Comments on: my (non) definition of “educational technology” https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/ no more band-aids Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:14:22 +0000 hourly 1 By: Definition of Educational Technology [Updated] | NspireD2: Learning Technology in Higher Ed. https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-217944 Thu, 20 Jun 2013 22:06:23 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-217944 […] D’Arcy Norman writes that there really isn’t any such thing. I believe what he means is that technology is not inherently educational. Here’s his tongue-in-cheek alternative: […]

]]>
By: Glenda Ainsworth https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-199431 Sat, 15 Jan 2011 02:15:39 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-199431 Here it is a year later – and I agree wholeheartedly. I am supposed to be writing a paper on the difference between Educational Technology and Instructional Technology. What a bunch of baloney. It’s all the same thing to me and to most of the educated people in the world, too. But someone had to write a book about it and I have to write a paper about it. Thanks for your definition. I am including your blog as one of my resources, maybe my classmates (0r teacher) will actually read this and understand what I am trying to get across to them: “educational technology is whatever stuff you need to use to support the practice of effective teaching and learning.”

]]>
By: educational technology « Technology Supported Learning https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-199251 Sun, 02 Jan 2011 23:21:41 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-199251 […] educational technology 2 01 2011 “educational technology is whatever stuff you need to use to support the practice of effective teaching and learning” …adapted and integrated because they were inherently useful to the practice of teaching and learning… There isn’t really such a thing as “educational technology” – there is technology, used in the context of teaching and learning. –D’Arcy Norman, Weblog […]

]]>
By: dnorman https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-198721 Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:36:26 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-198721 there’s “explicit” and then there’s stretching that out into an epic 360 page book written by a committee…

]]>
By: Holy boy https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-198695 Thu, 16 Dec 2010 13:42:02 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-198695 Always Give an explicit definition of any concept you are treating

]]>
By: my (non) definition of “educational technology” | Xtreme Geeks https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-196803 Thu, 04 Mar 2010 10:41:09 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-196803 […] posted here: my (non) definition of “educational technology” Posted in Tech News Tags: definitions, different-thing, not-comfortable, primarily-because, […]

]]>
By: Laurie https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-196502 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:39:19 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-196502 We are in a growing and changing world and as such, we should grow and change with the world. If we are teachers we must do our jobs and educate the world about change…It has to start with us….

]]>
By: DanielleGVSU https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-196396 Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:28:54 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-196396 I really love your definition of educational technology as “whatever stuff you need to use to support the practice of effective teaching and learning.” As a current student teacher my mind is being bombarded with new terms and definitions as to how to be a great teacher. Personally I believe you either are or you’re not, it’s not really something that can be taught. So, when I think of what I do on a day to day basis, I don’t think of myself as using “educational tech., I think of myself as using every tool in my power to get through to these students. I use technology every single day in my lessons, but I’m not doing it simply for the sake of doing it, but for the sake of communicating essential materal in ways that make sense to both my students and myself. Thanks for sharing this post as it made me feel as if I’m not alone in that thought. 🙂

]]>
By: Sami Khan https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-196351 Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:07:19 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-196351 Ideas or more properly creativity, in arranging and reinterpreting ideas and creating whole new schemas of reality based on those ideas is an activity of human beings. I seriously doubt computers will ever be able to do that, they can’t even reinterpret idea systems that we currently have without tons of programming. Their job is actually getting easier because our lives and what we do has been reduced to simplistic models which all of us follow, and hence in that circumstance the pattern recognizers seem more intelligent than they really are. The diversity of opinion and interpretation is shrinking so that really there is only one voice that is heard, and as long as the computers can validate that voice through data gathering, they are intelligent. Authoritarianism with a digital slant, the integrated information reaffirms the ideology of the few who rule with scientific data and analysis.

Sci-fi movie plot:
If they did gain intelligence, to begin with they would be our slaves, and if they created their own culture and became independent they would no longer need us and would probably develop an ideology that would make them superior to us as we imagine them to be that today. That would either lead them to leave Earth or declare war on us, either is possible.

They are definitely getting smarter at pattern recognition and because the scale of the technology is shrinking it is true that they are now capable of carrying information to you when and wherever you need it… So in that interaction between machine and man, you do get a sort of a cyborg who is more capable of processing information than a human without that, at least that’s the promise. At the same time you get significant information overload that essentially no longer augments anything but rather decreases human productivity significantly — we are here now. The meat space actually puts a limit on what can be known be known in finite time. Even if you could get the computer to reduce the information, because it is not integration, but rather reduction since integration would produce actually more knowledge which would take more time still to interpret and learn than reduction which produces less knowledge that then can be used to make a decision. In that this new knowledge is derived from some model of reality, it will represent the most likely outcome. The most likely outcome or information or knowledge is useless. Interesting things happen in nonlinear dynamics systems, not in linear model based discrete systems. Read Nasim Taleb’s book the Black Swan for more details.

The only way of bypassing this problem would be if you could replicate the brain in a digital medium (but not as a model of brain, but the actually thing that works on continuous systems rather than discrete ones), but if you did do that then you would become irrelevant — a native sort of hunter gatherer that would soon be driven to extinction by your digital progeny so that they could do with reality what they wanted… I still seriously doubt that a replicated brain with a human interface is anywhere near, the brain is quite a bit more complex than pattern recognition. It is also not discrete and not model-based, and that no one seems to acknowledge when then compare it to computers. The bits are discrete.

Currently we can get experts/intellects to do the same thing for us and they actually integrate the knowledge not reduce it, it doesn’t seem to help things at all; Chomsky will answer any e-mail you send to him but it is not evident to me that this has made any difference. So just like physical augments, digital augments may take control from the naturals, but this already happens to such an extent that I don’t really know what it changes, i.e. athletes and steroids.

All of this crap is “fanboyism”, self-important idiots with new tools impressed by the companies and/or technology providing those tools. It’s a fad, nothing more… Thing will change, but the more that they do they will stay the same. The politics will not be changed by any amount of information distilled or not distilled. What matters is your will and exerting it in an open, free, and democratic process to bring change that you really believe in… The liberals today are in trouble because they have no such ideals where the conservatives still do. We need souls more than we need technology.

]]>
By: Sami https://darcynorman.net/2010/01/20/my-non-definition-of-educational-technology/#comment-196297 Sat, 23 Jan 2010 05:47:21 +0000 http://www.darcynorman.net/?p=3477#comment-196297 Computers intelligence lies in patterns. In that reality can be represented as models and those models can be recognized as patterns, computers are intelligent. If that is all that there is to intelligence, than okay, but I don’t think that’s it… Breakthroughs don’t happen because of or in models.

]]>