Doug's Thinking Space

...a space to think in a non-linear fashion\n

[[Welcome]]\n[[Quotations]]\n[[To Do]]\n[[Thoughts]]\n[[Thesis]]\n[[Lesson Planning]]\n[[Wiki Formatting]]\n

*[[Constructivism]]\n*[[Critical Theory]]\n*[[Culture Change]]\n*[[Curriculum - Problems With Current]]\n*[[Definitions]]\n*[[Edubloggers]]\n*[[The End of Schools]]\n*[[History]]\n*[[ICT - General]]\n*[[ICT - Potential]]\n*[[ICT - Advantages]]\n*[[ICT - Disadvantages]]\n*[[ICT - Effect on Learner]]\n*[[ICT - Effect on Teacher]]\n*[[ICT - Implementation]]\n*[[ICT - Literacy]]\n*[[ICT - Paradigm Shift]]\n*[[ICT - Skeptics]]\n*[[Learning]]\n*[[Memes]]\n*[[Organizational Change]]\n*[[Personalising Learning]]\n*[[The Purpose of Education]]\n*[[Teaching]]\n*[[Technical Terms & Definitions]]\n*[[UK Government - speeches & policy documents]]\n\n*[[Motivational Quotations]]\n\n\n

Salomon & Almod (1998) - constructivist beliefs r.e. learning - which is a process,\n<<<\n"whereby learners construct their own knowledge by applying their existing knowledge and mental skills to novel incoming information, constructing their own meanings as they go along."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.256\n\n----\n\nRoberts (1998) - socio-constructivism:\n<<<\n"Good learning is a process of socially based, active co-construction of contextualized knowledge and webs of relations among its nodes."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.256\n\n----\n\nPressures of cost & time in education sector have led to version of the constructivist paradigm, which makes "a virtue out of a necessity."\n\nRushby, 'Editorial: where are the new paradigms?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:3, 2005), p.360\n\n----\n

''Basic formatting:''\n| !To get | !Type this |h\n| ''Bold'' | {{{''Bold''}}} |\n| ==Strikethrough== | {{{==Strikethrough==}}} |\n| __Underline__ | {{{__Underline__}}} (that's two underline characters) |\n| //Italic// | {{{//Italic//}}} |\n| Superscript: 2^^3^^=8 | {{{2^^3^^=8}}} |\n| Subscript: a~~ij~~ = -a~~ji~~ | {{{a~~ij~~ = -a~~ji~~}}} |\n| @@highlight@@ | {{{@@highlight@@}}} |\n\n''Images:''\n{{{\n[img[title|filename]]\n[img[filename]]\n[img[title|filename][link]]\n[img[filename][link]]\n}}}\nImages can be included by their filename or full URL. It's good practice to include a title to be shown as a tooltip, and when the image isn't available. An image can also link to another tiddler or or a URL\n[img[Romanesque broccoli|fractalveg.jpg][http://www.flickr.com/photos/jermy/10134618/]]\n{{{\n[img[Fractal vegetable|fractalveg.jpg]]\n[img[This is shown as a tooltip|http://example.com/image.jpg]]\n[img[http://example.com/image.jpg]]\n[img[http://example.com/image.jpg][ExampleDotCom]]\n}}}\n\n''Monospaced text:''\n{{{\nDone like this!\n}}}\n\n''Subheadings:''\n!Header 1\n!!Header 2\n!!!Header 3\n!!!!Header 4\n!!!!!Header 5\n\n''Links''\nYou can link to [[other sites|http://teaching.mrbelshaw.co.uk]] or [[ordinary tiddlers|TiddlyWiki]] with ordinary words, without the messiness of the full URL appearing. Edit this tiddler to see how. You can also LinkToFolders.\n\n''Bullets:''\n* Just add an asterisk\n* at the beginning of a line.\n** If you want to create sub-bullets\n** start the line with two asterisks\n*** And if you want yet another level\n*** use three asterisks\n\n''Numbered List:''\n# Use a single '#' at the start of each line\n# and the tiddler will automatically\n# start numbering your list.\n## If you want a sub-list\n## within any bullets\n## add two '#'s at the start of the lines.\n# When you go back to a single '#'\n# the main numbered list will start up\n# where it left off.\n\n''Horizontal Rules:''\nYou can divide a tiddler into\n----\nsections by typing four dashes on a line by themselves\n\n''Tables:''\n*sample:\n|!th1111111111|!th2222222222|\n|>| colspan |\n| rowspan |left|\n|~| right|\n|bgcolor(#a0ffa0):colored| center |\n|caption|c\n\n''Blockquotes:''\nYou can have multiple levels of Block Quotes. Just edit this tiddler to see how it's done.\n\n>level 1\n>level 1\n>>level 2\n>>level 2\n>>>level 3\n>>>level 3\n>>level 2\n>level 1\n\n''Popups:''\n<<tag formatting>>

[[Welcome]]\n[[To Do]]

[img[I Can't Stop Thinking!|http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/kahane/Images/images_teaching/Can't%20stop%20thinking%20cartoon.gif]]\n\nThis is a space for me to get things down quickly in a way which isn't necessarily fully formed but at the same time is accessible to me pretty much wherever I am. Sometimes I use areas as a place for lesson <<tag planning>> and a repository for useful <<tag quotations>> that I come across. It's especially useful as a repository of information for my Ed.D. <<tag thesis>>...\n\nThis part of teaching.mrbelshaw.co.uk uses [[ccTiddly|http://cctiddly.sourceforge.net/]], a server-side implementation of [[TiddlyWiki|http://www.tiddlywiki.com/]] :-)\n

!Thesis\n\n!!Thoughts to expand upon\n*What is the average age of a teacher in the UK?\n*Do notions of 'digital literacy' favour the white middle-classes?\n\n!!Articles to find\n*Green & Bigum (1993) - 'Aliens in the classroom' (//Australian Journal of Education//, vol.37, no.2, pp.119-41)\n*Green, B. (1996) - 'Literacy/technology/learning: notes and issues' (unpublished discussion paper, but might find references)\n*Lemke, J. (1993) - 'Education, cyberspace and change' (//The Arachnet Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture//, vol.1, no.1)\n\n!!To get done\n*Look on DUO for previous examples of non-empirical Ed.D. thesis proposals\n*Critically engage with literature in lit. review rather than just being descriptive\n*Find out r.e. Habermas & 'lifeworld' -> learning to make a living or learning to make a life?\n*Contrast literature with government view (skills for 21st century)\n*Is the Labour government correct that //specific// skills are needed in the 21st century workplace? Should this impact schools?\n*Is 'digital literacy' real or imagined? What is 'literacy'?\n*If 'digital literacy' exists, how can it be measured?\n*How should we respond to technology?\n*Explain that interest = what it means to be 'educated' and 'literate' in 21st century, but areas very large. My interest = use of technology and how it fits into broader questions. Focusing, therefore, on 'digital literacy'\n*'Literacy' is at the heart of education (competence, etc.), but what do we //mean// by it?\n*Conclusion -> schools don't always know why they're there -> confusion\n\n__Possible structure__\n#Possible structure of argument:\n#What is literacy?\n#Literacy = dynamic\n#Why does literacy change (reflecting society vs. something 'out there' to be revealed)\n#Government policy still informed by Victorian model of schooling.\n#Emergence of term 'digital literacy'.\n#What did it mean to be 'literate' before and after a new technology (e.g. printing press)\n#'Functional' aspect of literacy -> is 'digital literacy' just another aspect of this?\n#What do people mean when they talk of being 'literate'?\n#What measures and tests are used for gauging whether someone is literate/'digitally literate'?\n#It makes sense for the government to want to improve 'literacy' -> but what do we mean by this?\n#Go back to literature -> what do we mean by 'digital literacy'?\n#Are there/can there be consistent measures for 'digital literacy'?\n\n*Try to define pre-industrial literacy, then consider whether 'digital literacy' is fundamentally different. How can it be shown to be different?\n*Make international comparisons -> curriculum (competency-based, etc.)\n*Look at Larry Cuban & Neil Postman's arguments against technology\n*Is 'digital literacy' economically and educationally important (difficult to distinguish in govt. pronouncements)\n*Tackle assumption that using computers = important, therefore 'digital literacy' is important -> counter-example of Nissan factory, Burger King etc.)\n*Literacy = powerful concept -> at heart of education since ancient times -> appear to be a numer of lines of argument as to how to measure or define 'digital literacy'\n*Major implications for schools -> digital literacy impossible to dismiss because linked to powerful notions of 'literacy' and 'technology'\n*Is 'digital literacy' a 'skill'? Does it threaten the teaching profession?\n\n\n

*Normal meaning of 'critical' = 'includined to criticize severely and unfavourably' (p.3)\n*Word 'critic' comes from Greek //kritikos// which 'denotes the ability, or even licence, to discern or to judge.' (p.3)\n*Most basic sense of Critical Theory = "principles upon which criticism might responsibly proceed." (p.4)\n*Word 'criticism' comes from Greek //krinein// meaning 'to decide' (p.7)\n8Greek //theoria// means 'way of seeing' or 'setting in view' (p.32)\n\nJ. Phillips, //Contested Knowledge: a guide to critical theory// (London, 2000)\n\n----\n\nWe construct frameworks to make sense of the world:\n<<<\n"Frameworks are constituted by habits of thought and action, the ways, and indeed the styles, we adopt to be confident and more or less secure in our relation to the world and to others."\n<<<\nJ. Phillips, //Contested Knowledge: a guide to critical theory// (London, 2000), p.11\n\n----\n\nKant began process culminating in Critical Theory:\n<<<\n"The key source for today's use of the term Critical Theory is the work of the German eighteenth-century philosopher Immanuel Kant."\n<<<\n*Uses 'critical' to describe his mature philosophy\n\nJ. Phillips, //Contested Knowledge: a guide to critical theory// (London, 2000), p.11\n\n----\n\nCriticism puts **all** grounds for knowledge into crisis:\n\nKant: \n<<<\n"Our age is the age of criticism, to which everything must be subjected. The sacredness of religion and the authority of legislation, are by many regarded as grounds of exemption from the examination of this tribunal. But, if they own they are exempted, they become the subjects of just suspicion, and cannot lay claim to sincere respect, which reason accords only to that which has stood the test of a free and public examination."\n<<<\nJ. Phillips, //Contested Knowledge: a guide to critical theory// (London, 2000), p.12\n\n----\n\nNames in development of Critical Theory:\n\n*Kant\n*Hegel\n*Marx\n*Nietzsche\n\nJ. Phillips, //Contested Knowledge: a guide to critical theory// (London, 2000), p.13\n\n----\n\nPlato (//The Republic//) - "We must let our destination be decided by the winds of the discussion."\n\nJ. Phillips, //Contested Knowledge: a guide to critical theory// (London, 2000), p.42\n\n----\n\nHerbert Marcuse - //Philosophy and Critical Theory// (1937) - criticizes philosophy's inability to offer a truly critical approach to the actual development of the world:\n<<<\n"For at its conclusion [philosophy] arrives at nothing that did not exist in itself 'at the beginning'. The absence of concrete development appeared to this philosophy as the greatest benefit."\n<<<\n~-Critical Theory "derives its progressive tendencies from its involvement with the present social process."\n\nP.U. Hohendahl, 'From the Eclipse of Reason to Communicative Rationality and Beyond' (in P.U. Hohendahl & J. Fisher (eds.), //Critical Theory: current state and future prospects// (Oxford, 2001)), p.5-6\n\n----\n\nCritical Theory = a metaphor and a development of a way of thinking:\n<<<\n"Critical Theory is a metaphor for a certain kind of theoretical orientation which owes its origin to Kant, Hegel and Marx, its systemization to Horkheimer and his associates at the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt, and its development to successors, particularly to the group led by Jürgen Habermas, who have sustained it under various redefinitions to the present day."\n<<<\n*'Critical Theory' = both general (critical element that began with Kant) and specific (orientation towards philosophy) as a term.\n\nD.M. Rasmussen, 'Critical Theory and Philosophy' (in D.M. Rasmussen (ed.), //The Handbook of Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1996)), p.11\n\n----\n\nCritical Theory is interested in ''action'' - c.f. Marx: "Philosophers have always interpreted the world, the point is to change it."\n\nD.M. Rasmussen, 'Critical Theory and Philosophy' (in D.M. Rasmussen (ed.), //The Handbook of Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1996)), p.11\n\n----\n\nTerm 'critical theory' owes its definition more than anything else to essay called 'Traditional and Critical Theory' by Max Horkhiemer in 1937. (p.16)\n\n*Danger of 'reification' - experience conforms to generalizations (according to theories) - generalizations tend to conform to ideas present in minds of researchers. (p.18)\n*Problem = theory conforms to researchers' ideas and not to experience.\n\nD.M. Rasmussen, 'Critical Theory and Philosophy' (in D.M. Rasmussen (ed.), //The Handbook of Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1996))\n\n----\n\nInfluences:\n\n{{table columns="3" cellpadding="1" cells="Individual;Time Period;Concept;Hegel;French Revolution;Freedom;Marx;Industrial Revolution;Class Struggle;Frankfurt School;Inter-war years;Rise of Fascism"}}\n\nD.M. Rasmussen, 'Critical Theory and Philosophy' (in D.M. Rasmussen (ed.), //The Handbook of Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1996), p.21\n\n----\n\nAim of Critical Theory = 'enlightenment'. Problem = leads to alienation.\n\nD.M. Rasmussen, 'Critical Theory and Philosophy' (in D.M. Rasmussen (ed.), //The Handbook of Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1996), p.23\n\n----\n<<<\n"[Horkheimer] argued against the equation of fallability with relativity. To grant that there is no final and conclusive theory of reality of which we are capable is not at all to abandon the distinction between truth and error. We make that distinction in relation to the "available means of knowledge." The claim that a belief is true must stand the test of experience and practice in the present. knowing that we are fallible, that what stands the test today may well fail to do so tomorrow or in the next century does not prevent us, or even exempt us, from making and defending claims to truth here and now. The abstract recognition that all our beliefs are open to connection does not make a rationally warranted belief any less warranted, any less rational."\n<<<\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.10\n\n----\n\nHorkheimer - social researchers are engaged in socially-situation forms of social action. They need to be conscious of this and think through the implications.\n\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.14\n\n----\n\nCritical theory interested in //real life://\n<<<\n"Unlike 'traditional' theory... critical social theory takes as topics of investigation the reflexivity of social research, the division of labor... and its social functions; that is, it studies, 'what theory means in human life'."\n<<<\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.15\n\n----\n\nCritical Theory takes into account the origin and application of facts, etc.\n<<<\n"Critical theory is concerned precisely with the historical and social genesis of the facts it examines and with the social context in which its results will have their effects. It stresses that social research is itself a form of social interaction in which the objects of knowledge are potentially subjects of the very same knowledge."\n<<<\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.16\n\n----\n<<<\n"...critical social theory expressly aims at becoming a factor in social change by becoming part of the self-consciousness of oppressed social groups. It does not consider the purposes it serves to be external to the context of enquiry."\n<<<\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.16\n\n----\n\nPostmodernists criticise and reject 'grand narrative' but they can still be relevant and useful:\n<<<\n"Critical theorists can develop and deploy practically interested, theoretically informed, general accounts in a fallibilistic and open manner, that is, without claiming closure. The point is to view big pictures and grand narratives as //ongoing accomplishments//. They are never finished, but have to be constructed, deconstructed, and reconstructed in ever-changing circumstances."\n<<<\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.19\n\n----\n<<<\n"There is no extramundane standpoint from which we can set our social world as a whole at a distance."\n<<<\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.21\n\n----\n<<<\n"The key to avoiding both a pure "insider's" or participant's standpoint, and a pure "outsider's" or observers standpoint is... to adopt the perspective of a critical-reflective participant. As there is no God's-eye point of view available to us, we can do no better than move back and forth between the different standpoints, playing one off against the other."\n<<<\nD.C. Hoy & T. McCarthy, //Critical Theory// (Oxford, 1994), p.81\n\n----\n<<<\n"Critical theory is social theory oriented toward critiquing and changing society as a whole, in contrast to traditional theory oriented only to understanding or explaining it."\n<<<\nWikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory - accessed: 27/02/06)\n\n----\n\nFrankfurt School:\n<<<\n"According to these theorists, a “critical� theory may be distinguished from a “traditional� theory according to a specific practical purpose: a theory is critical to the extent that it seeks human emancipation, “to liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them� (Horkheimer 1982, 244)."\n<<<\nStanford Encylopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory - accessed: 27/02/06)\n\n----\n\nCritical Theory different from traditional theories:\n<<<\n"Critical Theorists have long sought to distinguish their aims, methods, theories, and forms of explanation from standard understandings in both the natural and the social sciences. Instead, they have claimed that social inquiry ought to combine rather than separate the poles of philosophy and the social sciences: explanation and understanding, structure and agency, regularity and normativity. Such an approach, Critical Theorists argue, permits their enterprise to be practical in a distinctively moral (rather than instrumental) sense."\n<<<\nStanford Encylopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory - accessed: 27/02/06)\n\n----\n\nHorkheimer - critical theory must have three qualities concurrently:\n\n*explanatory\n*prescriptive\n*normative\n<<<\n"That is, it must explain what is wrong with current social reality, identify the actors to change it, and provide both clear norms for criticism and achievable practical goals for social transformation."\n<<<\nStanford Encylopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory - accessed: 27/02/06)\n\n----

Children use tools of their culture:\n<<<\n"Like other builders, children appropriate to their own use materials they find about them, most saliently the models and metaphors suggested by the surrounding culture."\n<<<\nS. Papert, //Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas// (London, 1980), p.19\n\n----\n\nCultural tools need to be given to learners (c.f. Vygotsky - children are capable of 'incidental learning based on their own natural mental functions):\n<<<\n"One of the most important challenges to an educational system is to empower the young with the intellectual tools of the culture."\n<<<\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.16\n\n----\n\nCultures = socially-constructed realities. How cultures change therefore 'depends on how one perceives and enacts culture.'\n\nBerger & Luckman (1966) - cited in D. Meyerson & J. Martin, 'Cultural Change: an integration of three different views' (in A. Harris, N. Bennett & M. Preedy (eds.), //Organizational Effectiveness and Improvement in Education//;OUP, 1997), p.31\n\n----\n\n3 different paradigmitic views r.e. cultural change:\n\n''Paradigm 1'' - hope & promise that leadership can initiate and control organization-wide cultural changes.\n\n''Paradigm 2'' - attempts to manage cultural change have localized impact (both intentional & unintentional) - can't predict organization-wide.\n\n''Paradigm 3'' - all cultural members 'inevitably and constantly change and are changed by the cultures they live in.'\n\nD. Meyerson & J. Martin, 'Cultural Change: an integration of three different views' (in A. Harris, N. Bennett & M. Preedy (eds.), //Organizational Effectiveness and Improvement in Education//;OUP, 1997), p.40\n\n----\n\nNeed to ''do'' something with computers:\n<<<\n"Simply handing out computers will not bring about... changes to the school culture, no matter how desirable the changes are."\n<<<\nA. McFarlane, '...and where might we end up?' (in A. McFarlane (ed.), //Information Technology and Authentic Learning: realising the potential of computers in the primary classroom//;London, 1997), p.175\n\n----\n\nJohn Donne (//The Anatomie of the World//) - change of paradigm:\n<<<\n"And the new Philosophy cals all in doubt,\nThe Element of fire is quite put out;\nThe Sun is lost, and th' earth and no man's wit,\nCan well direct him, where to looke for it.\n\n'Tis all in peeces, all cohaerance gone."\n<<<\nquoted in W.E. Doll, Jr., //A Post-modern pespective on curriculum// (London, 1993), p.28\n\n----\n\nWe are in midst of revolution r.e. technology in education:\n<<<\n"We are in the first phases of a profound revolution in technology whose consequences for teaching and learning are enormous. Our culture will never be the same again."\n<<<\nE.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.245\n\n----\n\nCastells (1996) - our culture will change due to ICTs:\n<<<\n"The emergence of a new electronic communication system characterised by its global reach, its integration of all communication media, and its potential interactivity is changing and will change forever our culture."\n<<<\n*defines culture as our historically-produced systems of beliefs & codes - mediated through communication\n*ICT = new way of communicating\n\nquoted in I. Snyder, 'Hybrid Vigour': Reconciling the verbal and the visual in electronic communication (in A. Loveless & V. Ellis (eds.), //ICT, Pedagogy and the Curriculum: subject to change//; London, 2001), p.44\n\n----\n\nBuckingham (1993) - 'high' culture is not the culture of the majority. Purpose of education? Need to allow the world to make sense to them:\n<<<\n"If the curriculum is to equip young people to understand and participate in their society, it must invariably being by acknowledging the cultural experiences of the majority."\n<<<\n*e.g. TV, computers, mobile phones\n\nquoted in C. Beavis, 'Computer games, culture and curriculum' (in I. Snyder (ed.), //Page to Screen: taking literacy into the electronic era//; London, 1988), p.242\n\n----\n\nUse of ICT and changing culture leading to change in notion of an 'educated person':\n<<<\n"The ubiquitous presence and utility of ICT in modern life are having a significant impact on the way we live, and even on the notion of an educated person. It has led to the concept of the knowledge society - sometimes also called the learning society or information society. There is a widespread awareness that these developments have profound implications for education, and that schools must change, but as yet little detailed consideration of the extent of the change needed and the advantages that ICT can bring. The growth of the knowledge society and the pervasiveness of the technology represent a major challenge //and// a major opportunity for education."\n<<<\nOECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.9\n\n----\n\nSociety looking to schools to provide skills needed:\n<<<\n"Modern society is increasingly looking to schools to foster independent and creative thinkers who can confidently solve problems and manage their own learning throughout their lives, the very qualities which ICT supremely is able to promote."\n<<<\nOECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.11\n\n----\n\nSchools need to change to gain benefits from ICT use:\n<<<\n"Powerful tensions exist between traditional curricula - based on well-defined content and rules for students to learn and be able to reproduce - and the open, skills-based, student-centred approaches supported by ICT. Dominant curricular and organisational patters in school were not designed for the Internet age, and often inhibit its effective use. ICT offers some gain for traditional curriculum delivery, but its full educational potential cannot be realised without radical changes in school structures and methodologies. As ICT gains acceptance in schools, it may become the driver and the facilitator of the necessary curriculum change."\n<<<\nOECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.15\n\n----\n\nSmith, Sachs & Chant (1988) - young people are "culturally positioned by the pervasiveness of computer-based and media technologies" (author) - these technologies are producing a "postmodern consciousness of multiple perspectives" - need for "technology literacy" to live in a "semiotic society".\n\ncited in J. Johnson-Eilda, 'Living on the surface: learning in the age of global communication networks' (in I. Snyder (ed.), //Page to Screen: taking \nliteracy into the electronic era//; London, 1998), p.211-2\n\n----\n\nKinsman (1991) - analogies between present historical period & shifts from agricultural to industrial production and culture in 18th & 19th century England:\n<<<\n"New technologies intended to simplify or streamline tasks become events in themselves." (author)\n<<<\ncited in J. Johnson-Eilda, 'Living on the surface: learning in the age of global communication networks' (in I. Snyder (ed.), //Page to Screen: taking literacy into the electronic era//; London, 1998)\n\n----\n\nGreen & Bigum (1993) - young people growing up in a different culture:\n<<<\n"... a fundamental issue is the significance of what is more specifically and appropriately understood as 'techno-popular culture', conceived as more and more the distinctive semiotic space which young people will increasingly inhabit as their natural environment, their proper realm, and the site par excellence of their sovereignty."\n<<<\nquoted in J. Johnson-Eilda, 'Living on the surface: learning in the age of global communication networks' (in I. Snyder (ed.), //Page to Screen: taking literacy into the electronic era//; London, 1998), p.223\n\n----\n\nMajor theme of new culture = 'social connectedness':\n<<<\n"Common culture is not (as 'post-modern' culture is held to be) chaotic or meaningless even though it is invisible or baffling to outside formal eyes. Its inherently democratic impulses, its variety and complexity, above all its social connectnedness, show us much more than does the formal 'modernist' or 'post-modernist' elite debate about how 'ordinary' identities creatively and 'commonly' articulate with, and are developed through, the restless, dramatic and contradictory themes of modernization."\n<<<\nP. Willis, //Common Culture// (OUP, 1990), p.140\n\n----\n\nContradictions in gap "between cultural richness and possibility on one side and no work or boring work and lack of cash on the other." Need new view of human beings:\n<<<\n"The crucial lesson for us to draw here is that we need a different view of human beings. If not, the young will soon hit us over the head with one."\n<<<\nP. Willis, //Common Culture// (OUP, 1990), p.145\n\n----\n\nReporting on changing teacher attitudes during ACOT (Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow) initiative:\n<<<\n"Throughout their careers, teachers had taken the role of expert in the classroom. But technology-rich classrooms undermined that role as some students quickly became more knowledgeable than both their peers and their teachers in using particular computer applications or hardware. Eventually, teachers not only accepted students' expertise but capitalized on and expanded the roles of student experts in their classrooms, relinquishing their emphasis on teacher-directed activities. Moreover, they discovered that students who had been perceived as slow or reluctant learners often blossomed when given an alternate means for displaying their abilities."\n<<<\nI. Haymore Sandholtz & C. Ringstaff, 'Teacher Change in Technology-Rich Classrooms' (in C. Fisher, D.C. Dwyer & K. Yocam (eds.), //Education and Technology: reflections on computing in classrooms// (San Francisco, 1996), p.283-4\n\n----\n\nSÃ¥ljo (1999) - learners use cultural tools:\n<<<\n"A fundamental assumption in a socio-cultural understanding of human learning is precisely this: learning is always learning to do something with cultural tools (be they intellectual and/or theoretical). This has the important implication that when understanding learning we have to consider that the unit we are studying is people in action using tools of some kind."\n<<<\nquoted in Sutherland & InterActive Project Team, //Designs for Learning: ICT and knowledge in the classroom// (Computers & Education, 43, 2004), p.6\n\n----\n\nApple (1991) - educational technology is loaded with cultural values:\n<<<\n"The new technology is not just an assemblage of machines and their accompanying software. It embodies a //form of thinking// that orients a person to approach the world in a particular way."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.257\n\n----\n\nMorrisett (1996) - society creates technology, but technology also creates society.\n\nOkan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.257\n\n----\n\nChanging culture and perceptions leading to a new teaching profession:\n<<<\n"The changes in society, among pupils' perceptions, and the evolution of new technologies are leading to a new profession for teachers."\n<<<\nB. Cornu, 'New technologies: integration into education' (in D. Watson & D. Tinsley (eds.), //Integrating Information Technology into Education//; London, 1995), p.8\n\n----\n\nBenjamin (1971) - analogy showing schools need to change:\n<<<\n"...a prehistoric tribe... decided to introduce systematic education for its children. The curriculum was specifically designed to meet particular survival needs in the local environment and so included such subjects as sabre-tooth-tiger-scaring-with-fire. But the climate of the region changes and the sabre tooth tigers perish. Attempts to change the curriculum to meet new survival needs encounter stern opposition."\n<<<\nquoted in J. Tiffin & L. Rajasingham, //The Global Virtual University// (London & New York, 2003), p.117\n\n----\n\nSmith, et al (1971):\n<<<\n"The curriculum is interwoven with the social fabric that sustains it."\n<<<\nquoted in J. Tiffin & L. Rajasingham, //The Global Virtual University// (London & New York, 2003), p.117\n\n----\n\nDiSessa (1988) - prediction of 'educated citizen' in 2020:\n<<<\n"an educated citizen in the year 2020 will be more valuable as an employee because he or she will be able to produce more builders of theory, synthesizers, and inventors of strategy than valuable as an employee who manages facts."\n<<<\nquoted in Demetriadis, et al, ' Cultures in negotiation': teachers' acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools' (//Computers & Education//, 41, 2003), p.20\n\n----\n\nSvanaes (2000) - for understanding, need shared assumptions, etc.\n<<<\n"For language users to be able to comprehend the words of another language user, they need a shared background of experience. This includes culture, corporeality, sensory system, social life, etc. Wittgenstein uses the term //life form// for this. To him, language users of different life forms can never truly communicate."\n<<<\nquoted in Demetriadis, et al, ' Cultures in negotiation': teachers' acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools' (//Computers & Education//, 41, 2003), p.34-35\n\n----\n\nReason for implementing ICT in education - question seems to be:\n<<<\n"If technology helps us work, entertains us, is increasingly tied into the parameters of our existence generally, then why not invite it into the institutions of education, the places where culture itself is both sustained and revised?"\n<<<\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1007\n\n----\n\nPeople becoming producers, not just consumers, of information:\n<<<\n"...individuals increasingly come to see themselves (and are expected to become) not only... consumers but also... producers of information for use by others." (Heylighen, 2002)\n<<<\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1010\n\n----\n\nBrand:\n<<<\n"Communications media are so fundamental to society that when their structure changes, everything is affected."\n<<<\nKenway, 'The Information Superhighway and Post-modernity' (//Comparative Education//, 32:2, 1996), p.219\n\n----\n\nTechnology has a destabilizing effects - students have more time to gain technological competence than teachers.\n\nKapitzke, 'Information Technology as Cultural Capital' (//Education and Information Technology//, 5:1, 2000), p.58\n\n----\n\nMetaphor of workers building cathedral - technician (building wall), craftsman (building cathedral), visionary (glorifying God)\n\nConlon, 'Visions of Change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology// 31:2, 2000), p.109\n\n----\n\nComputers are the ulimate postmodern technology - "devoid of intrinsic commitment but programmable for any task."\n\nConlon, 'Visions of Change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology// 31:2, 2000), p.111\n\n----\n\nImportance of //procedural// knowledge:\n<<<\n"We have more information being presented to us than we can possibly encode and remember. Our personal abilities are far exceeded by the amount of information created in the modern worlsd, and so ours has become a problem of deciding which information sources to attend to, and which information systems to use when we do not know something. In order to make use of an existing store of information we need to understand how the information within it is organised, and how to access it."\n<<<\nJ.D.M. Underwood & G. Underwood, //Computers and Learning: helping children acquire thinking skills// (Oxford, 1990), p.60\n\n----\n\nSecretary of State for Education (1999):\n<<<\n"We stand of the brink of a new age. Familiar certainties and old ways of doing things are disappearing. Jobs are changing and with them the skills needed for the world of tomorrow. In our hearts we know we have no choice but to prepare for this new age, in which the key to success will be the education, knowledge and skills of our people."\n<<<\nquoted in - T. Imison & P. Taylor, //Managing ICT in the Secondary School//, (Oxford, 2001), p.124\n\n----\n\nNegroponte (1998):\n<<<\n"Like air and drinking water, being digital will be noticed only by its absence, not its presence."\n<<<\nG.F. Hoban, //Teacher Learning for Educational Change: a systems thinking approach// (OUP, 2002), p.117\n\n----\n\nNo choice but to join in 'ICT revolution':\n<<<\n"Abstention is not really an option since the ICT revolution is only one aspect of a deeper and broader cultural revolution that is changing Western culture from modern (or industrial) to postmodern (or post-industrial). Leaving educational systems outside this process would mean subjecting them to marginalization or even extinction."\n<<<\nA. Aviram, 'From "Computers in the Classroom" to mindful radical adaptation by education system to the emerging cyber culture' (//Journal of Educational Change//, 1, 2000), p.333\n\n----\n\nAdults who tell kids to turn off their computer games just don't get it:\n<<<\nYou tell me to turn off the game. Because you're staring at the box. I can't turn off the game. Because the game ain't in the box.\n\nSo, stop making technology such a big deal. You want laptops. I got a cell phone. And you still don't get it.\n\n'cause no matter what you spend your money and professional development time on, for us it's about being //inside// the game, inside the story, in //real-time//. \n\nEverything else is over-priced and ready for recycling.\n<<<\nChristian Long in [["The Future of Learning" Manifesto|http://thinklab.typepad.com/think_lab/2007/01/the_future_of_l.html]]

<<<\n"The suggestion that there might come a day when schools no longer exist elicits strong responses from many people. There are many obstacles to thinking clearly about a world without schools. Some are highly personal. Most of us spent a larger fraction of our lives going to school than we care to think about... The concept of a world without school is highly dissonant with out experiences of our own lives. Other obstacles are more conceptual. One cannot define such a world negatively, that is by simply removing school and putting nothing in its place. Doing so leaves a thought vacuum thatthe mind has to fill one way or another, often with vague but scary images of children 'running wild', 'drugging themselves' or 'making life impossible for their parents'. Thinking seriously about a world without schools cll for elaborated models of the non-school activities in which children would engage."\n<<<\nPapert (1993) - quoted in C. Abbott, //ICT: changing education// (London, 2001), p.4\n\n----\n\nDangers of thinking one technology will change everything:\n<<<\n"Books will soon be obsolete in the schools. Scholars will be instructed through the eye. It is possible to teach every branch of human knowledge with the motion picture. Our school system will be completely changed in ten years."\n<<<\n//New York Dramatic Mirror//, 1913 - quoted in C. Abbott, //ICT: changing education// (London, 2001), p.5\n\n----\n\nLearning does not come primarily from teaching:\n<<<\n"A... major illusion on which the school system rests is that most learning is the result of teaching. Teaching, it is true, may contribute to certain kinds of learning under certain circumstances. But most people acquire most of their knowledge outside school, and in school only in so far as school, in a few rich countries, has become their place of confinement during an increasing part of their lives."\n<<<\nIllich (1973) - quoted in C. Abbott, //ICT: changing education// (London, 2001), p.29\n\n----\n\nSchools can be changed, despite faults:\n<<<\n"The institution we call 'school' is what it is because we made it that way. If it is irrelevant, as Marshall McLuhan says; if it shields children from reality, as Norbert Wiener says; if it does not develop intelligence, as Jerome Bruner says; if it is based on fear, as Carl Rogers says; if it punishes creativity and independence, as Edfar Friedenberg says; if, in short, it is not doing what needs to be done, it can be changed; it must be changed."\n<<<\nPostman & Weingartner (1971) - quoted in C. Abbott, //ICT: changing education// (London, 2001), p.46\n\n----\n\nLearning in a school environment is not natural (e.g. of real 'natural' learning = healthy relationship between mother and baby, or getting to know another person):\n<<<\n"The institution of school, with its daily lesson plan, fixed curriculum, standardized tests, and other such paraphernalia, tends constantly to reduce learning to a series of technical acts and the teacher to the role of a technician."\n<<<\nS. Papert, //The Children's Machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer// (London, 1993)\n\n----\n\nPiaget - the aim should be to teach without a general curriculum:\n<<<\n"But 'teaching without curriculum' does not mean spontaneous, free-form classrooms or simply 'leaving the child alone.' It means supporting children as they build their own intellectual structures with materials drawn from the surrounding culture."\n<<<\nS. Papert, //Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas// (London, 1980), p.31-2\n\n----\n\nClassrooms not best places to learn:\n<<<\n"Classrooms are not ideal learning environments; they are working compromises in mass education systems"\n<<<\n- Having to deal with classroom dynamics makes teachers "managers of learners" rather than "managers of learning".\n\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.21\n\n----\n\nPapert (1984):\n<<<\n"There won't be schools in the future... I think the computer will blow up the school. That is, the school defined as something where there are classes, teachers running exams, people structured in groups by age, following a curriculum - all of that. The whole system is based on a set of structural concepts that are incompatible with the presence of the computer... But this will happen only in communities of children who have access to computers on a sufficient scale."\n<<<\nL. Cuban, //Teachers and Machines: the classroom use of technology since 1920// (London, 1986), p.72\n\n----\n\nTechnology should end schools:\n<<<\n"Technology can and should end schooling as we know it. For educators, there is not even really a choice: eitehr we tag along as closely as we can, or we lost individuality and nationality in a global marketplace."\n<<<\nD. Blacker & J. McKie, 'Information and Communication Technology' (in N. Blake, et al. (eds.), //The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Education//; Oxford, 2003), p.235\n\n----\n\nLearners learning outside the classroom:\n<<<\n"In the world outside the classroom the young consumer is gradually being educated in ways a school does not begin to recognise. Using entertainment technology, the young user can develop hand-eye co-ordination, spatial relations, graphical awareness, parallel reading from non-linear scripts, multi-line plots and problem solving."\n<<<\nJ. Sanger, 'ICT, the demise of UK schooling and the rise of the individual learner' (in A. Loveless & V. Ellis (eds.), //ICT, Pedagogy and the Curriculum: subject to change//; London, 2001), p.10\n\n----\n\nPapert - metaphor of boats and planes r.e. ICT:\n<<<\n"Back in the 50s the United States was somewhat embarrassed by the fact that the fastest transatlantic ocean liners beonged to European countries... So American resources of technology and money were mobilised and led to triumph. They made the fastest boat in the world, the S.S. United States. In the very same year the first commercial jet plan flew and it became totally irrelevant which boat could travel faster across the Atlantic... Are we trying to perfect an obsolete system or are we trying to make an educational jet plane?"\n<<<\nin OECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.112\n\n----\n\nAs younger teachers enter the teaching profession who are closer to the tech. culture, likely to challenge the current definition of 'school'.\n\nJ. Johnson-Eilda, 'Living on the surface: learning in the age of global communication networks' (in I. Snyder (ed.), //Page to Screen: taking literacy into the electronic era//; London, 1998), p.226\n\n----\n\nMass schooling losing legitimacy:\n<<<\n"As mass schooling loses its legitimacy, educational understanding seems less about grand theories of teaching and learning or indeed 'society' and more to do with how individual children create identities with a plethora of cultural materials and, indeed, with how 'we' come to know ourselves as constrained or liberated."\n<<<\nJ. Johnson-Eilda, 'Living on the surface: learning in the age of global communication networks' (in I. Snyder (ed.), //Page to Screen: taking literacy into the electronic era//; London, 1998), p.230\n\n----\n\nEducation likely to be marginalized if doesn't adapt to new cultures:\n<<<\n"The field of education is likely to come under even more intense pressure. It will be further marginalized in most people's experience by common culture. In so far as educational practices are still predicated on traditional liberal humanist lines and on the assumed superiority of high art, they will become almost totally irrelevant to the real energies and interests of most young people and no part of their identity formation."\n<<<\nP. Willis, //Common Culture// (OUP, 1990), p.147\n\n----\n\nNeed new approach to education:\n<<<\n"We need an altogether new approach to education. Let us give the deveil of work what is due, let us pay necessary homage to the goddess of technology, but then why not use the rest of humanity's currency for the widest possible imaginative exchanges and sensuous purposes."\n<<<\nP. Willis, //Common Culture// (OUP, 1990), p.147\n\n----\n\nIdea of 'school' will only die if society gives up on its idea of 'society'.\n\nConlon, 'Visions of Change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology// 31:2, 2000), p.114\n\n----\n\nRevolution in educaiton will reverse roles of home and school:\n<<<\n"Children will go to school because they need to play with other children, to acquire social skills, engage in sports, go on field trips, fiddle with machinery, perform experiments, dance, put on plays, etc. In short, home will become the place to go to learn - school, where you go to play."\n<<<\nT. Stonier & C. Conlin, //The Three C's: children, computers, communication// (Chichester, 1985), p.31\n\n----\n<<<\n"Practically, the most meaningful development accompanying the ICT revolution has taken place outside schools as reflected in the impressive leap in the number, both absolute and relative, of students who study at home and do not belong to any formal educational system. In the United States the number rose from a few tens of thousands in the 1980s to one million in 1994, or about two percent of the total number of children of compulsory education age (Aiex, 1994), to somewhere between two and four millions at the end of the ’nineties. A similar leap has taken place in other countries including Australia, Canada and the U.K. (Meighan, 1997)."\n<<<\nA. Aviram, 'From "Computers in the Classroom" to mindful radical adaptation by education system to the emerging cyber culture' (//Journal of Educational Change//, 1, 2000), p.334-5\n\n----\n<<<\n"Breaking the glass ceiling is no small matter, however. It amounts to pulling the carpet from under the most essential characteristics of the\nprevailing system of schooling. If students and teachers were allowed to perform a large part of their learning activities flexibly from distance and at varying times; if greater emphasis were to be placed on non-disciplinary, research-oriented learning based on authentic problems; and if, on the organizational level, there was to be flexibility in the definition of roles such that a teacher for a certain issue/problem can also choose to deal with a totally different subject or to become a learner, and a learner if satisfying relevant requirements can become a teacher – will there be anything left of the modern educational system as we have known it since the late nineteenth century?\n<<<\nA. Aviram, 'From "Computers in the Classroom" to mindful radical adaptation by education system to the emerging cyber culture' (//Journal of Educational Change//, 1, 2000), p.341\n\n----\n\nNot just end of schools as we know them, but end of society as we know it:\n<<<\n"The ICT revolution is... a defining revolution that is all encompassing, irreversibly affecting every aspect of our lives, for good and for bad. It also threatens the most basic assumptions of schooling. It threatens the linear, authoritarian, disciplinary structure of knowledge, the distinction between valid knowledge and superstitions, the importance of literacy and of the written text, all of which have been basic to the\nwestern liberal curriculum over the past 2500 years and to the modern educational system in the last century. It rapidly erodes the advantage that adults have over children in “life experience�, wisdom and understanding of the world – another basic presupposition of western education since its earliest origins. It extinguishes the importance of a shared geographical place and time structure for the transmission or production of knowledge – the most basic characteristic of modern educational systems in the past century.\n<<<\nA. Aviram, 'From "Computers in the Classroom" to mindful radical adaptation by education system to the emerging cyber culture' (//Journal of Educational Change//, 1, 2000), p.344\n\n----

Computers can 'concretize' and personalize the formal:\n<<<\n"Seen in this light, [the computer] is not just another powerful educational tool, it is unique in providing us with the means of addressing what Piaget and other see as the obstacle which is overcome in the passage from child to adult thinking."\n<<<\nS. Papert, //Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas// (London, 1980), p.21\n\n----\n\nStrong statement r.e. importance of ICT\n<<<\n"If our society is to adjust and avoid turmil, alienation and the threat of disintegration, then the impact and potential of IT must be at everyone's fingertips."\n<<<\nCharles Desforges, in preface to B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997)\n\n----\n\nICT for personalized learning:\n<<<\n"Within a system of mass schooling there has to be a tension between what is ideal for each individual and what is possible for all. It is perhaps in alleviating this tension that information technology tools may be able to make a difference."\n<<<\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.15\n\n----\n\nKozma (1991) - features of ICT which are important r.e. learning:\n\n(i) Speed of processing\n(ii) Produralisation of info (operating according to rules)\n(iii) Transformative capabilities (text-to-speech, data to graph, etc.)\n(iv) Help novices build mental models as experts do.\n\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.17\n\n----\n\nICT skills learnt more quickly in context rather than in isolation:\n<<<\n"IT skills are likely to be more easily learned in the context of some other pursuit, focused more on open-ended tasks in which individuals can engage at their own speed; in this context learning to use information technology tools has an obvious purpose which provides the motivation to learn."\n<<<\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.23\n\n----\n\nICT can help support learners in the 'zone of proximal development" (Vygotsky)\n\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.25\n\n----\n\nICTs can make learning environment more interesting and 'real':\n<<<\n"An important use of technology is its capacity to create new opportunities for curriculum and instruction by bringing real-world into the classroom for students to explore and solve. Technology can help create an active environment in which students not only solve problems, but also find their own problems."\n<<<\nJ.D. Bransford, A.L. Brown, R.R. Cocking (eds.), //How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School// (Washington D.C., 1999), p.195\n\n----\n\nNegroponte - labelling of certain learners may stem from teaching methods and tools used:\n<<<\n"We may be a society with far fewer learning-disabled children and far more teaching-disabled environments than currently perceived. The computer changes this by making us more able to reach children with different learning and cognitive styles."\n<<<\nquoted in E.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.73\n\n----\n\nUsing ICT can lead to new learning opportunities/objectives not available before:\n<<<\n"There is a real sense in which increasing familiarity with the use of ICT can foster the development of new activities. Over time, this can lead to insightful new uses for software, which in turn, leads teachers to develop new learning objectives. Rewards of this kind are won through a maturity of experience and reflection on using ICT in teaching."\n<<<\nL. Newton, 'Management and the use of ICT in subject teaching' (in Selwood, Find & O'Mahony (eds.), //Management of Education in the Information Age: the role of ICT//; 2003), p.18\n\n----\n\n3 main reasons for inclusion of ICT in education:\n\n(i) ''Economic:'' perceived needs of a present and future economy - need for personnel with ICT skills. 'There is a widespread expectation on the global scale that those nations successfully embracing the information age will benefit economically.'\n\n(ii) ''Social:'' ICT = a 'life skill' in same way as literacy and numeracy - 'digital literacy' (requirement & right) - 'As usage of ICT becomes more extensive across society, wider benefits will also flow - better links between home and school, greater parental involvement in student progress, and greater scope for schools and other educational institutions to play an inter-active part in community life and development.'\n\n(iii) ''Pedagogical:'' role of ICT in teaching & learning - move from 'drill-and-practice' programme to increasing 'breadth and richness of learning, not least through the topicality and realism that the new resources can bring.' - also ''motivating''\n\nOECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.10-11\n\n----\n\nPapert - one of the advantages of ICT = not knowing what kind of advantages it will bring:\n<<<\n"Education and the popular view reinforce one another on the informational side of this technology. Our view of what the technology is going to do in education becomes dominated by an informational aspect, which is a dangerously bad thing to do. The real value of this technology is to open up a vast, unprecedented, and up to now unimaginable, range of activities."\n<<<\nin OECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.110\n\n----\n\nTechnology about thought processes not just about hardware and software:\n<<<\n"For educational purposes, technology is not only about hardware and software, but also, and importantly, about procedures, processes, structure, systems, and patterns and use. In educational terms, technology is about means towards certain ends, having largely to do with thought processes, information flows and human communication."\n<<<\nC. Wright (ed.), //Issues in Education & Technology: politcy guidelines and strategies// (Commonwealth Secretariat, London, 2000), p.23\n\n----\n\nBransford, Brown & Cocking (1999) - ICTs can extend human capabilities for interaction:\n<<<\n"What has not yet been fully understood is that computer-based technologies can be powerful pedagogical tools - not just rich sources of information, but extensions of human capabilities and contexts for social interactions supporting learning. The process of using technology to improve learning is never solely a technical matter, concerned only with properties of educational hardware and software. Like a textbook or any other cultural object, technology resources for educaiton function in a social environment, mediated by learning conversations with peers and teachers."\n<<<\nquoted in Sutherland, & InterActive Project Team, //Designs for Learning: ICT and knowledge in the classroom// (Computers & Education, 43, 2004), p.5\n\n----\n\nBecta (2002):\n<<<\n"Schools that were judged by OfSTED to have very good ICT resources had better achievement than schools with poor ICT."\n<<<\n*true across all socio-economic groups.\n\nquoted in Reynolds, Treharne & Tripp, //ICT - the hopes and the reality// (British Journal of Educational Technology, 34:2, 2003), p.152\n\n----\n\nGuile (1998) - ICT can lead to 'tremendous gains':\n<<<\n"ICT can lead to tremendous gains in student learning, for example, significant improvements in examination or statutory test performance, development of broader forms of social, cultural and intellectual capability."\n<<<\nReynolds, Treharne & Tripp, //ICT - the hopes and the reality// (British Journal of Educational Technology, 34:2, 2003), p.153\n\n----\n\nFerrate (2000) - use of technology is more important than the technology itself:\n<<<\n"It is not the technology itself that is important, but using the best technology available in the service of one idea: to enhance and globalize learning."\n<<<\nJ. Tiffin & L. Rajasingham, //The Global Virtual University// (London & New York, 2003), p.20\n\n----\n\nInventors of the printing press, Xerox machine & telephone didn't forsee the applications of their inventions for popular use.\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1009\n\n----\n\nWe don't always know what technology is 'good for' at a given point in time:\n<<<\n"The social history of technology suggests that we do not always know what technology is 'good for' at any particular time or in any particular setting - the practices that people develop around it are varied and not always predictable, but they do represent what users of these technologies have found valuable at that place and time."\n<<<\n*(Not necessarily the //best// technologies that are widely adopted - e.g. Betamax vs. VHS)\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1009-10\n\n----\n\nICTs allow us to work with information in ways not previously possible - 7 dimensions of this:\n\n1. ''Fluidity'' - time & place become irrelevant for accessing information and communication: "In education, fluidity of information is both an opportunity and a threat" (end of lectures, etc.) - no canon or cultural core of information (p.1011)\n\n2. ''Replicability'' - information easily copied and passed on.\n\n3. ''Mutability'' - "The proposition that there is no place for a canon in contemporary life is a truism for postmodernists, but a joke for many scientists (Fish, 1996). Schools in the future may have to teach a form of textual connoisseurship that is partly aesthetic and partly forensic." (p.1012)\n\n4. ''Selectability'' - problem of being done for others (*e.g. power of being in top 10 of Google search results*)\n\n5. ''Idiosyncrasy'' - experience of education likely to be different becuase of highly-customisable nature of ICTs: "In turn, this may reduce the sense of and opportunity for common experience that individuals have as they learn." (p.1013)\n\n6. ''Independence'' - learners able to structure and personalise their learning.\n\n7. ''Agency'' - "Education, then, increasingly becomes not to be about mastering information that someone else determines to be significant but rather about how to make of oneself an agent, someone able both to consume but (more unusually) to produce information as an agent of culture. Acting in this way is so engaging that it, potentially, becomes not work but 'fun'... which is surely a new thing for education." (p.1013)\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005)\n\n----\n\nPapert (1980) - computers = extremely flexible:\n<<<\n"The computer is the Proteus of machines. Its essence is its universality, its power to simulate. Because it can take on a thousand forms and can serve a thousand functions, it can appeal to a thousand tastes."\n<<<\nT. Imison & P. Taylor, //Managing ICT in the Secondary School//, (Oxford, 2001), p.60\n\n----\n

Need to temper technologically-inspired innovators who have short historical focus when looking at education with 'long, humanistic' view:\n<<<\n"The current ferment about computers, combined with an evangelistic and uncritical enthusiasm, makes it necessary to be vigilant. There is already some evidence that the takeup of the computer has added haste to an existing movement which sees education as a process of training in technical skills and employment related functionalism."\n<<<\nS. Dunn & V. Morgan, //The Impact of the Computer on Education: a course for teachers// (London, 1987), p.8-9\n\n----\n<<<\n"Effective use of information technology, like any other tool, has to be acquired. You have to learn how to use a knife to cut a notch in a stick."\n<<<\n*computers are complex tools and may be difficult to justify time spent learning __how__ to use ICT rather than learning __with__ ICT\n\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.22\n\n----\n\nICT can be used in boring ways:\n<<<\n"teachers can use information technology to create a new set of mundane tasks which negate the opportunities for quality learning."\n<<<\n*effective use depends on the teacher\n\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.25\n\n----\n\nIntroduction of computers into classrooms = like US policy of 'de-institutionalizing' the mentally-ill in 1960s and 70s - drugs insufficient to cope with psychoses, etc. - rise in homeless 'street people':\n<<<\n"Many of those patients who left state hospitals never should have done so. We psychiatrists saw too much of the old snake pit, saw too many people who shouldn't have been there and we overreacted. The result is not what we intended, and perhaps we didn't ask the questions that should have been asked when developing a new concept, but psychiatrists are human too, and we tried out damndest."\n<<<\nFormer director of National Institute of Mental Health, quoted in L. Cuban, //Teachers and Machines: the classroom use of technology since 1920// (London, 1986), p.101-2\n\n----\n\nA.N. Whitehead - Danger of pupils learning a myriad of disconnected 'inert' ideas:\n<<<\n"Let the main ideas that are introduced into a child's education be few and important, and let them be thrown into every combination possible. The child should mke them his own, and should understand their application here and now in the circumstances of his actual life."\n<<<\n(Could probably also be quoted in //support// of ICT...)\n\nquoted in M. Bonnett, 'Computers in the Classroom: some values issues' (in A. McFarlane (ed.), //Information Technology and Authentic Learning: realising the potentials of computers in the primary classroom//; London, 1997), p.155\n\n----\n\nICT is not a neutral tool - used in the service of hegemonic power:\n<<<\n"Elites not only use technology as a club, but also to conceal tht there is any clubbing going on at all. It provides the perfect weapon, effective yet invisible. And the more value-neutral we regard it, the more invisible it becomes."\n<<<\nD. Blacker & J. McKie, 'Information and Communication Technology' (in N. Blake, et al. (eds.), //The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Education//; Oxford, 2003), p.241\n\n----\n\nTechnological needs of the economy need techologically literate labour force? - could lead to 'proletarianization' and deskilling of jobs - recent study of new technologies on future labour market:\n<<<\n"...while many more workers will be using computers, automated office equipment, and other sophisticated technical devices in their jobs, the increased use of technology may actually reduce skills and discretion required to perform many jobs."\n<<<\nM. Apple, 'Is the New Technology part of the solution or part of the problem in education?' (in A. Darder, M. Baltodano & R.D. Torres, The Critical Pedagogy Reader; London, 2003), p.443\n\n----\n\nHow can we be sure that ICTs are a good thing for education?:\n<<<\n"It is more than a little important that we question whether the wagon we have been asked to ride on is going in the right direction. It's a long walk back."\n<<<\nM. Apple, 'Is the New Technology part of the solution or part of the problem in education?' (in A. Darder, M. Baltodano & R.D. Torres, The Critical Pedagogy Reader; London, 2003), p.456\n\n----\n\nBowers (1988) - most important question is r.e. ICT's neutrality:\n<<<\n"...the most fundamental question about hte new technology... has to do with whether the technology is neutral; that is, neutral in terms of accurately representing, at the level of the software program, the domains of the real world in which people live."\n<<<\nquoted in E.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.7\n\n----\n\nTeachers and pupils can be distracted by superficiality of ICT:\n<<<\n"[The computer] can contribute much to improving classroom instruction. But it can also be a limiting technology that ultimately distracts teachers and students from their primary purpose by imposing a set of assumed values that do not advance the purpose of instruction or individual and group development."\n<<<\n(What are these 'assumed values'?)\n\nE.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.14-15\n\n----\n\nPace of change has psychological effect - the tyranny of what Joyce (1999) calls 'an anticipatory state of constant nextness'.\n\nI. Snyder, 'Hybrid Vigour': Reconciling the verbal and the visual in electronic communication (in A. Loveless & V. Ellis (eds.), //ICT, Pedagogy and the Curriculum: subject to change//; London, 2001), p.42\n\n----\n\nPapert - arguments against ICT adoption are not good ones:\n<<<\n"There was serious opposition to this new-fangled technology [pencils], because the thinking was that if children became dependent on writing they would lost their memory power. That serious argument was advanced by Plato."\n<<<\nin OECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.107\n\n----\n\nJoseph Weizenbaum (MIT) - the computer is "a solution in search of problems."\n\nquoted in - T. Roszak, //The Cult of Information: the folklore of computers and the true art of thinking// (Cambridge, 1986), p.51\n\n----\n<<<\n"Finally, we must resist the temptation to use technology just because it is available. We human beings are fascinated with new technology - nowadays especially with the new educational technology. And those responsible for inventing and developing the technology are even more fascinated with it than the rest of us are. We must resist the temptation to climb Mount Everest just because it is there."\n<<<\nH.A. Simon, 'Cooperation between Educational Technology and Learning Theory to Advance Higher Education' (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.63\n\n----\n<<<\n"There has been much talk about the information superhighways, but little talk about traffic jams and the lack of parking space."\n<<<\n*technology can produce a glut of information which can crowd out more important stuff.\n\nH.A. Simon, 'Cooperation between Educational Technology and Learning Theory to Advance Higher Education' (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.64\n\n----\n\nThe Alliance for Childhood in the USA argues that parents & teachers have been distracted from children's basic needs:\n\n*contact with other human beings\n*contact with natural world\n*space to grow & develop\n*time to be children\n\nThe use of ICT introduces them to "adult mode of seated, intellectually oriented approach." Suggestions that ICT use leads to obesity. (p.153)\n<<<\n"our national infatuation with computers in early childhood and elementary education... is fuelled by adults' fears about their own ability to keep up with the pace of technological and cultural change." (p.154)\n<<<\nReynolds, Treharne & Tripp, //ICT - the hopes and the reality// (British Journal of Educational Technology, 34:2, 2003)\n\n----\n\nPostman (1985) - ICT shouldn't be used just to make learning 'fun':\n<<<\n"And in the end, what will the students have learned? They will, to be sure, have learned something about (the content in question), most of which they could have learned just as well by other means. Mainly, they will have learned that learning is a form of entertainment or, more precisely, that anything worth learning can take the form of entertainment, and ought to."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.258\n\n----\n\nOkan, et al (2001) - using technology can damage serious learning:\n<<<\n"So although technology often fascinates students, it has an unintented effect of battering habits congruent with serious learning."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.258\n\n----\n\nPrimary reason for using technology shouldn't be to make it 'fun' for students - no higher-order tasks:\n<<<\n"If the primary advantage of using the technology is that is will be fun for students or more 'motivating', seriously consider why this is so. We think you will find that technology often diminishes the need to attend seriously to prior knowledge, to use metacognitive strategies, question prior ideas, generate examples, compare alternative solutions, grapple with experience, make sense of these new experiences, make new connections and analyze whether prior connections make sense."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.260\n\n----\n\nDifficulty of technology-based learning is the reality of development costs:\n<<<\n"There is little doubt that highly interactive learning programmes that use extensive branching to tailor the material to the evolving needs of the learner are very effective. But they are also usually very complex and require significant resources to design and develop. Thi smakes them expensive and cost effective only for situations where there is a large number of potential learners or where the costs of not getting the learning right are unacceptable."\n<<<\n<<<\n"If the main determinant is the cost of producing learning that covers a given set of topics, then producers will deliver solutions to that criterion and will not seek to maximise effectiveness."\n<<<\nRushby, 'Editorial: where are the new paradigms?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:3, 2005), p.359\n\n----\n\nInvestment in ICTs in education since 1970s:\n<<<\n"Rarely in the history of education has so much been spent by so many for so long, with so little to show for the blood, sweat and tears expended."\n<<<\nNichol & Watson, 'Editorial: Rhetoric & reality: the present and future of ICT in education' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:2, 2003), p.132\n\n----\n\nReasons for ICT in education:\n\nNunan (1983) - clamour for ICT = offshoot of behaviourist psychology - trying to push students into learning standardized content in standard ways. (p.1006)\n\nOthers have seen it as a conspiracy by educational hardware/software producers (p.1007)\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005)\n\n----\n\nFranklin (1992) - advantages always come with concomitant disadvantages:\n<<<\n"Whenever someone talks to you about the benefits and costs of a particular project, don't ask 'what benefits?' ask '//whose// benefits and //whose// costs?' At times it helps to rephrase an observation in line with a perspective from the receiving end of technology."\n<<<\nRumble, 'Just How Relevant is E-education to Global Educational Needs?', (//Online Learning//, 16:3, 2001)\n\n----\n\nDanger of 'soundbite-ism' - most children expect entertainment from ICT - teachers therefore under pressure to give into them - leads to practically //any// use of ICT being seen as a 'good thing'.\n\nConlon, 'Visions of Change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology// 31:2, 2000), p.114\n\n----

Knowledge & learning always associated with literacy:\n<<<\n"Knowledge and learning are almost always viewed in forms associated with current literacies; they appear to us through the lens of a literacy."\n<<<\n*(This is a reason for people who //don't// have ICT literacy not seeing need for it)\n\nA.A. diSessa, //Changing Minds: computers, learning, and literacy// (London, 2000), p.65\n\n----\n\nDanger of using term like 'computer literacy':\n<<<\n"We need to be much more accountable in saying when and how certain materials, computers among them, might convey enough intellectual power to be likened to textual literacy."\n<<<\nA.A. diSessa, //Changing Minds: computers, learning, and literacy// (London, 2000), p.109\n\n----\n\nICTs change how we define literacy:\n<<<\n"Computers, along with multimedia software and hardware, help us express our ideas as animations, video poems, slide shows, interactive movies, virtual environments, and other forms yet to be created. As we create these new texts, we are changing how we define literacy."\n<<<\nB. Reilly, 'New Technologies, New Literacies, New Patterns' (in C. Fisher, D.C. Dwyer & K. Yocam (eds.), //Education and Technology: reflections on computing in classrooms// (San Francisco, 1996), p.218\n\n----\n\nTeachers see 'ICT competency' in terms of general skills and vocabulary.\n\nDemetriadis, et al, ' 'Cultures in negotiation': teachers' acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools' (//Computers & Education//, 41, 2003), p.30\n\n----\n<<<\n"ICT is being introduced to education not because it does a better job: it is being introduced because it does the job differently and\nbecause this different way of doing things is now rapidly conquering the world, is radically changing it and schools do not have the option\nof ignoring it."\n<<<\nA. Aviram, 'From "Computers in the Classroom" to mindful radical adaptation by education system to the emerging cyber culture' (//Journal of Educational Change//, 1, 2000), p.340\n\n----

Fullan (1991) - current focus on technology is only 30 years after similar focus on science (stimulated by space race & global political needs)\n\nWatson, 'Pedagogy before Technology: rethinking the relationship between ICT and teaching' (//Education and Information Technology//, 6:4, 2001), p.265\n\n----\n<<<\n"Despite these huge investments and grandiose expectations, ICT has not been widely integrated into educational systems throughout the postindustrial world; and to the extent that it has been integrated, there is no clear evidence that ICT makes a difference to student outcomes, enhances desired modes of learning or desired social values, or brings about desired changes in approaches to teaching (Alexander, 1999; Healy, 1998: Melamed, 1999). Indeed, on the basis of the outcomes realized to date, one could characterize the rapid and costly response of educational systems to the ICT revolution as “much ado about nothing�. Furthermore, the introduction of ICT into education has often been carried out with vague and confused conceptions of the desired model of learning which the new technologies were supposed to enhance and without clear conceptions of any guiding educational values (Postman, 1992; Healy, 1998; Aviram, 1999a, 1999e; Agalianos, 1997: Agalianos & Witty, 2000)."\n<<<\nA. Aviram, 'From "Computers in the Classroom" to mindful radical adaptation by education system to the emerging cyber culture' (//Journal of Educational Change//, 1, 2000), p.332\n\n----

ICT = adaptable.\n<<<\n"Information technology is such an adaptable intellectual tool that it may be better visualised as many tools."\n<<<\nN. Davis, et al, 'Can quality in learning be enhanced through the use of IT?' (in B. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.17\n\n----\n\nICT covers wide range of technologies:\n<<<\n"The label 'ICT' embraces a range of software with very different features... It is clearly unhelpful to talk about the range of ICT types as if they were all identical and to suggst that a single model of integration will suit each type is equally unhelpful."\n<<<\nL. Newton, 'Management and the use of ICT in subject teaching' (in Selwood, Find & O'Mahony (eds.), //Management of Education in the Information Age: the role of ICT//; 2003), p.17\n\n----\n\nOne way of thinking is that ICTs are "systems that support cultural tools that are now in the process of development."\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1010\n\n----

ICT allows new learning styles:\n<<<\n"the new technology is playing a role in the redefinition of self... Electronic technology is helping to change the communicative balance between word and image in our media... It is the breakout of the visual that leads to new constructions of the self."\n<<<\nBolter (1996), quoted in C. Abbott, //ICT: changing education// (London, 2001), p.17\n\n----\n\nChallenge = to create higher-order tasks using ICT:\n<<<\n"The challenge for education is to design technologies for learning that draw both from knoweldge about human cognition and from how technology can facilitate complex tasks in the workplace. These designs use technologies to scaffold thinking and activity, much as training wheels allow young bike riders to practice cycling when they would fall without support."\n<<<\nJ.D. Bransford, A.L. Brown, R.R. Cocking (eds.), //How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School// (Washington D.C., 1999), p.202\n\n----\n\nDewey (1925) - effect of tool on learner:\n<<<\n"A tool is a particular thing, but it is more than a particular thing, since it is a thing in which a connection, a sequential bond of nature is embodied. It posesses an objective relation as its own defining property. Its perception as well as its actual use takes the mind to other things."\n<<<\nquoted in D. Blacker & J. McKie, 'Information and Communication Technology' (in N. Blake, et al. (eds.), //The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Education//; Oxford, 2003), p.235\n\n----\n\nTechnology affects the way learners think:\n<<<\n"The new technology is not just an assemblage of machines and their accompanying software. It embodies a //form of thinking// that orients a person to approach the world in a particular way. Computers involve ways of thinking that are primarily //technical//."\n<<<\n*'How to' tends to replace 'why'\n\nM. Apple, 'Is the New Technology part of the solution or part of the problem in education?' (in A. Darder, M. Baltodano & R.D. Torres, //The Critical Pedagogy Reader//; London, 2003), p.454\n\n----\n\nMarshall McLuhan (1964) - technology affects humans:\n<<<\n"Any technology tends to create a new human environment." (p.1)\n<<<\n<<<\n"Technological environments are not merely passive containers of people but are active processes that reshape people and other technologies alike." (p.3-4)\n<<<\nquoted in E.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999)\n\n----\n\nHeidegger - technology mediates human experience:\n<<<\n"any technology - whether the automobile, television, or the computer - //mediates human experience through it selection/amplification and reduction characteristics.//"\n<<<\nE.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.4\n\n----\n\nBowers - learners should become self-reflectively aware of the impact ICT has upon their modes of thought:\n<<<\n"Understanding how the educational use of computers infludences our pattern of thinking, and thus contributes to changes in the symbolic underpinning of the culture, should be an essential aspect of computer literacy."\n<<<\nquoted in E.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.23\n\n----\n\nWinograd & Flores (1987) - we create technology, but it also creates us:\n<<<\n"All new technologies develop within the background of a tacit understanding of human nature and human work. The use of technology in turn leads to fundamental changes in what we do, and ultimately in turn what it is to be human. We encounter the deep questions of design when we recognize that in designing tools we are designing ways of being."\n<<<\nquoted in E.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.40\n\n----\n\nSherry Turkle - computer more than just a tool:\n<<<\n"At one level, the computer is a tool. It helps us write, keep track of our accounts, and communicate with others. Beyond this, the computer offers us both new models of mind, a new medium on which to project our ideas and fantasies."\n<<<\nquoted in E.F. Provenzo, Jr., A. Brett G.N. McCloskey, //Computers, Curriculum, and Cultural Change: an introduction for teachers// (London, 1999), p.195\n\n----\n\nHeim (1993) - thought processes are shaped by technology - e.g. search engines use Boolean logic - affects the way we think, the questions we raise & the answers we get.\n\ncited in C. Lankshear, M. Peters & M. Knobel, 'Information, knowledge & learning: some issues facing epistemology and education in a digital age' (in M.R. Lee & K. Nicoll (eds.), //Distributed Learning: social and cultural approaches to practice//; London, 2002), p.28\n\n----\n\nMcLuhan (1987) - the medium is the message:\n<<<\n"In a culture like ours, long accustomed to splitting and dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of shock to be reminded that, in operational and practical fact, the medium is the message. This is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium - that is, of any extension of ourselves - result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology."\n<<<\nquoted in N. Lee, 'The Extensions of Childhood: technologies, children and independence' (in I. Hutchby & J. Moran-Ellis, //Children, Technology and Culture: the impacts of technologies in children's everyday lives//; London, 2001), p.162\n\n----\n<<<\n"Learning takes place in the head of the student, and depends entirely on the activities of hte student... The activities of teachers, and the impact of textbooks or lectures or electronic displays influence education only to the extent that they affect the behaviors of the students. Designing effective methods requires predicting, with some accuracy, how students will respond to them."\n<<<\nH.A. Simon, 'Cooperation between Educational Technology and Learning Theory to Advance Higher Education' (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.62\n\n----\n\nSalomon (1993) - possibility of people still 'thinking with a tool' even when the tool is not present\n\nSutherland & InterActive Project Team, //Designs for Learning: ICT and knowledge in the classroom// (Computers & Education, 43, 2004), p.6\n\n----\n\nCole & Engestrom (1993) - cultural mediation has a "recursive, bidirectional effect; mediated activity simultaneously modifies both the environment and the subject."\n\nSutherland & InterActive Project Team, //Designs for Learning: ICT and knowledge in the classroom// (Computers & Education, 43, 2004), p.6\n\n----\n\nProblem of learning being equated with 'having fun' - Bloom & Hanych:\n<<<\n"such an approach doesn't promote learning: it trivializes the learning process."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.258\n\n----\n\nSchnotz (2002) - new ways of dealing with and presenting information should be used due to different ways learners process info:\n<<<\n"As humans are exposed to an increasing mass of information that frequently dazzles the eyes, ears and mind, new standards of presenting information emerge... One can assume that learners who have much experience with electronic media and with new kinds of information presentation might have new expectations, new attitudes, and new processing havits that affect their cognitive processing."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.262\n\n----\n\nOppenheimer (1997) - we don't know the effect of using computers with young learners:\n<<<\n"Little or no data exists on how comptuers affect the brains of young learners and whether we are teaching students to be better thinkers because they have access to technology. In other words, no clear method of 'best practices' is evident. In lieu of this, it appears that schools are forced to make subjective decisions, which affect the future of education on a massive scale."\n<<<\nquoted in Okan, 'Edutainment: is learning at risk?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:3, 2003), p.263\n\n----\n\nJonassen & Rohrer-Murphy (1999) - tools affect human mental development:\n<<<\n"tools mediate or alter the nature of human activity and, when internalized, influence humans' mental development."\n<<<\nquoted in Demetriadis, et al, ' 'Cultures in negotiation': teachers' acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools' (//Computers & Education//, 41, 2003), p.34\n\n----\n\nTechnology can given students greater control - metaphor of moving from 'stepping stones' approach to a 'walled garden' approach - i.e. intranet rather than internet.\n\nSomekh, 'New Technology and Learning: policy and practice in the UK, 1980-2010' (//Education and Information Technology//, 5:1, 2000), p.30\n\n----\n\nTechnology always has an effect on the user:\n<<<\n"Regardless of whether the implement is a stylus, a quill, a pencil or a keyboard, technologies of incription and communication do things //to// people as well as //for// people."\n<<<\n<<<\n"Like the tool of language computers are instruments of normalisation, marginalisation or empowerment, depending on who is using them, how they are being operated, and to what end they are being employed."\n<<<\nKapitzke, 'Information Technology as Cultural Capital' (//Education and Information Technology//, 5:1, 2000), p.59\n\n----

Need for 'integrated teachers':\n<<<\n"They will not only be delivering knowledge, but acting as counsellors, advisors, organizers, leaders and managers. They will collaborate in the design, elaboration and production of tools for teaching. Thus they will be genuine intellectuals, specialists in teaching and learning, true professionals."\n<<<\nB. Cornu, 'New technologies: integration into education' (in D. Watson & D. Tinsley (eds.), //Integrating Information Technology into Education//; London, 1995), p.8\n\n----\n\nBecker (2000) - used //Teaching, Learning & Computing survey// (over 4000 teachers in 1,100 US schools) - minority of teachers had used computers transformatively. Such teachers,\n<<<\n"...have fairly distinctive teaching philosophies, being disproportionately supportive of constructivist pedagogies such as developing student responsibility for selecting and carrying out tasks, emphasising group work involving discourse, and the use of projects, products, and performances for outside audiences."\n<<<\nConlon & Simpson, 'Silicon Valley versus Silicon Glen: the impact of computers upon teaching and learning: a comparative study' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:2, 2003), p.148\n\n----\n\nTeachers in study commented on the benefits of ICT in "re-awakening a learning culture among the staff" - improved communications (sharing resources, etc.) (p.77)\n<<<\n"Around half of the respondents acknowledged that ICT could have a significant impact on the classroom of the future, making it a very different place from that experience today." (p.78)\n<<<\nCondie & Simpson, 'The Impact of ICT initiatives in Scottish schools: cultural issues' (//European Journal of Teacher Education//, 27:1.2004)\n\n----\n\nICTs result in changes in teaching styles, etc.\n<<<\n"IT is not only perceived as a catalyst for change, but also change in teaching style, change in learning approaches, and change in access to information."\n<<<\n*teachers not impressed because focus on what technology can //do//, rather than on learning.\n\nWatson, 'Pedagogy before Technology: rethinking the relationship between ICT and teaching' (//Education and Information Technology//, 6:4, 2001), p.251\n\n----\n\nOfsted (2001):\n<<<\n"Only a minority of teachers are capable of managing ICT resources and organising the classroom to ensure that effective subject learning is taking place."\n<<<\nquoted in - Watson, 'Pedagogy before Technology: rethinking the relationship between ICT and teaching' (//Education and Information Technology//, 6:4, 2001), p.258\n\n----\n\nTechnology often results in teachers becoming co-learners with students - shift in roles - more autonomus learning - teachers become //facilitators// of learning (scaffolding)\n\n*links to Vygotsky's 'zone of proximal development'\n\nSomekh, 'New Technology and Learning: policy and practice in the UK, 1980-2010' (//Education and Information Technology//, 5:1, 2000), p.28\n\n----\n\nSome staff see technological developments as a threat - either becuase they are pushed to the margins of their competence, or because it alters the balance of power in the teaching & learning interaction.\n\nKing, 'Managing the Changing Nature of Distance and Open Education at Institutional Level' (//Online Learning//, 16:1, 2001), p.52\n\n----\n\nGates (1995) - computers to replace teachers?\n<<<\n"There is an often-expressed fear that technology will replace teachers. I can say emphatically and unequivocally, IT WON'T."\n<<<\nquoted in - T. Imison & P. Taylor, //Managing ICT in the Secondary School//, (Oxford, 2001), p.111\n\n----\n\nBarnes (1992):\n<<<\n"To achieve change, teachers need to discover that their existing frame for understanding what happens in their classes is only one of several possible ones, and this... is likely to be achieved only when the teachers themselves reflect critically upon what they do and its results."\n<<<\nquoted in - G.F. Hoban, //Teacher Learning for Educational Change: a systems thinking approach// (OUP, 2002), p.62\n\n----

Fullan (1982) - classic stages of an innovation:\n<<<\n*its source (where did the idea come from and why?);\n*its adoption (the decision of an institution to initiate the work);\n*its implementation (teachers and students putting the new ideas into practice);\n*its institutionalisation (changes in practice established as the norm so they will continue without any special support.\n<<<\nB. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.191\n\n----\n\n2 things necessary to change school culture r.e. ICT:\n\n(i) teachers need support - not just additional resources but time & assistance to apply understanding of ICT to planning & teaching\n(ii) formal assessment system need adapting to give pupils credit for problem-solving, not just regurgitation, skills\n\nA. McFarlane, '...and where might we end up?' (in A. McFarlane (ed.), //Information Technology and Authentic Learning: realising the potential of computers in the primary classroom//; London, 1997), p.178\n\n----\n\nFullan (1991) - key factos that affect successful implementation of an innovation:\n\n*needs identification\n*goal clarity\n*complexity (degree of difficulty)\n*practicality\n\ncited in L. Newton, 'Management and the use of ICT in subject teaching' (in Selwood, Find & O'Mahony (eds.), //Management of Education in the Information Age: the role of ICT//; 2003), p.13\n\n----\n\nAttitude, not provision = key in ICT implementation:\n<<<\n"...ultimately, successful integration of ICT into teaching is dependent on the attitudes, understanding and action of individual teachers towards teaching with new technology."\n<<<\nL. Newton, 'Management and the use of ICT in subject teaching' (in Selwood, Find & O'Mahony (eds.), //Management of Education in the Information Age: the role of ICT//; 2003), p.14\n\n----\n\nKnezeck, et al (2000) - 'will skill & access' = 3 conditions to promote teacher uptake r.e. ICT:\n\n''Will:'' positive attitudes towards ICT (40% of variance)\n''Skill:'' level of competence (40% of variance)\n''Access:'' ability to procure computer & relevant software on regular basis (10% of variance)\n\ncited in M. Lambert & P. Nolan, 'Managing Learning Environments in Schools: developing ICT capable teachers' (in Selwood, Fung & O'Mahony (eds.), //Management of Education in the Information Age: the role of ICT//; 2003), p.171\n\n----\n\n3 reasons why dramatic changes in education r.e. ICT differ from any previous reform:\n\n(i) ICT has arisen from //outside// the world of education, unlike previous reforms, 'but with an irresistible case for adoption within schools.\n(ii) Those who are taught often 'more comfortable with the new developments than their teachers'.\n(iii) 'Finally, the pervasive nature of ICT has profound implications across the ethos and organisation of the whole of the learning environment.'\n\nOECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.10\n\n----\n\nSchon (1971) - all real change involves passing through zones of uncertainty.\n\nFullan (1991) - "The anxieties of uncertainty and the joys of mastery are central to the subjective meaning of educational change."\n\nFullan (1991) - "Conflict is fundamental to any successful change effort... success in school change efforts is much more likely when problems are treated as natural, expected phenomena, and are looked for."\n\nquoted in - B. Robinson, 'Getting Ready to Change: the place of change theory in the information technology education of teachers' (in D. Passey & B. Samways (eds.), //Information Technology: supporting change through teacher education// (London, 1997), p.42\n\n----\n\n5 stages of instructional evolution in ACOT (Apple Classrooms of Technology):\n\n1. ''Entry'' - teachers focus on changes to physical environment - replication of traditional activities.\n2. ''Adoption'' - teachers use text-based 'drill-and-practice' - still using whole-group lectures and individualised 'seat work'.\n3. ''Adaption'' - technology increasingly incorporated into lessons - increases in student productivity and engagement.\n4. ''Appropriation'' - teachers understand technology & use it effortlessly as tool to accomplish real work - team teaching, inter-disciplinary projects, etc. - old assumptions questioned.\n5. ''Invention'' - continuing development by teachers - integrated curriculum & alternative assessment.\n\nI. Haymore Sandholtz & C. Ringstaff, 'Teacher Change in Technology-Rich Classrooms' (in C. Fisher, D.C. Dwyer & K. Yocam (eds.), //Education and Technology: reflections on computing in classrooms// (San Francisco, 1996), p.285-7\n\n----\n\n'Productivity Paradox' - little connection between investments in IT and productivity benefits (i.e. benefit may not be where you expect them to be)\n\nP.S. Goodman - 'Creating Organizational and Technological Change (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.157\n\n----\n\nChoosing technology before the educational task is "like buying twelve dozen hammers, then searching for nails to pound."\n\nH.A. Simon, 'Cooperation between Educational Technology and Learning Theory to Advance Higher Education' (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.63\n\n----\n\nBecta study - ICT has cumulative effect on raising standards - more subjects ICT used for, better results across all subjects.\n\nReynolds, Treharne & Tripp, //ICT - the hopes and the reality// (British Journal of Educational Technology, 34:2, 2003), p.159\n\n----\n\nOECD (2001) - use of technology in education too dependent on pioneering teachers:\n<<<\n"Technology use reflects traditional classroom methodology, though affording some increased attention to the individual learner, it still depends too much on highly motivated pioneering principals and teachers."\n<<<\nquoted in Demetriadis, et al, ' Cultures in negotiation': teachers' acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools' (//Computers & Education//, 41, 2003), p.21\n\n----\n\nEly (1993) - 3 major conditions relevant to ICT implementation:\n\n'(i) dissatisfaction with the status quo\n(ii) existence of knowledge and skills\n(iii) availability of resources'\n\nquoted in Demetriadis, et al, ' Cultures in negotiation': teachers' acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools' (//Computers & Education//, 41, 2003), p.22\n\n----\n\nImplementation of ICT bound to experience opposition:\n<<<\n"Not all will share the motivations, values and needs of the innovation's originators. Some will experience (or at least perceive) the costs of introducing the innovation as higher than the perceived benefits, and are therefore likely to ignore, resent, reject, subvert, or oppose the change."\n<<<\nWhitworth, 'The Politics of Virtual Learning Environments: environmental change, conflict, and e-learning' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:4, 2005), p.686\n\n----\n\n'Success' and 'failure' are subjective terms:\n<<<\n"Each stakeholder group brings to the development process a certain culture, filled with assumptions, values, prior experiences, calculations of costs and benefits, and the like. Therefore, each will have different ideas about what will constitute the 'success' or 'failture' of an innovation."\n<<<\nWhitworth, 'The Politics of Virtual Learning Environments: environmental change, conflict, and e-learning' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:4, 2005), p.686\n\n----\n\nProblem of ad-hoc resourcing of ICT:\n<<<\n"provides the illusion of adequate resourcing for educational purposes, at least in some rather limited areas: wordprocessing and printing."\n<<<\n*schools cannot capitalize on developments in ICTs any further, for fear of alienating those with inadequate provision.\n\nGough, 'Opinion: 'Learning Technologies'? 'Convergent Technologies'? What do these mean?' (//Education and Information Technologies, 5:2, 2000), p.135\n\n----\n\nSchools cannot re-purpose ICTs as 'tools':\n<<<\n"it does not make any sense for educational systems to refer to the ICT revolution in its present form as involving technological tools that the system can “swallow� as it did earlier devices such as the television or the video, which did not leave any meaningful mark on the educational system. Rather, we have to switch from speaking about “integrating computers into the classroom� or “using ICT for the teaching of Math to fourth graders� to radically restructuring the educational system, while relying on a broad cultural perspective, in order to enhance its adaptation to cyber culture and postmodernity, thus saving it from marginalization or even extinction."\n<<<\nA. Aviram, 'From "Computers in the Classroom" to mindful radical adaptation by education system to the emerging cyber culture' (//Journal of Educational Change//, 1, 2000), p.345\n\n----

Idea of the meme first appeared in Richard Dawkins' 1976 book //The Selfish Gene//:\n<<<\n"We need a name for the new replicator, a noun that conveys the idea of a unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of //imitation//. 'Mimeme' comes from a suiable Greek root, but I want a monosyllable that sounds a bit like 'gene'. I hope my classicist friends will forgive me if I abbreviate mimeme to //meme//."\n<<<\nS. Blackmore, //The Meme Machine// (OUP, 1999), p.6\n\n----\n\nDefinition of a meme & examples:\n<<<\n"Everything that is passed from person to person [by a process of imitation] is a meme. This includes all the words in your vocabulary, the stories you know, the skills and habits you have picked up from others and the games you like to play... Each of these memes has evolved in its own unique way with its own history, but each of them is using your behaviour to get itself copied."\n<<<\nS. Blackmore, //The Meme Machine// (OUP, 1999), p.7\n\n----\n\nMemes = amoral:\n<<<\n"Memes spread themselves around indiscriminately without regard to whether they are useful, neutral, or positively harmful to us. A brilliant new scientific idea, or a technological invention, may spread because of its usefulness. A song like Jingle Bells may spread because it sounds OK, though it is not seriously useful and can definitely get on your nerves. But some memes are positively harmful - like chain letters and pyramid selling, new methods of fraud and false doctrines, ineffective slimming diets and dangerous medical 'cures'."\n<<<\nS. Blackmore, //The Meme Machine// (OUP, 1999), p.7\n\n----\n\nCannot define the unit of the meme - part of a symphony, or all of it?\n\nS. Blackmore, //The Meme Machine// (OUP, 1999), p.53\n\n----\n\n//Oxford English Dictionary:// **meme** - an element of culture that may be considered to be passed on by non-genetic means.\n\nD. Sperber, 'An Objection to the Memetic Approach to Culture' (in R. Aunger (ed.), //Darwinizing Culture: The Status of Memetics as a Science//; OUP, 2000), p.163\n\n----\n\nMeme:\n<<<\n"The terms has come to describe a cultural unit that individuals rapidly take up and pass along to others."\n<<<\n*E.g.'s of successful memes = advertising slogans that become part of everday language, best sellers, emoticons & abbreviations.\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1007\n\n----\n\nJahoda (2002) - idea of memes = simplistic and untestable.\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1008\n\n----\n\nSuccessful memes are "flexible, adaptable and can be turned into many different particular uses."\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1008\n\n----\n<<<\n"Briefly put, memetics suggests that new ideas spread through a culture via a genetically modelled information flow in which some ideas become successful by rapidly replicating themselves and finding willing 'hosts' to pass them new ideas."\n<<<\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1009\n\n----\n\nEd. Tech. = a successful meme:\n<<<\n"Educational technology is a successful //meme// because, like a wordprocessor or other functional computer programme [sic], it 'copies the instruction' on how to make new copies of itself." (Blackmore, 1999)\n<<<\n<<<\n"As a //meme//, it [educational technology] has become attractive enough to garner a wide network of adherent, a group of supporters who willingly and eagerly pass the idea on to others. It is, in other words, an idea that fits well with current cultural assumptions about how the world works."\n<<<\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1010\n\n----\n\nMemetic interpretation of ICT in education:\n<<<\n"In a memetic interpretation, it is not so much that individuals find ICT tools attractive and urge their use, nor is it that groups (institutions such as schools) take an intentional stand in favor of using these tools. Rather, it is that the //idea// of using these tools in particular ways is so attractive and so motivating that individuals are constrained, willy-nilly, to pass on a good thing and to encourage others... to use ICT as a an increasingly regular taken-for-granted part of education."\n<<<\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1014\n\n----

<<<\n"Ironically, change is often made more difficult because managers concentrate on trying to get other people to change, not realising that they may need to begin by changing their own management strategies - and probably also some aspects of organizational structure."\n<<<\n(C.f. metaphor of trying to put an engine in a horse)\n\nB. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, //IT and the politics of institutional change// (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997)\n\n----\n\nHoyle (1976) - two extreme forms of organization in schools:\n\n''Bureaucratic (hierarchical)''\n*Fixed, rigid roles for teaching staff\n*Clear & definite rules\n*Rigid timetable & curriculum\n*Head has lots of power\n\n''Non-bureaucratic''\n*Very few rules (and those established open to interpretation)\n*Flexible timetable & curriculum\n*School policy decided by teachers\n\nB. Somekh, G. Whitty & R. Coveney, 'IT and the politics of institutional change' (in B. Somekh & N. Davis, //Using Information Technology Effectively in Teaching and Learning//; London, 1997), p.196\n\n----\n\nOrganizations = concepts:\n<<<\n"[Social institutions] are not entitities whose functions may be explained and controlled in terms of simple causes and controlled in terms of simple causes and efefcts. Rather, organizations are concepts. They are constituted in the minds of people. They are therefore subject to different and variable interpretations and impressions and different intensities of interest."\n<<<\nA. Inglis, P. Ling & V. Joosten, //Delivering Digitally: managing the transition to the knowlege media// (London, 2002), p.19\n\n----\n\nIntegration of new technology into classroom practice = essentially a problem of management.\n\nL. Newton, 'Management and the use of ICT in subject teaching' (in Selwood, Find & O'Mahony (eds.), //Management of Education in the Information Age: the role of ICT//; 2003), p.12\n\n----\n\nLeadership needed to integrate ICT and change organization:\n<<<\n"Visionary school leadership is needed to bring about and sustain the dramatic changes enabled by ICT, to persuade and give confidence to all involved - teachers and learners, parents and others in the school and community. The school must be re-organised so that working with ICT becomes integral and unexceptional..."\n<<<\nOECD, //Learning to Change: ICT in Schools// (2001), p.16\n\n----\n\nDifferent forms of change:\n\n(i) ''Incremental change'' - builds on work already done, making small changes.\n(ii) ''Discontinuous change'' - organization makes fundamental break with past and undergoes major restructuring.\n(iii) ''Proactive change'' - organization plans ahead and anticipates need to make changes.\n(iv) ''Reactive change'' - changes in regulations, environment or competition forces organization to change.\n\nP.S. Goodman - 'Creating Organizational and Technological Change (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.163\n\n----\n\n'Paradox of value' - tendency to build expectation r.e. benefits & understate losses in any change - initially, experienced costs likely to be higher and benefits lower. This leads to a discrepancy between expectations and experience - the greater the discrepancy, the more negativity.\n\nP.S. Goodman - 'Creating Organizational and Technological Change (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.170\n\n----\n<<<\n"Institutionalization refers to a process by which the change persists over time and the new learning environments become part of the structure, norms and values of the organization. The change becomes independent of any individual."\n<<<\nP.S. Goodman - 'Creating Organizational and Technological Change (in P.S. Goodman (ed.), //Technology Enhanced Learning: opportunities for change//; London, 2001), p.172-3\n\n----\n\nZhao & Cziko (2001) - 3 conditions necessary for teachers to use technology:\n\n1. Teachers must believe that technology can more effectively achieve or maintain a higher-level goal than what has been used ('effectiveness')\n2. Teachers must believe that using technology will not cause disturbances to other higher-level goals that they evaluate as more important than the one being maintained ('disturbances')\n3. Teachers must believe that they have the ability and the resources to use technology ('control')\n\nquoted in Demetriadis, et al, ' 'Cultures in negotiation': teachers' acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools' (//Computers & Education//, 41, 2003), p.21\n\n----\n\nNeed for change management:\n<<<\n"Whilst ICT has its own unique properties and additional requirements, the underlying need to address the fundamental requirements of change management is inescapable."\n<<<\nTearle, 'ICT implementation: what makes the difference?' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:5, 2003), p.578\n\n----\n\nChanging ideas r.e. learning should lead to a change in the structure of schools:\n<<<\n"Contemporary enthusiasm for using technology in education has much to do with current ideas about what learning is and how to foster it in young people and therefore how schools should be organised to do this."\n<<<\n*previously, the role of educational technology was "grounded in assumptions about technology's role in providing efficiency... or motivation."\n\nKerr, 'Why we all want it to work: towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 36:6, 2005), p.1005\n\n----\n<<<\n"Many teachers have beliefs about education that are traditional and slow to change. Most feel so heavily constrained by the contexts in which they work that new methods are attempted only rarely. Policy reforms, such as those relating to technology in schools, which do not address teachers' beliefs and contexts will have only a superficial effect on practice."\n<<<\nConlon & Simpson, 'Silicon Valley versus Silicon Glen: the impact of computers upon teaching and learning: a comparative study' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 34:2, 2003), p.145\n\n----\n\nError in applying business models to education.\n\nBarbera, 'Quality in Virtual Educaiton Environments' (//British Journal of Educational Technology//, 35:1, 2004), p.15\n\n----\n\nFullan (1989) - teacher is at the heart of the success or failure of educational change - however, usually small group of innovators cascade knowledge & skills to peer group - hasn't happened with ICT. (p.259)\n\n*others see innovators as 'mavericks' as different from them (credibility gap)\n*Fullan (1991): "In many ways the more committed an individual is to the specific form of change, the less effective he or shee will be in getting others to implement it." (p.260)\n\nWatson, 'Pedagogy before Technology: rethinking the relationship between ICT and teaching' (//Education and Information Technology//, 6:4, 2001)\n\n----\n\nWillis (1993) - barries to change - reasons why "efforts that involve technology may be particularly difficult to pull off":\n\n*curriculum integration = complex\n*teachers need time to experiment\n*resentment & resistance destroys progress\n*ownership = critical to success\n*admin support = essential\n\nWatson, 'Pedagogy before Technology: rethinking the relationship between ICT and teaching' (//Education and Information Technology//, 6:4, 2001), p.260\n\n----\n\nRAND Corporation (1988) - American study:\n<<<\n"Reforms that deal with the fundamental stuff of education - teaching and learning - seem to have weak, transitory, and ephemeral effects; whilst those that expand, solidify and entrench school bureaucracy seem to have strong, enduring and concrete effects."\n<<<\nquoted in - J. Abbott & T. Ryan, //The Unfinished Revolution: learning, human behaviour, community and political paradox//, (London, 2000), p.109\n\n----\n\nWilson & Daviss (1995) - difference between industry & education:\n<<<\n"Technical cultures are shaped and driven by... a community of learners. In essence, they are webs that link research, development, evaluation and dissemination into a single, synergistic, supportive system that increases the effectiveness and efficiency of creator, user and process alike. In contrast, the teaching profession is marked by a series of missing links - separations between areas within the profession that, if joined, could create the technical culture necessary to sustain progressive innovation in education."\n<<<\nquoted in - G.F. Hoban, //Teacher Learning for Educational Change: a systems thinking approach// (OUP, 2002), p.5-6\n\n----\n<<<\n"...if educational change is viewed as a complex system, it emphasizes the need to accompany change with a f