Those trained in the area of educational technology end up in various professional positions with a variety of responsibilities. What follows is a brief review of the job titles, roles, and responsibilities associated with educational technology profes- sionals; it is not intended to be a complete or comprehensive of the various roles in which educational technologists are placed.
• Instructional designer—responsible for planning, analyzing, designing, devel- oping, modifying, implementing, evaluating, and/or managing a variety of courses, instructional systems, and learning environments
• Instructional project manager—responsible for leading instructional develop- ment projects, directing educational programs, and/or managing the creation of learning environment efforts
• Media specialist—responsible for creating, finding, modifying, and/or using a variety of media artifacts in various formats
• Technology coordinator—responsible for helping teachers and instructorsfind, modify, use, and/or integrate a variety of educational technology resources
• System administrator—responsible for managing and supporting an education system, content management system, learning management system, and/or a network environment used to support learning and instruction
• Developer/programmer—responsible for coding instructionally related software and/or developing mediated objects and resources to be used in support of learning and instruction
• Evaluator—responsible for the formative and summative evaluation of lessons, courses, programs, instructional systems, and/or learning environments
• Instructor—responsible leading units of instruction, tutoring students, and/or providing learning guidance and feedback in the context of formal learning contexts.
Another way to represent the complexity of educational technology is in terms of Robert Tennyson’s (1995) Fourth-Generation Instructional Systems Development (ISD) model (see Fig.1.4). Note that in this context, the notion of“development” covers the entire life cycle of planning, implementing, managing, and evaluating an educational effort. Some practitioners refer to this notion of development as big D, and some also use design in the same big D sense to cover the entire life cycle. In this volume, we generally use design and development to refer to specific tasks rather than the entire process.
Terminology is often an important component of gaining competence in a particular domain. For that reason, we have included definitions of key terms in each chapter in an effort to use those terms as would most educational technologists.
Nonetheless, different uses do occur in various situations. That is particularly true with regard to terms“assessment”and “evaluation”which are treated later in this volume. In general, and by way of an advance organizer,“assessment”is most often
Fig. 1.4 Tennyson’s Fourth-Generation ISD model (used with permission)
used to refer to individuals—learners or workers.“Evaluation”on the other hand is most often used to refer to courses, projects, programs, products, policies, pro- cesses, or practices. There are two things especially noteworthy in Tennyson’s ISD model. First, a situational evaluation applies regardless of where in that model one happens to be working. Second, the model is elaborate primarily in terms of what people do. As a consequence, that model can serve as a point of departure for elaborating in more detail the roles of an instructional designer, which are differ- ently defined than those of an educational technologist.
Key Points in This Chapter
(1) AECT definition of educational technology is the study and ethical practice of facilitating learning and improving performance by creating, using, and managing appropriate technological processes and resources.
(2) The scope of educational technology includes needs assessment, requirements and feasibility analysis, design/redesign, development, deployment, manage- ment, evaluation, support, training.
(3) The dimensions of educational technology include communication/coordination, content/resources, hardware devices and software, implementation, media, and representation formats.
(4) Roles of educational technologist include instructional designer, instructional project manager, media specialist, technology coordinator, system administra- tor, developer/programmer, evaluator, and instructor.
Learning Resources
• The AECT Open Content Portal—open access resources for educational tech- nologists; see https://sites.google.com/site/aectopencontent/
• Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology—a variety of contributions from leading scholars edited by Michael Orey; seehttp://epltt.coe.
uga.edu/index.php?title=Main_Page
• Instructional Design Central—a privately run Web site for instructional design professionals; seehttp://www.instructionaldesigncentral.com
• International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and Instruction (ibstpi)—identifies standards and sets standards for instructors, instructional designers, evaluators, online learners, and training managers; see http://ibstpi.
org/
• The Makerspace Movement—a community who uses 3D printers to create objects and artifacts which can be used to support learning and instruction; see http://library-maker-culture.weebly.com/what-are-they.html
• The New Media Consortium (NMC)—an organization that tracks and docu- ments promising and emerging technologies likely to impact learning and instruction in the form of annualHorizon Reportsin a number of contexts; see http://www.nmc.org/
• Open educational resource (OER): Resource Roundup from Edutopia; seehttp://
www.edutopia.org/open-educational-resources-guide
• Open educational resources—a UNESCO guidebook and resource; see http://
www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/access-to- knowledge/open-educational-resources//
• Smithsonian Institute, Resources for Educators; see http://www.si.edu/
Educators
• Theory Into Practice Database/Instructional.org—Greg Kearsley’s original database created in 1992 which has been revised several times since then; see http://instructionaldesign.org/
• UNESCO: Education for the twenty-first century—see http://en.unesco.org/
themes/education-21st-century.
References
Dijkstra, E. W. (1972). The humble programmer.Communications of the ACM, 15(10), 859–866.
Gagné, R. M. (1985).The conditions of learning and theory of instruction(4th ed.). New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Gagné, R. M., & Merrill, M. D. (1990). Integrative goals for instructional design.Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 23–30.
Hartley, R., Kinshuk, Koper, R., Okamoto, T., & Spector, J. M. (2010). The education and training of learning technologists: A competences approach.Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 206–216. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ifets.info/journals/13_2/17.pdf.
Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (Eds.). (2008). Educational technology: A definition with commentary. New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.aect.org/publications/
EducationalTechnology/.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59.
Merrill, M. D. (2007). The future of instructional design: The proper study of instructional design.
In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.),Trends and issues in instructional design and technology(2nd ed., pp. 336–341). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Merrill, M. D. (2013).First principles of instruction. Identifying and designing effective, efficient, and engaging instruction. San Francisco, CA: Wiley & Sons.
Merrill, M. D., Tennyson, R. D., & Posey, L. O. (1992). Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Reeves, T. C. (2006). Design research from the technology perspective. In J. V. Akker, K.
Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.),Educational design research(pp. 86–109).
London: Routledge.
Rogers, E. M. (2003).Diffusion of innovations(5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Rossett, A. (2009). First things fast: A handbook for performance analysis (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley & Sons.
Spector, J. M. (2015). Foundations of educational technology: Integrative approaches and interdisciplinary perspectives(2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Spector, J. M., & Ren, Y. (2015). History of educational technology. In J. M. Spector (Ed.),The SAGE Encyclopedia of educational technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tennyson, R. D. (1995). Instructional systems development: The fourth generation. In R.
D. Tennyson & A. E. Barron (Eds.), Automating instructional design: Computer-based development and delivery(pp. 33–78). New York: Springer.
of Technologies 2
Chapter Outline
• Behaviorism
• Cognitivism
• Constructivism
• Other learning theories
• Technology-enhanced learning.
By the End of This Chapter, You Should Be Able To
• Clarify the background and main ideas of different learning theories
• State the relationship of technology and learning theories
• Describe the impact of learning theories on teaching, including behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, connectivism and humanism
Main Learning Activities
1. Think about what is learning and the advantages and disadvantages of program instruction and discuss with your peers.
2. Think about the characteristics and functions of sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory as well as the implications of information processing theory for instruction. More specifically, how would you characterize your response to the discussions of behaviorism and cognitivism? Were you passive as a reader or were you processing what you read and creating ideas or cognitive structures?
3. Think about what are the differences between individual/cognitive construc- tivism and social constructivism? In addition, think about the implications of constructivism for teaching.
©Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019
R. Huang et al.,Educational Technology, Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6643-7_2
33
4. Think about the implications of connectivism for teaching. Suppose you want to learn more about climate change, who might you ask to gain a better under- standing? Is there a group you might join to follow up on your interest?
5. Think about the integration of technology and education and how the learning theories evolved over time. Do you find a connection between specific tech- nologies and learning theories? Can you describe a couple of examples?
6. Work with your group members or peers, to create a concept map to show how learning theories and technologies are related to each other. Modify the concept map based on your discussion in the group.