Critical Considerations of Teachers as Designers of Technology-Enhanced Learning

• In Event: 60.028 - Teachers as Designers of Technology-Enhanced Learning

Abstract

Purpose
The purpose of this contribution is to provide critical considerations that cut across each of the main themes featured in this session. Inspired by the five other contributions in this interactive session, this discussion voices concerns from broader perspectives in educational research. Key issues receiving critical commentary include: importance of this work; feasibility and variation in existing research; key insights in their application (success and failure factors); and recommendations for future research.

Theoretical perspectives
While research evidence suggests that involvement of teachers in the design of curricula can result in effective professional development and sustainable innovations (e.g. Pieters & Voogt, 2008), the challenges associated with teachers designing technology-enhanced learning are also serious. Teachers typically have little time, limited expertise and rarely any formal endorsement for their design efforts. Yet they must meet new demands placed upon them e.g. by: policy, as developments towards decentralized structures require teachers to be more involved in curriculum design (e.g. Dinham, 2005); research, which shows that teacher customization of materials can enhance student learning (Gerard, Spitulnik, & Linn, 2010); and practice, where the mismatch between existing resources and needs of specific learners/settings requires that teachers design to improve alignment (McLoughlin, 2001).

Approach
This contribution uses the five other papers as starting points for critical reflections on broader issues related to teachers as designers of technology-enhanced learning. While the focus, methods and conclusions in the five papers differ, each contribution shares the stance that teacher design of technology-enhanced learning warrants investigation. In this sixth contribution, the devil’s advocate reflects on the importance, variation, findings and future research of teachers as designers of technology-enhanced learning. Specifically, the following questions are addressed: What might the field of education risk if this line of inquiry were not pursued? In what ways might the divergence and convergence in this work be unproductive? What caveats should be placed on existing knowledge about teachers as designers of technology-enhanced learning? What do we still need to know and do these priorities have methodological implications?

Results and significance
The notion of teachers as designers of technology-enhanced learning is timely, relevant and under-developed. Variation in this session set alone pertains to: designer identity (individuals [McKenney et al.] or teams [Svihla et al.]); design situations (in preparation for enactment [Cober et al.; Shvila et al.; Voogt et al.] or during lessons [e.g. Matuk et al.]); the role of technology (to support design [Matuk et al.; Shvila et al.] or to embody design [Cober et al.; Shvila et al.; Voogt et al.]); and improvement goals (more on personal practice or student learning). While the virtues of teacher design are extolled across the paper set, the costs are rarely discussed. Given the extreme and increasing demands placed on teachers, it would seem that any benefits could only seriously be discussed in light of costs that are incurred by investing in design (e.g. time, thoroughness, other tasks dropped). This contribution offers those interested in the session theme the kind of conceptual ‘tough love’ that can inspire serious improvements.

Authors

• Paul A. Kirschner, Open University of the Netherlands

• Ornit Sagy, University of Haifa