In activity 3 we are being asked to reflect upon the paper and the video.
Question 1: Do you think these issues are representative of the broader picture of technology adoption in universities?
A couple of issues have been raised in the various papers and video. The Hara & Kling paper described the frustrations the students experience with technology, isolation, anger and demotivation were other factors which made some of the students decide to quit the course. The tutor in this case had to deal with a few technological problems as well. The video showed us some time consuming frustrations, relevance issues and in my opinion student –lecture relevance (all viewed from the students point of view). The Noble paper described the commercialisation of the Universities and the fear of becoming Diploma Mills.
To come back to the question whether these issues are representative of the broader picture of technology adoption in universities, I believe that every introduction of a new technology brings fear and frustration. Not with all of us, but always a specific group. It is for those group of students or colleagues that we as tutors have to set up proper training and rethink our approaches to our design of course content. As tutors we have to challenge the other group, the ones who don’t get frustrated, alienated or isolated by technology. A differentiated approach is in my opinion is still needed nowadays.
So, yes I do believe it is representative of the broader picture of technology adaption. I believe that there is still a group of students in educational institutions that do have a problem with adapting technology due to various reasons: principle reasons, financial resons, cultural reasons.
However, I wonder if technology is the main reason here in the video and the papers. As Vikki mentioned in a posting on the forum, at the age of 18-22 it is very likely that a lack of life experience and subject experience will make you rebel against it...a social reason?
Week 17, thinking about the issues part 1
In activity 3 we are being asked to reflect upon the paper and the video.
Question 1: Do you think these issues are representative of the broader picture of technology adoption in universities?
A couple of issues have been raised in the various papers and video. The Hara & Kling paper described the frustrations the students experience with technology, isolation, anger and demotivation were other factors which made some of the students decide to quit the course. The tutor in this case had to deal with a few technological problems as well. The video showed us some time consuming frustrations, relevance issues and in my opinion student –lecture relevance (all viewed from the students point of view). The Noble paper described the commercialisation of the Universities and the fear of becoming Diploma Mills.
To come back to the question whether these issues are representative of the broader picture of technology adoption in universities, I believe that every introduction of a new technology brings fear and frustration. Not with all of us, but always a specific group. It is for those group of students or colleagues that we as tutors have to set up proper training and rethink our approaches to our design of course content. As tutors we have to challenge the other group, the ones who don’t get frustrated, alienated or isolated by technology. A differentiated approach is in my opinion is still needed nowadays.
So, yes I do believe it is representative of the broader picture of technology adaption. I believe that there is still a group of students in educational institutions that do have a problem with adapting technology due to various reasons: principle reasons, financial resons, cultural reasons.
However, I wonder if technology is the main reason here in the video and the papers. As Vikki mentioned in a posting on the forum, at the age of 18-22 it is very likely that a lack of life experience and subject experience will make you rebel against it...a social reason?