Advertisement

Digital Technologies: An Effective Educational Change Agent?

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter questions why digital technology is a ubiquitous tool outside of the classroom but is less well received within the classroom. It addresses the questions of what happens if we, the educators, fail to embrace technology and ask could the technology take education itself out of the classroom and the hands of educators themselves.

Keywords

Mobile Phone Digital Technology Central Processing Unit Learner Autonomy Massive Open Online 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aronson, E. D. (2012). Cyber-politics: How new media has revolutionized electoral politics in the United States. Colgate Academic Review, 9, Article 7. Retrieved from http://commons.colgate.edu/car/vol9/iss1/7
  2. Aviram, A., & Talmi, D. (2005). The impact of information and communication technology on education: The missing discourse between three different paradigms. E-Learning and Digital Media, 2, 161–191.Google Scholar
  3. Crabtree, J., & Roberts, S. (2003). Fat pipes, connected people rethinking broadband Britain. London: iSociety. Retrieved from http://www.theworkfoundation.com/pdf/fat_pipes.pdf Accessed November 5, 2003.
  4. Clarke-Midura, J., & Dede, C. (2010). Assessment, Technology, and Change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Downes, S. (2005). An introduction to connective knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/post/33034
  6. Friedman, R. L. (2013, January 27). Revolution hits the universities. New York Times, page SR1 Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/opinion/sunday/friedman-revolution-hits-the-universities.html?_r=0
  7. Haste, H. (2005). Joined-Up Texting: The Role of Mobile Phones in Young People’s Lives. Report No. 3. London: Nestle ́Social Research Programme.Google Scholar
  8. Hernandez, F., & Goodison, I. F. (2004). Social geographies of educational change. Dordrcht, NL: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  10. Jordan, K. (2013). MOOC completion rates: The data. Retrieved from http://www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject.html
  11. Junco, R. (2011). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers and Education, 58, 162–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? Participant support on Massive Open Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12, 74–93.Google Scholar
  13. Lebrun, M. (2007). Quality towards an expected harmony: Pedagogy and technology speaking together about innovation. AACE Journal, 15, 115–130.Google Scholar
  14. Lowendahl, J. -M. et al. (2009). Hype Cycle for Higher Education, 2008. Industry Research ID: G00158592) Gartner. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?id=709014
  15. Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010 (pp. 266–275). Lancaster: University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
  16. OfCom (2006). Media Literacy Audit: Report on media literacy amongst children, Retrieved from http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/media-literacy/archive/medlitpub/medlitpubrss/children/
  17. OfCom (2010). UK children’s media literacy. Retrieved from http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/ukchildrensml1.pdf
  18. Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  19. Palser, B. (2009). Amateur content's star turn. American Journalism Review, 31, 42.Google Scholar
  20. Parr, C. (2013a, May 23). Futruelearn reveals big plans to deliver MOOCs on the move. Times Higher Education, 9.Google Scholar
  21. Parr, C. (2013b, May 9). How many stay the course? A mere 7 %. Times Higher Education, 19.Google Scholar
  22. Pedró, F. (2006). The new millennium learners: Challenging our views on ICT and learning. OECD-CERI.Google Scholar
  23. Plester, B., & Wood, C. (2009). Exploring relationships between traditional and new media literacies: British preteen texters at school. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 1108–1129. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/1/1/38358359.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  25. Resnick, M. (2006). Computer as paintbrush: Technology, play, and the creative society. In D. Singer, R. Golikoff, & K. Hirsh-Pasek (Eds.), Play = Learning: How play motivates and enhances children's cognitive and social-emotional growth (pp. 192–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Robinson, H. (2010). Case prompts mobile crackdown call. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/10092626.stm
  27. Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sandford, R., Uiksak, M., Facer, K., & Rudd, T. (2006). Teaching with games: Using commercial off-the-shelf computer games in formal education. Bristol: Nesta Futurelab.Google Scholar
  29. Sclater, N. (2010). eLearning in the cloud. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1, 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Severance, C., Hardin, J., & Whyte, A. (2008). The coming functionality mash-up in personal learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 16, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from elearnspace. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
  32. Simplicio, J. S. C. (2000). Teaching classroom educators how to be more effective and creative teachers. Education, 120, 675–680.Google Scholar
  33. Sleigh, M. J., Smith, A. W., & Laboe, J. (2013). Professors’ facebook content affects students’ perceptions and expectations. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 16(7), 489–496. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2012.0561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Underwood, J., Ault, A., Banyard, P., Bird, K. Dillon, G., Hayes, M., Selwood, I., Somekh, B., & Twining, P. (2005). The impact of broadband in school. Coventry; Becta. Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1616/1/becta_2005_impactofbroadband_report_underwood.pdf
  35. Underwood, J., Baguley, T., Banyard, P., Dillon, G., Farrington-Flint, L., Hayes, M., Le Geyt, G., Murphy, J., & Selwood, I. (2010). Understanding the impact of technology: Learner and school-level factors. Coventry; Becta. Retrieved from http://research.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/research/understanding_impact_technology_learner_school_level_factors.pdf
  36. Underwood, J., & Dillon, G. (2011). Chasing dreams and recognising realities: Teachers’ responses to ICT. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20, 343–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Underwood, J. D. M., & Stiller, J. (2014). Does knowing lead to doing in the case of learning platforms? Teachers and Teaching, 20, 229–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. (2009). The impact of mobile learning on students’ learning behaviours and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 673–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Watson, D. M. (2001). Pedagogy before technology: Re-thinking the relationship between ICT and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6, 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Westera, W. (2010). Technology-enhanced learning: Review and prospects. Serdica Journal of Computing, 4, 159–182.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of PsychologyNottingham Trent UniversityNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations