Whose Definition of (Educational) Technology?



A challenge that I see emerging is that there are multiple definitions of the word technology in the Education Community. These definitions are based entirely on and limited by an individual's experience with computers/computing devices and [proprietary] software . Here are some personal observations noted recently:





  • A curious dichotomy between 'great teaching' vs. 'technology' seems to creep in to many conversations. As if the two are mutually exclusive. (They're not)


  • Those with limited experience with current technologies tend to believe that those with successful experience using technology are biased because they "like" technology/computers. (Actually, in many cases, education technology enthusiasts are only enthusiasts because they have seen remarkable results along the lines of engagement and learning with their students while learning with technology)


  • Those with limited experience with current technologies believe all technology/technological applications are expensive. (Wrong. Most web applications and many cloud-based programs are....FREE. Many of these rival proprietary programs like Microsoft Office).


  • Those with limited experience with current technologies make no mention of web-based, networked online learning spaces. The conversation remains in the realm of hardware and internet access. (Yes, you need to be able to access the Internet to use any cloud-based app but the hardware/device being used to access the web is beside the point. The learning moments happen in those networked spaces.)


  • Those with limited experience with current technologies scoff at the idea of using Twitter or other social networking platforms as a Professional Development tool or Learning Resource. (Twitter is, to many education professionals a "Professional Development Superhighway".)


  • Etc...(Add your observations in the comments below)

Here's one way of describing the problem:
Those with limited experience with current technologies are like people who stopped learning the alphabet at the letter "C". Knowing only 3 letters of the alphabet, they will argue that the alphabet is a limited resource. After all, you can only craft so many words with three letters.

They're right about that . (CAB) But guess what? There are 26 letters. And so it is with technology, except that the technological alphabet is ever-expanding. Which is why Lifelong Learning is imperative now. It's not just an option to stop learning and impose your limitation on those who know better. It's an indefensible position. I'm reading: Whose Definition of (Educational) Technology? Tweet this!

2 comments :