Your main question first:

Technology is not the driver of student engagement nor disengagement. Good or Bad learning design and delivery is.

When someone says "We need a course on this" they then have to think about and answer the Who, Why, When, Where, What, What for and How of Learning. Technology based learning is a tool. Face to Face based learning is a tool. You select the appropriate tool for the job based on your response to those seven questions. The up-front time and cost of developing quality learning experiences can be surprising & daunting so it's no wonder people take short cuts.

That's why this 'third space' of the Learning Design/Development/Design professional (with subject matter experts, project managers etc) continues to grow and evolve. Professionalism (1) reduces the risk of poor learning experiences (2) more likely to balance the real world constraints of cost / time / resource / quality.

So when you have shovelware learning, or poor tool selection, or content misaligned with assessment, or student learning needs unmet, or abstract content then you will have bad learning experiences. These problems are not exclusive to technology based learning - it happens with Face-To-Face learning as well.

Student disengagement is perennial issue regardless of the mode. Technology has the characteristic to magnifying and multiplying effects. So technology is scaling and multiplying the reach and volume of learning that traditional education approaches can't achieve. So bad learning design / development / delivery (and therefore student disengagement) effects would be magnified and multiplied too.

My conjecture about your questions is this: the key difference with technology may be the absence of a 'human' last line of defence against poor learning design/development and to 'save the day' from a bad learning experience.

From this last statement, it may seem Face-To-Face learning is more powerful than technology mediated learning - but remember context is all important. That multivariate learning equation has to be answered. The outcomes for the student is but one consideration: there are outcomes for the business, project sponsors, the project manager, the learning professionals, subject matter experts, the media team too that have to be considered when answering that question.

To the other questions:

Blended Learning is simply a useful transitional term (my opinion) to explain a concept to those unfamiliar or uncomfortable with online learning. It's a similar to how eCommerce was useful once but now it's just the way you do business. I look forward to the day when the terms like eLearning, Blended Learning, Online Learning go the same way as CBT and it all just becomes "Learning" again.

This was the thrust behind the "Technology is just a tool just as much as a lecture is a tool" statement. Blended learning in the Higher Ed space space refers to having mixed delivery modes of which online learning (usually LMS) is but one delivery mode to achieve a set of course / subject Intended Learning Outcomes. Other modes may include workshops or lectures.

As a small classic example is the "Flipped classroom". A content heavy subjects use online materials and activities as a pre-lecture deep-dive into a topic. The lecture that follows then maps and highlights the inter-connectedness of key learning ideas.

I acknowledge the broader sense of 'Technology' can incorporate technology beyond the web and this should not be forgotten. However I find that the online dominates the discussion for cost, equity and ubiquity reasons.

I hope that helps.

/rant. Note: Edited for clarity.

You can use technology in order to provide timely feedback, use the technology for automated assignments evaluation, through technology you may also provide students new means to study the subject. Like you can do more using AR/VR in order to engage your students with astronomy classes, than you could using just paper and lectures. But the technology for the sake of technology is a clear distractor - technology can easily become an encouragement of its own, you should stay clear of that, because it ruins intrinsic motivation. Technology can also be used to implement gamification of the process of education that otherwise would not have been possible. You may see our papers on that:

Conference Paper New model of mobile learning for the high school students pr...

Article GAMIFICATION FOR EDUCATION

If properly designed and followed, the teaching activity can be improved by technology.

In this regard you can read:

- Ercolino, I., Maraffi, S., Sacerdoti, F.M. (2016). Could smartphone in science teaching foster motivation and positive attitudes in students?. In Pixel (Eds.), New Perspectives in Science Education International Conference Proceedings, 127-131. Florence: Libreriauniversitaria.

- Maraffi, S., Paris, E. & Sacerdoti, F.M. (2017). Learning on Gaming: A New Digital Game Based Learning Approach to Improve Education Outcomes. US-China Education Review A, September 2017, Vol. 7, No. 9, 421-432. doi: 10.17265/2161-623X/2017.09.003. http://www.davidpublisher.org/Public/uploads/Contribute/5a38cc913519c.pdf

- Maraffi, S. & Sacerdoti, F.M. (2017). “Save Yourselves”: an App to Improve Correct Behaviors in Earth Environmental Emergency. American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, New Orleans, USA.

A study has been made on comparing the effectiveness of teaching science thru technology and technology thru science.The study showed that the achievement of the students in learning technology thru science was higher than in learning of science thru technology.

SCHOOL SCIENCE REVIEW December 2015 VOL.97 ,117-120

I think this type of study can factor in your project.

Thank you so much Airat, Sabina & R.s., you have given me a lot of good ideas and material to explore! I am right into gamification myself, but I don't want this initial dialogue to stray from the direct question, so I am hoping we can keep to the essential question of which type of "driver" do you believe technology acts as most: more as a driver of student engagement or more as a driver of student disengagement. I realise it can work both ways, but which way do you think it tends to work most in general, that is, as generally used in education at the moment, and why this is so? I greatly appreciate your answers though, and certainly will follow-up on the recommended readings and other sources you have suggested so far. Thanking you kindly...Tony :)

Based on my experience it is more a driver of student engagement with learning.

If technology is used as a tool for teaching and learning, it is more engaging. If technology is used in replace of teaching, students can become disengaged. Students and others are on technology most of their day: home, school, work. I notice that their social and communication skills are weaker as a result. I like my technology, but am glad I did not grow up depending on it for everything!

As a former tyrant tester who found students eager with no testing, I believe grade competition disengages kids natural wonder more than misused technology that helps students to collaborate and cooperate as industry requires. For example Excel worksheets do the number crunching so users get insight from discrete math and easy graphing.

I think engagement (driver) happens whether technology is integrated effectively as when students are playing serious games or developing critical thinking skills through an asynchronous debate on a topic via a discussion forum. But if technology is integrated ineffectively and students spend more time trying to figure out how to use the technology instead of learning, then they become frustrated and disengaged (driver).

Best regards,

Debra

Research has proven that when students use technology in the classroom they are more engaged and they also become active participant of the learning process. You can think of technologies such as Clicks or Students response systems, back channel communication tools which can be used intermittently to engage and motivate students in the classroom.

Before becoming an academic I was a foreign language teacher in secondary schools. Computer assisted language allows students to do exercises at their own pace and then revisit and correct them themselves. It provides a degree of autonomy and allows the teacher to step back and change role to facilitator. However it does not replace the spark of human communication. I am for instance right now learning Italian. I would rather meet real Italians and order my coffee and pastry in an Italian cafe rather then do a simulation on-line. So for interaction nothing replaces human communication. So technology has it's place and needs to support learning rather than be a replacement-hence blended learning-it needs to blend not replace. Thanks. Dave

Thanks again to everyone so far. I especially appreciate your insights and suggestions concerning the way technology can be used to help students collaborate and cooperate as industry requires, and the importance of students being able to engage asynchronously in their learning. These are important aspects of technology-driven learning and its great to see others pointing them out. I hope we continue to get responses to this question...tony :)

Technology is just a tool just as much as a lecture is a tool. Each has it's own specific affordances. Technology provides lots of new affordances - tools to make the invisible visible, the unsafe safe, the abstract concrete etc - it's just a matter of understanding them and how to apply them appropriately to the learning challenge and context.

It's folly to forget the basics principles of learning dynamics - especially the powerful relationship between learner and teacher. A typical example of it being forgotten is the content "clothesline" effect where content is effectively hung out in great loads on the LMS or embedded in PowerPoints.

Remember that technology is a communications technology and that can be used to great effect to harness the other great property of ICT - scale and reach for a new spin on that learner-teacher relationship. Done poorly, online learning can leave learners feeling isolated and disconnected. However if the teachers / academics / facilitators etc take on the a new role of learning community facilitator in a efficient way, then it can lead to dynamic experiences.

How? These are some that have helped

- Setting expectations and being responsive to queries (within reason 1 hr responsive is unreasonable but 24 hours is (excluding weekends);

- making weekly summative posts on forums (making the learners feel like their opinions and work has been valued). It is unnecessary to reply on all posts;

- use video to regular posts to summarise the previous week learning points and posts;

- use short video to support the learning anxiety points: getting started, assessment tasks, placements. Done right, these can typically be recycled from one subject instance to another.

- in-subject learning administration support videos (provide a standard answer to those "how do I submit the essay" type questions).

It would be great to hear from others other ways that have found to be effective.

A large part of it is not being afraid of having yourself appear online, in videos on a regular basis. It does not have to be high end video quality - consumer level hardware and software is certainly up to the task these days and it comes across as authentic. While video is certainly out of the comfort zone for many people I recommend going through that particular pain barrier - it's extremely effective at closing the emotional distance that online / blended learning can create; going someway in part to restore that learner/teacher relationship and dialogue.

The next level of technology enhanced learning dialogue will be learning analytics. I'm keen to hear from other academics how this is transforming their practice, the questions they need answered by their analytics systems etc.

I enjoyed your cobtribution Tom, except for one point. You mixed blended with online learning. This was a common finding in the literature and is worrying fir the simple readon that you cannot put the two together in the same basket; as a local saying goes:)

In answer to the question:

Is technology more a driver of student disengagement with learning, or more a driver of student engagement with learning? Why?

As someone above rightly said using the allegory of the 👨‍🍳 knife, it can be both. I use the phrase, it is a double edged knife in various ways.

Before going any further though I would appreciate what you mean by 'blended learning' Tony. Do you mean that teaching and learning will be 50% of both? Or do you mean teaching face-to-face supplemented by technology? They are similar but different as I experienced and as I said above the phrase blended learning is used interchangeably.

Hence my query

I believe that despite the importance of technology in education, the role of the teacher is still very important to ensure interaction within and outside the classroom

Thanks Pauline, your input is much appreciated!

Your request for me to define what I mean by 'blended learning' actually exposes one of my reasons for pursuing this particular question, which is that there is currently no universally agreed definition for this term. Blended learning is generally accepted as referring to a teaching & learning process in which there is "some combination of face-to-face and online learning" taking place, but the specific elements of this are not always agreed, and at the centre of most disagreements there seem to be differences concerning the role of technology in blended learning. It is for this very reason that I wanted to see what my colleagues thought about the term and the role played by technology as a driver of learning.

For what its worth, and for the sake of transparency, I should point out that although I continue to learn about blended learning all the time, the following references represent some of the key sources of information that I originally engaged with concerning blended learning as a pedagogical concept:

Angelini, M.L. (2016). Integration of the Pedagogical Models “Simulation” and “Flipped Classroom” in Teacher Instruction. SAGE Open. DOI: 10.1177/2158244016636430.

Brodersen, R. M., & Melluso, D. (2017). Summary of research on online and blended learning programs that offer differentiated learning options (REL 2017–228). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Central. Available online: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.

Christensen Institute: Blended Learning Universe: https://www.christenseninstitute.org/.

Horn, M.B. & Staker, H. (2015). Blended: using disruptive innovation to improve schools. Jossey-Bass: New York. ISBN-13: 978-1119413295.

Kazakoff, E. & Mitchell, A. (2016). Cultivating a Growth Mindset with Educational Technology. Available online: http://www.lexialearning.com.

Lynch, M. (2017) Implementing Blended Learning in higher education. Available online: http://www.thetechedvocate.org/implementing-blended-learning-higher-education/.

Patrick, S., Kennedy, K., & Powell, A. (2013). Mean what you say: Defining and integrating personalized, blended and competency education. Report for The International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL). Available online: http://www.inacol.org/.

Hope this is helpful...Tony :)

Your main question first:

Technology is not the driver of student engagement nor disengagement. Good or Bad learning design and delivery is.

When someone says "We need a course on this" they then have to think about and answer the Who, Why, When, Where, What, What for and How of Learning. Technology based learning is a tool. Face to Face based learning is a tool. You select the appropriate tool for the job based on your response to those seven questions. The up-front time and cost of developing quality learning experiences can be surprising & daunting so it's no wonder people take short cuts.

That's why this 'third space' of the Learning Design/Development/Design professional (with subject matter experts, project managers etc) continues to grow and evolve. Professionalism (1) reduces the risk of poor learning experiences (2) more likely to balance the real world constraints of cost / time / resource / quality.

So when you have shovelware learning, or poor tool selection, or content misaligned with assessment, or student learning needs unmet, or abstract content then you will have bad learning experiences. These problems are not exclusive to technology based learning - it happens with Face-To-Face learning as well.

Student disengagement is perennial issue regardless of the mode. Technology has the characteristic to magnifying and multiplying effects. So technology is scaling and multiplying the reach and volume of learning that traditional education approaches can't achieve. So bad learning design / development / delivery (and therefore student disengagement) effects would be magnified and multiplied too.

My conjecture about your questions is this: the key difference with technology may be the absence of a 'human' last line of defence against poor learning design/development and to 'save the day' from a bad learning experience.

From this last statement, it may seem Face-To-Face learning is more powerful than technology mediated learning - but remember context is all important. That multivariate learning equation has to be answered. The outcomes for the student is but one consideration: there are outcomes for the business, project sponsors, the project manager, the learning professionals, subject matter experts, the media team too that have to be considered when answering that question.

To the other questions:

Blended Learning is simply a useful transitional term (my opinion) to explain a concept to those unfamiliar or uncomfortable with online learning. It's a similar to how eCommerce was useful once but now it's just the way you do business. I look forward to the day when the terms like eLearning, Blended Learning, Online Learning go the same way as CBT and it all just becomes "Learning" again.

This was the thrust behind the "Technology is just a tool just as much as a lecture is a tool" statement. Blended learning in the Higher Ed space space refers to having mixed delivery modes of which online learning (usually LMS) is but one delivery mode to achieve a set of course / subject Intended Learning Outcomes. Other modes may include workshops or lectures.

As a small classic example is the "Flipped classroom". A content heavy subjects use online materials and activities as a pre-lecture deep-dive into a topic. The lecture that follows then maps and highlights the inter-connectedness of key learning ideas.

I acknowledge the broader sense of 'Technology' can incorporate technology beyond the web and this should not be forgotten. However I find that the online dominates the discussion for cost, equity and ubiquity reasons.

I hope that helps.

/rant. Note: Edited for clarity.

go through the attachment.

If used properly, technology can be a tool for student engagement on learning. Both the student and the teachers must approach this subject carefully. Students must rather use technology to enhance learning rather than detract themselves. Similarly, teachers must adopt technology to improve their lecture and assignment delivery.

At one point I requested my students to send me their assignment as soft copies. My hope was that students would study and put together their assignment and simply send me the assignments by the click of a button rather than wasting time printing and then physically come to submit.

All of a sudden, I started receiving very long assignments wich lacked anlysis

Previously, students had to analyse and summarize their assignment and had to pay for their printing. The removal of the cost element of printing meant to them that they could put a lot of content.

i have since returned back to printed copies! Because they pay for the printing they are now giving me shorter assignemnt which have been summarized

Technology is more of a catalyst of student engagement in a classroom and even outside the portals of the school.

Jack Son's article link is gold (source: https://t.co/TCemWOhjY2). It addresses the social-emotional side of engagement which speaks directly to understanding the 'who': why they are studying and their emotional readiness to engage. This aspect is a critical element in answering your question.

I can’t see how technology per se creates/destroys engagement rather it facilitates the process of engagement into learning instead and it depends on how well technology is applied. For a trite example, take a multiple choice quiz on a piece of paper can be far more effective for the student than online experience. Why? With paper students, the locus of control is greater: they can choose which order of questions to answer far more efficiently. It easier to review questions. With paper, batteries don’t die. etc.

It strikes me when we use technology to deliver learning experiences the process can inadvertently remove the passion from the learning experience. This can be countered in the way design and create materials and facilitate learning. Imagine creating a new ‘Gonzo Learning' experience based on the principles of Gonzo Journalism --> https://vib.by/v/mkvA98WnE (a 5 min vid).

Student engagement with learning depends on various factors as has been highlighted above

The use of technology for a blended approach to achieve student engagement is neither the solution nor the cause of student engagement or the lack of it. This reminds me of a study unit I used to teach about technology enhanced health care delivery, where one finds people recommending it as a solution to solve all its problems. It does not; period.

Blended learning, (not online distance learning courses where technology reigns supreme nowadays) can result in student engagement for some students; not so much for others. I still remain amazed how the so called net generation has problems of actually applying this useful learning tool. Ironically digital immigrants (the mature students) sometimes are more into this method of learning.

Blended learning is usually an optional activity since real life campus activities are still mandatory and for good reasons as mentioned above.

Technology can result in disengagement if students are distracted by its very, increasingly, aspect of connectivity in the class setting. Too many students are obsessed with social media, especially teh ubiquitous facebook, even during actual class sessions. There was a hot debate at our uni as to whether students should be allowed to have notebooks or tablets in class. This was a lost battle since admin was a strongly proactive for technology enhanced education.

However it still remains as a rather grey area since some academics use the only technology which is compulsory, the LMS/ VLE soley as a notes repository. Which up to a degree is understandable since blended learning is time consuming and it is not recognised in the same academics advancement. Publication is still the only means of advancing up the career ladder in universities, so blended learning takes second place for some or most academics.

So in actual fact there is no guarantee that blended learning will result in student engagement or disengagement with learning, unless it is included in the assessment strategy. The factors are too various and varying.

The only way that I found useful to actually achieve students' engagement withe blended learning by making it a 'compulsory' part of the assessmet process. Forum discussions where part of the assessment strategy in that the students had to post in forums their choice of topic for the assignment (unseen papers were hardly useful here I found) where the students had to write about their choice of topic. The assignmnet was an open one in that the students had to choose One Focused aspect of technology enhanced health care delivery, which is offers a variety of topics.

Apart from my besetting sin of disliking reading the same material ad nauseum in assignments, this resulted in their having to write something in a forum discussion to argue about thier choice of topic. Even so, the most effective experience as I found it, was when half the group were on Erasmus exchange, and hence physically absent from class.

Hi Salma,

Teaching to millennials, I truly think that technology and game-based learning are great enhancers of their engagement. They already are generations of digital users and gamers, addicted to technology and dopamine anyway so we should all integrate these elements in our classes !

Effective use of technology is definitely an active driver of student engagement. The learning management system at my university offers invaluable opportunities to integrate technology in various ways which motivate my students as their course content is available readily and feedback is instantaneous. It also enhances my teaching strategies making learning fun, relevant and meaningful. The role of the teacher in the process, however, as mentioned, cannot be underscored.

I can see classroom IT used, beginning very early on in the elementary school and made accessible to all students, together with the necessary training, especially in disadvantaged schools. Drop outs have too often come from such cohorts. IT, particularly with the ' flipped' learning opportunities that are being used at present in Australian schools, is perhaps the brightest element in education for the Millenials. Yes, with academic as well as social information at the touch of a button in the classroom setting, disadvantaged children can enter a world that their personal situations could otherwise well preclude. Discussion of their findings with peers and teachers could motivate them in learning and problem solving. Success breeds success. I firmly believe that the present schooling system, into which the technology is being introduced, that will need to change to accommodate student needs with IT and prevent the disengagement it has helped to create in the past. Cathy Jones

The use of IT technique might help some (rather poor) students to feel themselves being part of a modern learning community. The problem is that computers do not free the learners from their own efforts to understand and to integrate outcomes into former knowledge stuctures. Many presentations of information by means of computers (internet, including pictorial material) can be presented easily by the teacher with blackboard and chalk, usually a procedure of teaching that has the advantage being slower and open to fundamental elaborative feedback. The use of IT techniques is, for sure, much more demanding for teachers than most of them believe it to be as far as both cognitive constructions and social interactions are concerned. The highest profit from IT techniques get the computer sellers.

Great forum! It all comes down to the design of both the technology and the learning. To your question asking whether technology in general as used today is engaging or disengaging, it is most definitely disengaging because there is little macro data that suggests learning has improved with the inclusion of technology. Best report I have seen so far is PISA: Students, Computers, & Learning: Making the Connection (OECD 2015). It illustrates clearly that the more a country invests in technology for primary and secondary students, they actually see a drop in their PISA scores over time...that is a bit disconcerting considering the billions spent on educational technology. Nevertheless, the report highlights research that illustrates when technology is integrated into the overall learning--it is just one of many tools rather than the learning tool, then student engagement and performance increase. Thus, good ed tech has to be designed to be highly engaging for teacher and student alike, and learning has to be designed to use technology in the process of learning.

So, to answer your question--in general, technology tends to be disengaging. But that is not predictive as well-designed technology can be highly engaging.

Following Curtis above, I really wonder if PISA needs to get with it, and re-think standardised testing and comparative international achievement per se. While the scores may mean something to governments and the global business world that supports them, I believe standardised educational assessment attempted on an uneven playing stage, with innumerable changing variables, is intended to promote the interests of the privileged rather than facilitate the aims and principles of education. The money would be better spent on providing better IT facilities and IT training in schools. Imagine a global social justice!! Imagine the vast appeal of a global classroom rather than the traditional one? 'Flipped learning' where the class and the caring and switched on teacher add others' research and experiences into the traditional classroom via IT: Skype, vlogs, videos, blogs.is one way to meet the needs of an IT fascinated and motivated generation (Millenials). Standardized tests are not broad enough in their scope to measure a fraction of the learning that has taken place.

Dear all, thank you for this interesting conversation. I suggest the following publications:

Pam A. Mueller and Daniel M. Oppenheimer

The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking. Psychological Science, 2014

DOI: 10.1177/0956797614524581

Abstract:

Taking notes on laptops rather than in longhand is increasingly common. Many researchers have suggested that laptop note taking is less effective than longhand note taking for learning. Prior studies have primarily focused on students’ capacity for multitasking and distraction when using laptops. The present research suggests that even when laptops are used solely to take notes, they may still be impairing learning because their use results in shallower processing. In three studies, we found that students who took notes on laptops performed worse on conceptual questions than students who took notes longhand. We show that whereas taking more notes can be beneficial, laptop note takers’ tendency to transcribe lectures verbatim rather than processing information and reframing it in their own words is detrimental to learning.

and:

Debra L. Worthington, David G. Levasseur

To provide or not to provide course PowerPoint slides? The impact of instructor-provided slides upon student attendance and performance

Article To provide or not to provide course PowerPoint slides? The i...

As PowerPoint has pervaded today's college classrooms, instructors have struggled with the issue of whether or not to provide students' with copies of course PowerPoint slides (instructor-provided slides). While students report that such slides assist them academically, many instructors have expressed con- cerns that these slides encourage absenteeism and classroom passivity. To help assess the academic impact of instructor-provided slides, the present study examined two semesters of students' progress in a communication theory course. Across these semesters, the study charted the relationship between access/use of various types of instructor-provided slides on class attendance and exam performance. In its key findings, the study found that instructor-provided slides had no impact on class attendance and an adverse impact on course performance for students using these slides in their notetaking process.

I found Power point slides/videos and pictures in lectures were great for providing the bare bones or a mud map of content and for giving direction to my follow up studies. I prefer the practice of printing the slides pre lecture then writing all the best extra/side comments the lecturers/other students make and my first reactions to these, long hand, all over them in class and in tuts and workshops as well. They really are a Godsend. I then add the main ideas my associated pre- and post-readings readings, together with my own critique beside them later on. When it comes to assignments, I'm in like Flynn! But you need to attend lectures as well as read them! All the best.

Information technology can increase student engagement. There are many students who can't get to campus for classes and so will not have access to education without the application of technology. As an extreme example, I was a distance education student living in Australia and studying in Canada. Without technology I could not have done that.

Pye, Holt and Salzman (2018) recently reported that female university students were significantly more engaged by on-line education than males.

"... gender differences were identified, with females indicating overall higher perceived levels of online engagement across all constructs, with significant differences in the dimensions of assessment, relevance and contact with staff. ... " From Pye, Holt and Salzman (2018).

Reference

Pye, G., Holt, D., & Salzman, S. (2018). Investigating different patterns of student engagement with blended learning environments in Australian business education: Implications for design and practice. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 22. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v22i0.1578

Thesis by P.A. Theis A narratological Heuristic case Study of teachers teaching in a blended learning classroom environment, Uni Of Missouri-Kansas city, 2017 (on line) is a very worthwhile read- particularly his theoretical component.

Fascinating discussion--thanks for the discussion prompt and the many thoughtful responses!! Oftentimes in our quest for certainty in pedagogy we seek grand or global answers to complex questions regarding student learning. One way or another way (usually the opposite of the first way) are the only pedagogical choices offered. My own experience as an experienced classroom teacher (in multiple places and schools in the USA) and in Africa and as a learning theorist in science education suggests a more fruitful direction to pursue is one that recognizes that learning is extremely complex and situational. That is, "one way" may sometimes better fit one teaching/learning situation while the "other way" may better fit another situation, and gradations between the two extreme options may better fit between the other situations. As a result, if we take time to examine what factors influence any if the "better fits," (as measured by student learning) we typically gain more insight into the learning process and therefore gain ability to more rationally plan for and enact teaching (curriculum, instruction, assessment dimensions) that achieves desired results for more learners. An example of this type of investigative process I am currently involved is examining the use of educational technology (robots, communication devices, drones, 3D printers) to prepare new and experienced teachers to teach climate change through a computational mindset with a systems thinking focus. Stay tuned!

Education knows the process through which the transfer of knowledge and skills to the recipient by different means. Education is the fruit of evolution in civilizations, where knowledge can not evolve or apply without transfer, otherwise it will be lost by the end of civilization or before. Therefore, the need for continuous development of this important process has been demonstrated by various means and methods, taking advantage of modern developments and inventions that can enhance the quality of this process, hence the term "educational technology".

Education technology in its broad sense includes methods, tools, materials, devices, and regulations used in a particular education system to achieve specific learning objectives. It is clear that the technology of education does not just mean the use of modern machines and devices, but primarily the introduction of the method of systems, which is a method, method and method of work going in organized steps, and uses all the possibilities offered by technology according to theories of teaching and learning. This method emphasizes the integrated view of the role of educational means and their association with other components of these systems in a reciprocal relationship

The importance of education technology The education sector has witnessed a great leap in the present century. The educational mechanisms have developed very rapidly, exploiting the development of technology. The productivity of education has increased. It has become more enjoyable, the student has become more interactive and more creative. And your goal is to find and provide effective means to help students learn more easily. Modern teaching methods include computers, CD-ROMs, the Internet as the sea of ​​information and a great educational tool, and audio-visual media.

I'm thinking again about my response to this question. Anecdotally, as a learning designer at La Trobe University is Technology and design will get you so far - which can be considerable. It's a way of creative a much more active learning experience. It creates a way of providing students with access to learning when opportunity arises for them 24/7.

However what pushes the student engagement over the top is when academics embrace technology to really drive leadership of a learning community.

A key element of the traditional lecture is the 'performance'. It's a great opportunity to display the passion for the topic and to engage an audience. What I'm seeing here are some academic have embraced the digital platforms as a tool for expressing their passion for their field of expertise.

That may be in online forums, it may be in feedback, it maybe in little video snippets. Remembering seeing someone passionate about something reflects positively on students perception of a topic's importance.

Students respond to this high level of engagement. Presence, frequency and interaction is a common characteristic of subjects with extremely high student satisfaction scores. So these academics have managed to shifted their 'Performance' from the lecture environment to online - using the diaspora of technology tools that are available to them.

An example from a subject that achieve an extremely high 4.6/5 satisfaction: Forums - normally dull as dishwater, hard to manage. One academic told the students at the outset:

• "I'm going to be appearing more often than the Trivago adverts"
• "Experts in the field are going to be reading your forum posts - I'm expecting high quality discussion here." [he arranged for this colleagues to read and respond to comments]

...and he did get that high engagement from the students. Early on he was in frequently in the forums summarising what he read (demonstrating he valued their contribution). Responding to just the items that were really right or really wrong. He was just using a very standard Moodle LMS forum.

The role tech here was to facilitate, enhance and multiply the effect of the academic's role as a Learning Community leader (very much reflecting Jane Vella's principles of Dialogue Education but with tech as the medium).

So to answer the question in a slightly different way:

• Learning design is still the principle driver of engagement.
• The best learning-tech design will only get the engagement so far.
• To get the best learning engagement, however, technology needs to support learning community leader's engagement, facilitation and creativity with the students and subject itself.

before commenting on this Tom; was the above referring to blended learning or totally online course?

@pauline_aquilina It was a health subject. Technically it was a blended - all theory and theory assessment components were delivered/managed via LMS. Workshops were used for practical component.

Yes if we using technology without clear policy and rubric

I have been pondering on this question for a while and I am still not sure of the answer. I believe it to be non-binary in essence and contextual, so you cannot say one over the other - it depends.

What I can add though, from observation, and with some certainty, is that technology is can certainly be a distraction from student engagement in learning

In short: it depends. Planning is the key.

As with every means of education and training (books, spreadsheet), ICT can help if examined and organised carefully