By
Erwina Tri Astuti
1507042028
The studies
examining of effectiveness of technology are producing encouraging results,causing
educators to provide greater access and availability of moreresources.
Scardamalia
(2006) argues three distinct areas of technology that have potential
implications for contributing to depth of understanding. These include: 1)
Computer-assisted instruction (CAI); 2) Simulations, games, and laboratory
instruments; and 3) Technology to support discourse. In particular, the use of
CAI to complement traditional teaching has become a common feature of
post-secondary education. However, the degree to which current uses of
technology-assisted instruction contribute to deep understanding, has often times
proved difficult to measure.
It is obvious using of technology in
education has exploded at all levels. As
stated in the above report by the U.S. Dept. Of Education, these successes
include the following features:
- Role of
concentrated, conscious and explicit planning among school leaders,
families and students to create "learner-centered environments."
- Goals and
challenging standards for student achievement are clearly articulated.
- Restructuring
of the school to support the learner-centered environment and achievement
of standards.
- Near
universal access to computer technology.
Sweller
says the limitations of working memory and devises instructional techniques to
facilitate the acquisition of knowledge in long-term memory. Cognitive load
theory provides a framework for instructional design by distinguishing between
3 types of cognitive load (intrinsic, extraneous, and germane) and their
association with learning. Intrinsic cognitive load has been described by
Sweller and Chandler (1994) as arising from the interaction between the
learning material and the expertise of the learner. Extraneous load is the
cognitive load that extends beyond the intrinsic, and germane cognitive load is
the load devoted to processes related to the construction and automation of
schemas (Sweller, Van Merriënboer, and Paas, 1998). While intrinsic load is
fixed, extraneous load and germane load may be directly impacted upon by
instructional design (Paas, Ayres, and Pachman, 2008). Hence, experiments
measuring cognitive load are often used to evaluate the success (or failure) of
technology in reaching its audience. Both Mayer and Sweller’s research have
contributed greatly to establishing theories describing the basic mechanisms of
learning in a multimedia environment. However, when we attempt to apply these
theories to the evaluation of multimedia in a more dynamic “real world”
context, the information processing model that forms the basis of this
research, and the traditional methods of measurement, both fail to capture the
complex interactions that occur between the learner and the subject matter.
This is a mind map of how to measure the instructional technology :
The evaluation of educational technology
involves the randomization of students into one of 2 treatment groups: control
and experimental. Measurement in the form of a pre-test establishes a baseline
for evaluating the efficacy of the tool.
A number of other conclusions can also
be found in the literature. These include:
1. Availability of
technology does not by itself improve learning.
- Changes in
teaching style need to occur to ensure better teaching and learning.
- Decision
makers must assume leadership and be willing to commit resources.
- Educators
at all levels require simple, flexible, cost-effective, easy to monitor
and well functioning tools and applications.
- Successful
technology-rich educational environments do result in improved
achievement, better attendance and better attitudes toward learning.
The
statements above andothers similar are usually very general. We also need
specificanswers to questions such as:
- What uses
of technology are most effective and why?
- What
experiences and educational activities should be kept personal and
individual and what interpersonal group-related?
- How d'es
learning become richer for students who are provided new and different
types of information otherwise inaccessible (Specific examples)?
- How to plan
for accessibility and affordability of ever-changing hardware and
software?
- How can the
education community benefit from government and private industry
developments in technology and how can their research be utilized by the
education community?
- What
successful models for implementation meet what needs?
References
Alston.A.J., Wade Mill.W. (2001). “Instructional Technology
Utilization and Availability in North Carolina and Virginia”. Journal of Southern Agricultural
Education Research. Vol. 51, No. 1, 63-71.
Jodie
Jenkinson. ( 2009).”Measuring the Effectiveness of Educational Technology: what
are we Attempting to Measure?”. Electronic Journal of e-Learning Volume 7,
Issue 3, (273 - 280).
No comments:
Post a Comment