I was struck by the negative characterisation of those academics and tutors who do not take to the use of Web 2.0 and ICT in general in education.
The author seems to approach the views of those who are not enthused as a kind of 'false consciousness' - that is 'if they only properly understood these wonderful technologies they would all use them to teach. They just don't understand'. I wonder if this is indeed the case.
Larry Cuban in 'New Technologies in Old Universities' reported that even in the late 1980's almost all faculty members at Stanford used computers to prepare materials and research and for personal use - but almost none used ICT in delivering teaching. These people are not technophobes - so something else seems to be going on.
I wonder if it is this - teachers/tutors/lecturers are very aware that whilst they present much the same materials each year, for their students this is very likely to be a one off opportunity. Experimentation is therefore a high risk strategy, not for the tutor, but for the student (even if the students are not aware of the danger).
There is apparently no evidence that ICT enhanced or based learning is more effective (in terms of grades or outcomes) than the 'old school' approach (which is perhaps not surprising given the relative lack of use - a Catch 22 situation).
Therefore there is a risk that the tutor will, at great personal cost in terms of time and effort, rewrite and revisit all elements of their practice and course - only to find that the outcomes for students are no better or indeed may be worse.
Add to that the tendency to assess competence by results, lack of time and training and that there is no additional pay for all the additional work involved, and the resistance to ICT in education starts to look like a rational (though deeply conservative) response, rather than a Luddite refusal to embrace the inevitable.
Reading Conole - thoughts
I was struck by the negative characterisation of those academics and tutors who do not take to the use of Web 2.0 and ICT in general in education.
The author seems to approach the views of those who are not enthused as a kind of 'false consciousness' - that is 'if they only properly understood these wonderful technologies they would all use them to teach. They just don't understand'. I wonder if this is indeed the case.
Larry Cuban in 'New Technologies in Old Universities' reported that even in the late 1980's almost all faculty members at Stanford used computers to prepare materials and research and for personal use - but almost none used ICT in delivering teaching. These people are not technophobes - so something else seems to be going on.
I wonder if it is this - teachers/tutors/lecturers are very aware that whilst they present much the same materials each year, for their students this is very likely to be a one off opportunity. Experimentation is therefore a high risk strategy, not for the tutor, but for the student (even if the students are not aware of the danger).
There is apparently no evidence that ICT enhanced or based learning is more effective (in terms of grades or outcomes) than the 'old school' approach (which is perhaps not surprising given the relative lack of use - a Catch 22 situation).
Therefore there is a risk that the tutor will, at great personal cost in terms of time and effort, rewrite and revisit all elements of their practice and course - only to find that the outcomes for students are no better or indeed may be worse.
Add to that the tendency to assess competence by results, lack of time and training and that there is no additional pay for all the additional work involved, and the resistance to ICT in education starts to look like a rational (though deeply conservative) response, rather than a Luddite refusal to embrace the inevitable.
Rant over
Vikki