Classroom-based use of two educational technologies: A socio-cultural perspective
Article
Sandy Schuck, Matthew Kearney, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
CITE Journal Volume 8, Number 4, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA
Abstract
This paper describes the fit between educational technologies and teacher views and pedagogies in light of two recently completed research projects. These studies focused on observed pedagogies associated with the classroom-based use of two learning technologies: digital video (student-generated), and interactive whiteboards. The paper considers the use of these two technologies from a sociocultural perspective, recognizing that the nature of tools and the nature of societal use of these tools are mutually dependent. Questions are raised about how the inherent nature of different technologies might shape different learning experiences and outcomes and whether certain technologies fit better with some pedagogical approaches than others.
Citation
Schuck, S. & Kearney, M. (2008). Classroom-based use of two educational technologies: A socio-cultural perspective. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 394-406. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved August 7, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/26272/.
© 2008 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
Keywords
References
View References & Citations Map- Ayersman, D. (1996). Reviewing the research on hypermedia-based learning. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(4), 500-525.
- Communications and Technology Agency. (2003). What the research says about interactive whiteboards. Coventry, UK: Author. 402
- Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (1998). Qualitative research for education. An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
- Bonk, C., & Graham, C. (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of blended learning environments. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
- Clarke, C. (2004, January). Secretary of State for Education and Skills opening address. British Educational Presentation at the British Education and Training Technology Conference, Olympia. Retrieved from the Teachnet Website: http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/community/webcasts/bett2004/transcripts/clarke7jan04/
- Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. Educational Technology, 31(5), 34-40.
- Glassman, M. (2001). Dewy and Vygotsky: Society, experience and inquiry in education practice. Educational Researcher, 30(4), 3-14.
- Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, (3rd ed. Pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
- Hedberg, J. (2006). E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come. Studies in Continuing Education, 28(2), 171-183.
- Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213-225.
- Jonassen, D. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Kearney, M., & Schuck, S. (2008). Exploring pedagogy with interactive whiteboards in Australian schools. Australian Educational Computing, 8-13.
- Kennewell, S. (2006, November). Reflections on the interactive whiteboard phenomenon: A synthesis of research from the UK. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Active Educational Researchers, Adelaide, Australia.
- Kent, P. (2004). E-teaching and interactive whiteboards. The Richardson experience. The Practising Administrator, 26(1).
- Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.
- Levin, H. (2003). Making history come alive: Students interview Holocaust survivors on camera and publish their stories on the web. Learning and Leading with Technology, 31(3), 22-27.
- Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4)
- Mehan, H. (1982). The structure of classroom events and their consequences for student performance. In P. Gilmore& A.A. Glatthorn (Eds.), Children in and out of school. (pp. 59-87). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
- Ong, W. (2005). Ramus, method and the decay of dialogue: From the art of discourse to the art of reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Papert, S. (1993). Children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York: Basic.
- Papert, S. (2004). Technology in schools: To support the system or render it obsolete. Retrieved from the Milken Family Foundation Website: http://www.mff.org/edtech/article.taf?_function=detail & Content_uid1=106
- Potter, J. (2005). ‘This brings back a lot of memories’: A case study in the analysis of digital video production by young learners. Education, Communication& Information, 5(1), 5-23.
- Reeves, T., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. In A. Goody, J. Herrington, & M. Northcote (Eds.), Quality conversations: Research and development in higher education, 25, 562-567. Jamison, Australian Capital Territory: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia.
- Reid, M., Burn, A., & Parker, D. (2002). Evaluation report of the Becta digital video pilot project. Coventry, UK: British Educational Communications and Technology Agency.
- Rychen, D.S. (2002). Key competencies for the Knowledge Society: A contribution from the OECD project definition and selection of competencies. Stuttgart: UNESCO.
- Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. Review of Research in Education, 23, 1-24.
- Schmid, E.C. (2006). Investigating the use of interactive whiteboard technology in the English language classroom through the lens of a critical theory of technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 47-62.
- Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2004). Students in the director’s seat: Teaching and learning with student-generated video. A research report. Retrieved from the University of Technology Sydney Education Website: http://www.edev.uts.edu.au/teachered/research/dvproject/pdfs/ReportWeb.pdf
- Schuck, S. & Kearney, M. (2007). Exploring pedagogy with interactive whiteboards. A research report. Retrieved from the University of Technology Sydney Education Website: http://www.eddev.uts.edu.au/teachered/research/iwbproject/pdfs/iwbreportweb.pdf
- Shewbridge, W., & Berge, Z. (2004). The role of theory and technology in learning video production: The challenge of change. International Journal on E-learning, 3(1), 31-39.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References