I think it is easy to be seduced by the apparent 'ease' of using technology but in practice it is not so simple. Most contemporary unis/uni students expect some form of technology to be used in presenting the course but you need to carefully consider what technology would be the most effective in promoting student engagement and enhancing learning; using technology does not necessarily equate to good teaching/pedagogy. Tara Brabazon makes some excellent points about using technology in teaching in 'The university of google' and other writings.

New technologies are very helpful in the learning process. It is important to not overdo it. There is no substitute known for centuries master-apprentice model.

We should think through what problem we are trying to solve before deciding on a particular technology. Maybe it is not even technology that we need to introduce, but a better way of solving the problem.

My starting point was thinking, wouldn’t it be great if someone could design a presentation tool where you could edit your slides as you go?

Then I picked up a piece of chalk and said, “Aha!”

At the conference where I presented this, one other talk was done without slides, and it was one of the best talks I have ever attended. Speaker knew what he was talking about, interacted with the audience and produced a range of props to demonstrate his points.

You said: wouldn’t it be great if someone could design a presentation tool where you could edit your slides as you go?

In fact, there is a such tool. You can use multimedia board, and during presentation use kind of ballpen or just using computer keyword changing and interacting with presntation in your desired way.

A lot of primary school in Poland have such. High school sometimes too.

We live in a world where everything around us is only technology, on airport, at home, at school, at work.

Children are the ones who are most responsive to technology news, gadgets, and other wonders of the modern world.

With moderate use of technology in class, children are those who are very interested and will be attracted to classes and will learn faster. But I think that would not be great to use more technology in the classroom.

In the classes will be necessary to use traditional methods and also learning.

In my teaching I've never felt the need to choose between the two. Working my way through a problem on the blackboard in front of the students can be very effective, in my experience. Or not, it really depends on how it's done. Just like technology can be really powerful in an educational context when it's used appropriately. I think technology can improve education, but only if it's used well. Online learning platforms are great tools, just like a piece of chalk and a blackboard are great tools. In the end, though, I think it's not so much about the tool as how it's used.

If the technology is dominating, then it's not working effectively in my view. I'm always dismayed when classrooms have a huge projector screen and no whiteboard (I mean a basic one not even an IWB) as in meetings or teaching it's good to be able to just write with a board pen. In ELT, threw a been a move towards a lesser emphasis on materials - see here for info on the Dogme approach: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dogme/info

In my View, we must use technology in teaching, as we updated ourselves with ongoing happenings. By availing technology we save time, the new generation taking interest in study as we are going through recent updates.

It is indeed a blind presumption that more technology is better. Consider that the adoption of technology to the classroom brings with it the requisite that what is taught is better explained through the use of technology than with conventional means. I enjoyed Christensen's view on disruptive innovation, for example, and think of the possibilities that can exist when technology is used to forge new directions in education. So, to my mind at least, it is not that we incorporate tech -- although 'incorporate' is probably not the best word -- but that we reinvent the project of education in a way that creates new knowledge consistent with the use of technology

If technology merely offers another way, rather than a new way, then there may be a loss. At a superficial level, what I see is that technology ncan be more cognitively passive for the students and so should be incorporated in thinking rich situations.

I think it is easy to be seduced by the apparent 'ease' of using technology but in practice it is not so simple. Most contemporary unis/uni students expect some form of technology to be used in presenting the course but you need to carefully consider what technology would be the most effective in promoting student engagement and enhancing learning; using technology does not necessarily equate to good teaching/pedagogy. Tara Brabazon makes some excellent points about using technology in teaching in 'The university of google' and other writings.

see link to Tara Brabazon below...

http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/educat/teached/staff/profiles/head/tara-brabazon

Dear Philip

New technologies are everywhere and anywhere, whether in factories or in other companies in various segments, not getting out, of course, the education sector and influencing the teaching-learning process. We know that these tools come in the form of facilitating work within and outside of schools, which is not to say that this is easily seen by all with good eyes, because there is a lot of education professionals, especially teachers, who do not accept new technology as a transformative tool in their practice. This rejection often occurs due to lack of knowledge on the part of those, on how to use them to acquire practical in the teaching-learning process. If the new educational technologies are not used becomes increasingly difficult the process of digital inclusion as discussed and expected. Which is not to say that the disordered use of these technologies will be well spent, because what matters is knowing how to use them and not just use them

Dear Philip

In the beginning we should define what do you mean by technology? because as you know the the technology term includes many things such as paper, pens, embodied things and even pedagogy etc. However, I think that the technology or (e-learning) plays a great role in educational process. 

Dear

In modern era we have to use technology in every area even though teaching. But we should remember that "Technolgy is constructive as well as destructive". In my class room as well as exam scriept i have found that most of the students are doing spelling mistakes as well as grametical mistackes. I think excessive use of technolgy is the main cause of these mistakes. My opinion regarding the use technology is it can be used but not in every moment in teaching.

I think it's good to keep in mind what Sultan Almelhes pointed out: what do we mean by technology? Unless we want to conduct teaching outdoors by lectures or socratic questioning I think it's hard to avoid some kind of technology (like e.g. a blackboard and a piece of chalk).

We can of course draw an arbitrary distinction between electronic, or even PC/software-based, technologies, and all the other technologies out there (e.g. books). But this is hardly motivated by their respective pedagogical merits, merely by how recent they are. And today's new technology is tomorrow's old technology.

A much more interesting set of questions involve which specific technologies perform better or worse in the classroom, and how they can be used. I take it that most people with a minimum of teaching experience have found it handy to have a blackboard (or similar equipment) around from time to time, so that's a pretty uncontroversial piece of tech gear in my view. Ultimately, this is an empirical question, however.

Of course, some technologies are more complex than others. How tech-infused should we let classrooms get? Where is the cut-off point? I'd say this is mostly a pragmatic question, but also partly a question of theory infused with a bit of best practice. In many classrooms today, sophisticated tech gear is ubiquitous (sometimes even a disturbance), in many cases the students bring it themselves (this is clearly dependent on a number of social, geographic, and economic factors, however). Assuming that high-tech gear is reasonably easily accessible to both teachers and students, I think it makes sense to use it. Back when I was a boy (a few decades back), that wasn't the case at all, so it made little sense to design a session around computers. However, if I today know that a group of students will have access to computers and/or smartphones I'll try to weave them into the course, because they do offer some unique possibilities.

However, technology for its own sake will fix nothing (neither in nor outside the classroom). The widespread use of presentation software has not had much positive impact, as far as I can tell. I recall teachers with transparency overheads/projectors, which was bad enough in some cases (though some did make it work). When some of them switched to MS PPT, it seemed to open a whole new world to (some of!) them in terms of possibilities for garbling their subject (mandatory certification before being allowed access to animations in MS PPT might be an idea...).

In the end, though, I do think the question boils down to an appropriate theoretical framework, alongside a set of best-practice ideas to start from or to use as models for incorporating high-tech devices or software systems. It's not that one cannot (or should not) experiment, it's just that I think more would be gained in terms of impact if more could be done to work out how we best use whatever technology is available already. For instance, in stead of uncritically spending bucket loads of money on smart boards, how about spending money on finding out how one could make use of the fact that many students carry smart phones (i.e. mini-computers) to school every day?

And that, I believe, is possible without neglecting or reducing the power and impact that an expert teacher solving a problem with a piece of chalk on a blackboard in front of a class can have.

In 1933 Princeton University appointed a new professor of physics. The vice chancellor offered the new professor whatever technology he needed. The technology budget was enormous so he could have anything. The professor replied that he only needed pencils and paper to do maths experiments on. And also a wastepaper basket so he could throw out his mistakes - he made a lot of mistakes.

The professor's name? 

Albert Einstein.  

Just to answer your question shortly, we should use as much technological solution as it is enough to present different learning materials with the help of different senses of our students. For instance, using too much ICT your students will pay their attention to colourful figures without reason while using less technological solution their conceptualisation will be limited.

In my eyes, the chalk and talk policy is the best.

Keeping view to the 3D representations and complex patterns, technology is necessary. But as usual presentation on a Board is very helpful for students.

We may use technology of course. However, the chalk and talk policy requires complete control over the subject, and that is one thing a teacher must necessarily have. Delivering a talk with the help of modern technology is not actually teaching in the real sense. Besides, not much of knowledge ts required to teach with the help of technology. Indeed, presentation and teaching are two different things. That is what I feel; I may be wrong however!

@Hemanta K. Baruah,

whether or not having complete control over one's subject (whatever "complete control" means in this context) equals better teaching is an empirical question, imhop.

I beg to differ with the assertion that not much knowledge is required to teach with the help of technology. If I want to use an online learning platform to implement peer grading and feedback in my class, I must necessarily have a good command of both the subject and the technology. In fact, since such an approach would require very explicit instructions to the students, clear examples/models, teaching meta-cognitive skills relevant to the subject, etc., it would probably require me to re-think and critically evaluate how my knowledge of the subject can best be put to use in this particular context. It might even alert me to gaps in my own knowledge, and thus lead me to fill those gaps.

Frankly, I find it an absurd notion that a piece of high-tech gear (or software) could somehow make up for any knowledge that I as a teacher might be lacking. I may be in error here, of course. However, if anyone is aware of such a piece of technology, or plans to develop it, please feel free to contact me. It might come in handy if my schedule gets too full...

My primary point in asking this question is to get people thinking about what your goal is in teaching. Know what you are trying to do, have a sound framework, and use evidence-based assessment of your effectiveness – then think about whether technology enhances your approach. Technology is at best a competence amplifier. If you are incompetent, it can make things worse.

Technology for education is great if the lesson is teaching how a type of technology works.  However, while technology can help us see things that the naked eye might not notice or that we physically might not be able to experience, using the learning styles and imagination of the student will provide better answers and more insightful questions.

Depending on the learning styles of your student audience and their interests you determine what medium would capture most attention.  If your style of delivery is more teacher directed, you may opt for chalk and talk.  If you prefer experiential teaching and learning you may choose to reorganize your classroom to facilitate learning that is technology based.  I have found that my son prefers to do the bulk of his reading online and has amassed a lot of trivia and important knowledge that way.  Some children enjoy web quests, and other research driven computer assisted projects.  Readings such as  Genevolic Report (2007) Classroom Technology & Teacher-Student Interaction may provide further insight into this topic.

The technology is very important in the teaching and learning process. But depend on the subject or the program. For example , physical education or sports science, both program needs the technology during teaching and learning process. As we know in the physical education and sports science almost topic related to the movement. To make sure the students easy to understand, so we have to use technology in the classroom.

Absolutely. The technology here fits what you are teaching.

My counter-example is teaching programming. If I cannot show the class how I am thinking, what I do to develop my code, how I look for mistakes and so on, they do not really learn how to tackle the problem. I can do all that using “chalk and talk”. Doing so using slides, not so easy. Maybe I could do that using a visual programming tool, but that also has its limits – some of these things are so good that you don’t really have to understand the syntax rules of the language because they help you as you type.

Chalk is a “technology” too.

I've noticed something rather interesting in this thread. When people are arguing against the use of high-tech tools in teaching, they tend to mention slides or presentations if a specific technology is mentioned.

Just to be clear about this: I'm not out to attack anyone here, but I find it really interesting that, amongst all the potentially useful high-tech solutions out there, what gets rolled out as an argument against technology in teaching is the largely inferior bad old slide presentation software.

I mean, there are so many technologies out there: online learning platforms, systems that facilitate peer teaching and peer assessment, systems for collaborative writing, systems for doing interactive storyline projects... I could go on, but you see my point.

Here's a thought: do we as teachers sometimes react negatively to high-tech teaching solutions, because of bad experiences with slide presentation software? Which then leads us to dismiss other possibilities too quickly? And is this because presentation software has a kind of prototypical status, of is it simply because it is ubiquitous?

Thanks for an interesting thread, by the way. It has really made me think more critically about technology in the classroom.

The effectiveness of instruction is primarily limited by the content knowledge and teaching skill of the instructor. If an instructor is competent in the use of a given technology, it can enhance instructional effectiveness to some degree. However, imposing the use of a given technology on an instructor who is not familiar or comfortable with it can actually reduce the effectiveness of the instruction.

I saw this over and over last year in my "day job" as the computer technology teacher in an urban elementary school in the Bronx, NY. Although my main responsibility was teaching computer skills to students in grades 3-5, I was also asked by the administration several times to train technophobic classroom teachers in the use of interactive whiteboards. In most of these cases, the teachers I was assigned to support were struggling with basic classroom management and pedagogy in the first place; the administrators imagined that their instructional effectiveness would be somehow improved by the addition of gratuitous technology to their lessons. In general, the effect was quite the opposite...forcing teachers who were already struggling to incorporate new media with which they were both unfamiliar and uncomfortable only added to their cognitive load while teaching, as well as increasing their anxiety level. Not surprisingly, overall instructional effectiveness actually went down in most cases.

Admittedly, this is anecdotal evidence based on a handful of cases, but I think the premise merits serious research. Technology, well utilized, can certainly enhance instruction, but when it's imposed on instructors who are not yet competent in the hows and whys of its use, it can only harm instructional effectiveness.

Here is an interesting quote from John Sandars from a few years ago:

“The potential for e-learning can only be achieved if an approach is used that concentrates on the education and recognises that the role of technology is to enhance the learning, rather than trying to find educational uses for new technology.”

It is interesting to consider how much technology has advanced even since 2006.

Sandars J. What is e-learning? In Sandars J (Ed). E-learning for GP educators. Radcliffe Publishing, Oxon. 2006. p 1-5

To seek the attention of students to concnetrate and learn we require some AIDS such as ICT / Tech enabled support...But that is not an ALL in-itself...

The real teaching is the content transfer in a way that can be comprehended by the student and "apply it at appropriate time in life when Opportunity lands on them", else "successfully clear the exam with whatever being questioned".

Therefore the package of TECH support should be as that which is required for the content and not More than that is required (bells and whistles)...

If it is a blind presumption why not determine the "best" method by a properly controlled statistical trial? You say that in your one course not using slides was better (what measure? student satisfaction, exam performance) but this could just be differences between the two cohorts. You could randomize topics between the with slides and without slides methods can compare the performance on the different topics controlling for the individual students overall ability.

Gary, it is very hard to do controlled trials when classes differ every year. The class that inspired me to write up my experiences scored approximately 20% higher than usual on their classmark (tests and pracs) than usual, but I make no claim that this one intervention had that effect, because this was a class that did better than average in all their courses.

I draw on decades of experience so it is not just one anecdote. I am doing the “experiment” across a number of different classes, so it more a qualitative than quantitative view I am describing.

I have reviewed many education papers that do attempt to do the stats, and very few are actually convincing.

To do this properly, I would have to conduct the study across a number of classes to ensure that I am eliminating confounding variables (such as an unusually good or bad group, or another unrelated course that happens to be imposing an unusually high workload).

If I am getting good results, I will carry on that way rather than try to do a rigorous study (even if that prevents me getting a journal publication) because I do not want to return to a method that disadvantages my students for the sake of a publication.

I think you missed my point if you do it at the course level you will always struggle with cohort effects that is why I suggested  you randomise at the topic level. So for example if the course had 8 topics you could teach 4 using each method. For subsequent runnings you have different sets of 4 this enables you to separate cohort effects from the teaching method. I agree that many papers are unconvincing but that is because of poor design. I also agree that ethics are important as with medical trials so we should compare our improvement against the current gold standard.So an alternative is run the class twice and let the students decide which they come to with slides, without slides or both.

Should we use so much technology in teaching =

learners characteristics + learners needs + field of the topic/content + available learning time + infrastructure + teacher preparation.

consider the previous factors so you can decide the importance of using technology, the possibility of using it and how much ;)

Upon continued usage, too much of the tech support in teaching process,  can bereft the teacher by reducing their Oratory skills expertise and will make them to depend more on the tech support.

I haven't been involved in face-to-face classroom teaching for a while. However, it seems to me that classroom practitioners should be careful not to over-emphasize the content-transmission aspect of the teaching-learning transaction when considering introducing ICTs into their classroom practice. There is need to pay greater attention to using the technologies from a learner-centred perspective, designing experiences that allow the learners to play a more active role in their learning, whether individually or in groups, even as they interact with technology-based materials.

Following on my earlier post, I am attaching an article which is extremely dated (1995) but which I hope you may find useful. I found the distinction that the authors make between idea and product technologies interesting.

Actually, this is something that I am very interested in.. I am studying research in the area of handwriting and how it helps reading. Research is showing that keyboarding and tracing etc... do not effect reading, but actual handwriting recruits the reading circuit of the brain, indicating a link between handwriting and reading. The problem remains that so many children are not fluent in handwriting. When not fluent, the process of handwriting often has to utilize the much needed and limited available attention to its own process. This is only one area, but it is a significant area and I think that more and more research will have similar results. 

Student-teacher contact hour is the key...when a teacher spends more time with a student, then teacher becomes a great teacher and if the student is willing to spend more time with a teacher, then the student is an awesome student...I am hinting at individual to individual training...if technology helps to stand in the shoulder of giants to make advancement, yes we get the basics in place using technology...I am not hinting at mass education here...

In some circumstances, technology might increase contact between student and teacher - facilitate communication where the student has some form of disability, or make communication at a distance possible, for example. As many contributions have implied already, it is the use of technology for specific pedagogical purposes that is important, not its use for its own sake. Unfortunately,teachers are often encouraged to use technology for its own sake, or themselves use it uncritically because it is new and therefore 'better'.

to teach it is priliminary question of skills in the teached field. If we own the scientific and pedagogic needed supports thereafter we can plan how and at which period the technology is helpfull

I notice that some colleagues are placing a lot of emphasis on teacher-student contact. In the traditional view of teaching and learning, that is a given. So shouldn't we be thinking more about the quality of the contact? And probably, that focus may also lead us to consider how we can add value to the learning experience of the student when there is NO contact. Because after all, our goal should be to build the student's capacity to manage their own learning. It is in this context that our perspective on the use of the various technologies can be particularly beneficial to learning. Just a thought.

As a professor, I have seen how my students in master's programs got bored despite the flashy, automated, hi-end and multi-media presentations.  Classroom dynamics is indeed different especially when a teacher throw some surprise questions.  One can only imagine that the deepness of discussions is reinvigorated, and the joy of knowing that your students became enlightened is  incomparable.

There's one new great tool that I'm using recently to build my research figures and presentations, it's very easy to use and it has a gorgeous cientific illustrations database, you should give it a try:

http://mindthegraph.com/

Best regards, Juliana.

Juliana, your answer does not really answer the question. Or am I missing something? Could you explain how it does?

Having read your SACLA paper, I am of the view that the 'summary' is in your abstract.

---------------

Technology is touted as a solution to problems in education. But is it?

Technology is not necessarily bad,

but making it the starting point risks locking out non-technological options.

----------------

Although I am focusing more on the e-assessment side of SoTLA, what I have done recently is to do on-the-spot "cold-switching". I have on occasions having to 1) use prepared side, 2) 'prepare' slides in the class (i.e. based on classroom engagement/interaction, populates slides on-the-fly in the class), 3) on-the-spot write/conceptualise/design on paper whilst using overhead projector, and 4) simulation/visualisation.

By so doing (1, 2, 3 and 4), a multi-modal environment has been created. The question remain, is it the technology that matters or the use of the technology. In my case, I subscribe to cognitive-constructivist active learning and connectivism. The multimodal approach afford me the flexibility I need. However, the students reception per learning viewpoint have been varied and diverse. Some loved it whilst some resent.

The balancing act continues! ... technology or technology alone is not sufficient ...

Isn't the problem in the mis-match between the learning and the assessment (Newhouse, 2013, p. 18)? Shouldn't technology just be part of the tools-of-trade rather than the tool-of-trade (Paiva, Morais, Costa, and Pinheiro, 2015).

Newhouse, C. P. (2011). Using IT to assess IT: Towards greater authenticity in summative performance assessment. Computers & Education, 56(2), 388–402. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.023

Clarke-Midura, J., & Dede, C. (2010). Assessment, Technology, and Change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 309–328. http://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782553

Newhouse, C. P. (2013). Using digital technologies to improve the authenticity of performance assessment for high-stakes purposes. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 17–33. http://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.851031

Paiva, J., Morais, C., Costa, L., & Pinheiro, A. (2015). The shift from “e-learning” to “learning”: Invisible technology and the dropping of the “e.” British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 226–238. http://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12242

Others:

Newhouse, C. P. (2013). Using digital technologies to improve the authenticity of performance assessment for high-stakes purposes. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 17–33. http://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.851031

Adesemowo, A. K., Johannes, H., Goldstone, S., & Terblanche, K. (2016: In Press). The experience of introducing secure e-assessment in a South African university first-year foundational ICT networking course. Africa Education Review, In Press. http://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2016.1186922

Using technology is not a target in its own. The decision of using technology or not depends on the nature of learning topics, learners' needs and teachers' abilities and their readiness to use technology inside or outside classrooms. Without considering such factors, you may find front teaching with the blackboard is much effective in comparison to using technology just for making a show. 

Technology should be a tool, not a goal. I feel that the focus of the teaching/learning process is being often misplaced.

Recently, I had the opportunity to attend a statewide education technology conference,     LACUE: Louisiana Association of Computer Using Educators (http://www.lacue.org/.) During this conference, I was able to learn about how our future college students are being educated with the pedagogy that is highly integrated with technology. I believe as educators in higher education we are a little slow to adopt changes in teaching and except the changes in how students learn. Even though technology may not be your preferred teaching method, just know that durning this conference I learned that teachers in K-12 education have already integrates 3-D printing into math and science content. Therefore, when these studtens arrive on our college campuses, they are tech ready and their expectations are that technology will also be an intricate part of the curriculum as well.  

I have also also researched the effect of technology on student achievement and it is minimal, but students engagement improves and the roles of the teacher changes to a more facilitative role.

https://www.lacue.org

Technology is already part and parcel of our daily life both inside and outside classroom. Consequently, using technology has positive effect on students' performance especially where there is dwarf shortage of teaching/learning materials. I personally tested using technology and it greatly promoted my students' engagement. Finally, it all depends on type of technology you termed 'technology'

Technology is only an assistive tool but it can't reach a teaching goal or can't take teacher's teaching role completely, unless focuses on teacher's explicit instruction with clear explaination and operation, even integrates into technology assistive, it might make teaching smoothly and productive.

The University of Arizona has licensed several technologies that facilitate knowledge and learning, make the most of the interactions between teachers and students.

http://oia.arizona.edu/content/6

Should we use so much technology in teaching?

Agreed with others that "technology" is an enabler to help achieve a goal i.e. a means to an end & not an end in itself.  Think the bottom line to adopt any technology for teaching is to facilitate the environments /  experience to maximize students' learning & teachers' teaching e.g. from multimedia projector to virtual reality etc.  There are other factors contributing to great learning & teaching beside technology e.g. teachers's competency & experience, content nature of a particular subject, how prepared the students before coming for class, their appetite to learn etc.  Ill-equipped teaching environment might form barrier to learning & teaching.  Too high tech teaching environment can be cost prohibitive.  Sometimes, we just need to be adaptive i.e. to utilize whatever technological equipment available for our disposal.  

It is a blind presumption that more technology is better – yet in a recent course, I found I could present much better by abandoning slides and working through examples on the board.

Sometimes impromptu whiteboarding & certain attributes of a presenter can make great presentation & explanation capturing the attention of all audience.  However, also encountered some presenters prefer to "whiteboarding" on the spot using projected PowerPoint, Visio, Paintbrush etc.  Yet other presenters like to deliver their presentations using whiteboarding software programs to pre-packaged their presentation slides.  Different people might use different means that they see fit to maximize the learning / understanding of their audience - just like the saying "It doesn't matter whether a cat is white or black, as long as it catches mice".