

Both qualitative and quantitative data can be collected in social science research.  In addition to actual statistics, data could be composed of interviews, field notes, documentation, surveys and participant generated input (Ravitch & Mittenfelner, 2018).  Although the results can be unexpected the approach is systematically planned and implemented.  By supplementing statistical data with a context social science is able to better explain a phenomena.  Rosenberg (2018) discusses the ability for natural sciences to progress faster than social science.  If social science based findings solely on statistics it would progress faster as well.

Social sciences employ numerous methods of validity to confirm reliability of research data. Some examples are descriptive, interpretive, theoretical and evaluative (Ravitch & Mittenfelner, 2018).  Descriptive confirms factual accuracy by including notes collected in qualitative research, transcription, and detailed project plans. Interpretive matches behaviors and perspectives of research participants.  Theoretical explains the phenomena through the use of existing theories.  This not only serves as a basis for the research but adds another level of confirmation for the theory by being able to repeat the methodology.  Finally, evaluation describes the data without bias or judgement of the research team inserted into findings.

Citations

Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/science/science

Rosenberg, A. (2018) Philosophy of Social Science. Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

Ravitch, S. M. & Mittenfelner, N. C. (2015). Qualitative Research: Bridging the Conceptual, Theoretical, and Methodological. SAGE Publications.

In The Role Of Technology In The Evolution Of Communication Rogers (2019) indicates the communication evolution started with the electric telegraph in 1831.  Although there were some forms of long-distance communication it was the start of electrical engineering that made this telegraph accessible.  Innovation continued with major milestones like the telephone in 1849, which continued to be our primary source of long-distance communication until more recent times. It took the adoption of internet technology, which was made available to the general public in the 1990s, to communicate in a new way.  Email became a welcomed substitution for writing and mailing a letter. After the turn of the millennium broadband became readily available for home use.  This allowed faster connection than dial-up, even able to out work complex corporate networks. Computers had been getting smaller, internet service was the missing piece for seamless remote communication. Of course we want smaller computers and faster connections, which led to advancements in Smartphone technology.  Anyone that has fought with a Blackberry would not be surprised to see how easily the iPhone took over the market in 2007.  In essence we can communicate long distances from anywhere we desire.  This ability has forever changed how we do business, how we learn, and in general how we interact with others.

In my corporate Instructional Design job all communication requires technology since we have remote teams spread out all over the world, and work with international customers.  Meetings are conducted through online web conferencing.  Dropping by someone’s desk to chat is instead a conversation exchanged through a messenger. Technology offers us the chance to communicate with the entire world without the time and expense of travel. Companies can assemble the right talent without worry of location.  Along with the opportunities technology brings, there are also challenges.  First, the actual technology is not consistent across every domestic location and every country.  Internet service is limited in some areas, which results in an individual losing connection during a meeting or even missing the meeting because the service is down.  We become dependent on communication tools, but these systems can periodically go down.  The other challenge is how we present ourselves when communicating with technology, verses in person.  For example, an in-person ribbing would result in laughs but that loses the charm online.  Explanations in email need to be more succinct than we might speak.  Thoughts, feelings, and intentions are not always portrayed the way we intend when we communicate with technology.  This can lead to hurt feelings, a lack of empathy and communication breakdown. A general awareness and better attempts to understand others can help with this challenge.

In education the use of technology has varied greatly between schools, programs, and levels.  In How Does Technology Impact Student Learning? Himmelsbach (2019) discusses how some teachers found technology more of a hinderance than helpful.  She went on to note several advantages which included access to information that is not available within the confines of a school.  This brings an opportunity to create curriculum with more diverse learning activities, and even pull in subject experts from another part of the world.  Students can interact, learn, and grow beyond the confines of a brick and mortar classroom. Technology accessibility has been highlighted more with the onset of COVID19.  Previously students in lower income communities could get by without technology, but now the educational gaps are becoming more defined. It takes thoughtful integration to use technology for learning.  We can’t just add technology to education and expect everyone to work the same as before.  Just like in business we need to change and adapt, that means attitude, accessibility, and pedagogy.  Instead of widening the gap technology could be the tool that closes it. 

Since the use of technology in education is relatively new in some settings, old theories or theories with a basis from a different industry have been adapted. We have entered a time of educational innovation, which was long past due.  It is time to innovate the theories that provide a basis for methodologies, outcomes and elevation of results. This idea is highlighted in an article by Bower (2019). Mediated learning technology theories have typically been adapted from theories intended for other uses or loosely associated.  Bower (2019) combined these technology-mediated learning theories into an individual concept. This idea is meant to offer a more stable way to analyze computer mediated learning.  In this article one premise that resonated was “In technology-mediated learning settings, the role of teachers is to help optimise student learning outcomes and experiences through the purposeful deployment of learning technologies” (p1039) In this premise he discusses how design should be for optimal learning.  Considerations should include how feedback is given.  The design should address more than direct feedback but also the information highlighted in data analytics.  This will create a more holistic approach and address individualized learning needs of the students. Technology has evolved, business has evolved, it is time for education to evolve. 

Citations

Bower, M. (2019) Technology-mediated learning theory. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1035-1048

Himmelsbach, V. (2019, March 15) How Does Technology Impact Student Learning? Top Hat. Retrieved from https://tophat.com/blog/how-does-technology-impact-student-learning/

Rogers, S. (2019, October 15) The role of technology in the evolution of communication. Forbes. Retrieved at https://www.forbes.com/sites/solrogers/2019/10/15/the-role-of-technology-in-the-evolution-of-communication/#5e92e994493b

Just taking in information does not equal knowledge development.  In addition to information we must take in experiences, thoughts, and feelings.  This adds a context to the information and allows us to evolve.  We develop new knowledge and grow old concepts.  Knowledge must develop for learning to happen.  This explanation of knowledge could make a case for behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism.  Behaviorism believes that the actual response to the learning stimuli shows that learning has happened.  It fails to account for any physical changes happening in the brain or how a higher level of thinking is developed.  Cognitivism focuses on the process taking place in the brain when information is taken in.  Ertmer & Newby (2013) suggest that learning happens when the acquired information is organized and stored in the working memory.  Constructivism takes the theoretical underpinnings of both behaviorism and cognitivism.  Ertmer & Newby (2013) notes that although constructivism is closely related to cognitivism it differs in believing more in an individual’s interpretation of the world, placing individual and environment as important.  Behaviorism and cognitivism believe the environment has a large role in influencing the individual.

My personal philosophy of learning is closer to a cognitivist view.  Ertmer & Newby (2013) describe this as a mental process “that entails internal coding and structuring by the learner.” (p51) Learning happens when outside stimuli is taken in, then applied, challenged, and disseminated into other contexts.  Ultimately the stimuli are constructed into new uses that can innovate and problem solve in unique ways; not for the sake of doing it but because it is an appropriate solution. 

Ertmer & Newby (2013) note that in constructivism “Prior knowledge is used to establish boundary constraints for identifying the similarities and differences of novel information.” (p52) I disagree, if the goal is to not only recall, but problem solving with new knowledge there should not be boundaries.  Innovative thinking comes from developing new ways to apply knowledge instead of staying in a box.  Having prior knowledge is valuable. The knowledge transfer process is most successful when new information is able to attach to existing knowledge.  This process is how we grow our thoughts, feelings, and views.   This makes a case for empiricism, in the context that we start with less knowledge and continuously build.  The thought of our mind starting as an empty slate does not account for physical brain development which happens prior to birth and all the way into adulthood.  Cognitivists align more with rationalism.  Knowledge transfer has successfully happened when we are able to recall existing information.  When knowledge transfer happens, then learning has occurred.

In looking for examples of cognitive learning theories I came across this example presented by Stanković et al. (2018). They quote the works of Piaget and Vigotski that influenced the cognitive learning theory of multimedia learning.  This theory activates the functions of sensory memory, working and long-term memory. 

The cognitive learning theory of multimedia encompasses the stages of:

• Multimedia learning: words and images are presented.
• Sensory stimulation: Audio and visual senses are stimulated as the multimedia is received.
• Working memory: temporarily holds and processes the audio and visual cues from the multimedia.
• Long term memory: permanent holding for future retrieval.

There is a need to slightly edit this model, since that the version Stanković et al. (2018) discussed is more passive.  My revised model would fall under active learning and include stages of:

• Multimedia learning: review old content and work in new content using words, images, and animation.
• Sensory stimulation: Audio and visual senses are the first to receive information.
• Working memory: Information is processed through the hippocampus and temporarily held in the working memory, but this will dissipate in roughly 6 seconds.  Although this time can slightly vary by learner (for me it is roughly 3 seconds).
• Practice: Interactive activity to experience new information to a deeper level and enforce previous learning.
• Multi-sense stimulation: audio, visual and kinetic functions are stimulated.  Information will again travel through the hippocampus but now it is also coming from executive functions in addition to sensory.  This second journey to the working memory will promote recall of new information before purging.
• Long-term memory: Some of the multimedia learning attached permanently, however the practice offers a second opportunity for attachment.

My revised model should promote a higher level of attachment to the working memory since it has two chances to attach during the learning process.  In the past this type of multimedia development was not easy to achieve.  More recently the tools Instructional Designers use have advanced, allowing the ability to include a large variety of interaction. Cognitivists and behaviorists alike believe practice promotes the learning changes, and constructivists place a high value in the actual experience. 

Citations:

Ertmer, P. & Newby, T. (2013) Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an Instructional Design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2) 43-71.

Stanković, Z., Maksimović, J. & Osmanović, J. (2018) Cognitive theories and paradigmatic research posts in the functions of multimedia teaching and learning. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education 6(2) 107-114

Eraut looks at conceptual frameworks for educational technology, coupled with historical developments.  This article appears to be more of a theoretical opinion with a historical review of educational technology. There was a plentiful collection of historical literature.  So much in fact that more than one article theme could have been supported.

Overall, the way the article was organized made it difficult to read. A history of educational technology was discussed along with theories that Eraut found significant at that time.  As a historical writing the theoretical underpinnings helped to understand the logic, however the way it was organized made it difficult to follow the progression over time. 

Distinct points appeared to get lost, or veer off, which made the article difficult to follow. One example is section three the discussion about the systems approach.  This is an opportunity to discuss how this widely used framework has been adapted to educational technology.  The contribution of von Bertalanffy was discussed which digressed from how systems thinking was adapted to an educational technology setting.  

Conclusions could have better surmised the point of the article.  Article goals to “rethink educational goals and the role of educational technology in facilitating their achievement” (p1883) were not laid out. Instead the ending stated educational technology history showed “limited theories, poor quality products, and naïve approaches to implementation.” (p1898) Educational technology processes and concepts were appropriate for the time in which they were used. For example, Dale’s Cone of Experience was discussed in regard to early audiovisual implementation.  Although not an appropriate method in modern times it did suggest a logical approach for the technology that was available in the 1960s.  In reality, this historical approach could be modernized and show merit. To further contradict this ending statement works by greats like Piaget and Gagne could have been included to emphasize the value of theoretical approaches throughout history. Finally, the article was supposed to discuss conceptual frameworks, so this should have also been mentioned in the conclusion. 

Eraut discusses the need for future educational technology modernization in other areas like information technology, cognitive science, and critical theory.  This may be a reasonable observation for the time this article was written.  Today cognitive science is more widely addressing topics like game-based learning, personalized learning and human computer interactions.

Citation

Eraut, M. (n.d.) Educational technology: Conceptual frameworks and historical development. Retrieved from UNT Internal link