EDCI 571 Assignment #1B- Is it Really a Debate?

 

Photo by Wei-Cheng Wu on Unsplash

Remember when the earth was flat? Remember when the sun rotated around the earth? Remember when we used cocaine to treat psychological issues? The idea that new media, or media in general, has NO effect on learning is ridiculous. If the argument was, to what degree media aids in education? I could see some validity in this. However, to just have a stance, and then deny any meaningful attempt (through obvious data) to change that stance, is really representative of where we are as people right now, and oddly enough, media allowed for that (but I digress). I agree that when Clark was initially writing in 1983, his view had some validity. The technology, or vehicles, maybe was not as reflective to the learning of students at that time. The “book” used in teaching poetic devices, for example, would have little to do with the teachers actual ability to teach poetic devices. These are valid arguments and it seems to me that Clark’s irritation comes with the fad of the next-big-thing. It reminds me of what we deal with in schools today. One year it is “reading power”, and now it is “PM Benchmarks” or “corrective reading” or “SRA (Student Reading Assessment)”. Do they all help with reading? Yes. Does it depend on which is used, based on the teacher using it? Yes. Are these just vehicles? Yes. Therefore, one could argue, that Clark has a point. In my example, if a teacher can, and does, teach students to read, it is therefore not as important what vehicle is used, but the fact that the teacher is successful. Point for Clark. Unfortunately, this is where Clark goes off the rails. It is his clinging dogmatically to an idea, that is constantly shown to be not relevant anymore, that leads to people frustrations.

Just because something was “true” in the past, becomes untrue or less relevant, with the advent of new technology and knowledge, does not diminish what was once true. At the time Clark wrote, maybe media was not the reason for student success. However, to fully deny the implications, and gains, that technology and new media has on the learning of today’s students, is just asinine.  As Katrin Becker’s 2010 article states, “…discussing the effectiveness of media, potential or otherwise in 2007 using reports from more than 10 years ago is like discussing today’s traffic issues using data from 1820” (pg. 2). I could list all the ways new-media changes have helped students of various abilities, access the same knowledge in my school. I won’t (because who has time for that on a Sunday), but I could.  Kozma’s argument was, by-far, the easiest to make. It is obvious that both technology and media have a drastic effect on student learning and access to that learning. For example, students with life threatening illnesses, who for their own safety cannot attend school physically, can learn from a school online. Therefore, media has affected that student’s learning. Kozma wins. Thus, the basis for this debate, because Clark made it a dichotomy (either/or), is therefore laughable; the idea should be, that media use itself is not as effective as the teacher’s use of that media. That is, if a teacher is being forced to use a platform, or resource, that they are not comfortable with, than the students learning will not be better. 

Though Kozma acknowledges that, at the time of writing his response, the data needed to show the value of media was constrained by acceptable scientific practice. Kozma states in his 1994 article that, “[m]issing in these studies are the mentalist notions or descriptions of the cognitive, affective, or social processes by which learning occurs” (pg. 2). That issue speaks more to how science was run than what is effective. It is plain to see that the “debate” is really not a “debate” at all, but merely a moot point. The idea of what a good teacher is, and what an effective lesson is, greatly depends on the teacher’s ability. It would be as much a mistake to say that textbooks are bad, as it would be to say all media is good. The need to “pick a side” is so pervasive in our world, but one thing is clear; students need support, and not all students learn the same. Furthermore, not all media is the same. Therefore, to lump them together is non-functional. There are many different ways to access information today and it is incumbent as the teacher, and learner facilitator, to help students find the pathways that work for them. 

 Andrew Vogelsang