Publisher： Common Ground Publishing
E-ISSN： 2327-2686|20|4|19-26
ISSN： 2327-0144
Source： The International Journal of Technologies in Learning, Vol.20, Iss.4, 2014-01, pp. : 19-26
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
Research shows that in the 21st century, technology use has become an integral part of education. The questions that arise from a STS (Science, Technology, amp; Society Studies) perspective are, “how and in what ways do society and culture influence technology and technology design in education?,” “how and in what ways does technology shape education?,” and “Can the metaphor-‘one size fits all’ be applicable in education in the diverse social and culture milieu?” To answer these questions, the SCOT (Social Construction of Technology) approach, developed by Wiebe E. Bijker, will give a unique perspective. Thus, the paper from a theoretical lens will be looking at the applicability of the SCOT approach with a focus on the teachers as the ‘relevant social groups’ when looking at education technology development. Central to the SCOT approach is the notion of ‘relevant social groups’ who interpret technology from the vantage point of their interests and culture, which in other words, is ‘interpretive flexibility’ until the design process incorporates the interpretations, and thus achieves a closure of interpretations and effects the development and diffusion of technology in education. The paper examines how and in what ways teachers are one of the ‘relevant social groups’ within the society influence designing, developing, and implementing educational technology. The paper argues that “human actions drive technology rather than technology driving human actions” (n.d.). We will identify some of the other stakeholders in this multi modal environment termed as the ‘other’ groups, but the main focus will be on teachers’ for this paper. The ‘others’ could be peers, learners, organizations, institutions, national and international policy makers, computer scientists, designers, developers, and social scientists in shaping technology in education.
Related content
Technology and Higher Education
The International Journal of Learning: Annual Review, Vol. 18, Iss. 3, 2012-01 ,pp. :
Access to resources
Recommend
Technology Integration in Education
The International Journal of Learning: Annual Review, Vol. 12, Iss. 6, 2006-01 ,pp. :
Alberta Education Technology Policy Analysis
The International Journal of Learning: Annual Review, Vol. 15, Iss. 7, 2008-01 ,pp. :
Technology-based Change in Thai Education
The International Journal of Technologies in Learning, Vol. 22, Iss. 4, 2015-01 ,pp. :