Social Icons

11 January 2017

Measuring the Effectiveness of Educational Technology

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.
  1. Changes in teaching style need to occur to ensure better teaching and learning.
  2. Decision makers must assume leadership and be willing to commit resources.
  3. Educators at all levels require simple, flexible, cost-effective, easy to monitor and well functioning tools and applications.
  4. 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

 
 
Blogger Templates