Reeves Article

Liberation and equity is what all should strive for no matter what background, orientation, experience we sprout from. Cultural sensitivity is not just a matter of identifying and eliminating cultural bias. The culturally sensitive instructional designer and evaluator must be proactive in seeking opportunities to increase the cultural relevance of instructional materials and to build upon cultural diversity and pluralism. The ultimate goal should not be designing culturally neutral instructional materials, but creating learning environments that are enriched by the unique values that are inherent in different cultures (Reeves, 1997). While the evaluation enterprise continues to expand, it remains a controversial field, replete with paradigm wars, competing (if not conflicting) models, and serious ethical dilemmas (Alkin & Ellett, 1990; Scriven, 1993; Shadish, et al. 1991). According to Reeves (1997), cultural diversity has been given little attention due to the fact that most of the evaluation authority has been white males steeped in western philosophy, psychology and research methodology and himself been no exception.

There is nothing wrong in shaping one’s evaluation perspective based on experience but to be an accomplished evaluator, individuals have to address multicultural diversity. According to Reeves (1997), the rationale for including cultural diversity as a critical factor in evaluating instructional programs and products goes to the heart of the challenge of making evaluation a legitimate, ethical process. He also stated that attention to issues involved in cultural and ethnic diversity are not “nice to have” criteria, but essential elements in the evaluation of education and training. Yes, it will be wrong for me to willingly give my prescribed medication to a friend simply because he expresses similar symptoms. A well learned and accomplished American professor with little or no knowledge of the Yorubas or Ibos native in Nigeria will not be the best choice in designing their learning programs and evaluation materials, despite his accomplishments with different age groups and audience in United States. In employing this professor however, it will be beneficial to involve other professionals in the field who are of the tribes and culture.

Delegating diversity and other cultural issues either to the “future issues” category or labeling them as site-specific traits is unacceptable. Insensitivity to some religious believes, race and gender may prove fatal and a wrong ethic. It is also of import for instructional designers not to think they can be an island in a quest to detect cultural insensitivities. While there may be many checklists or rating scales to help in evaluating instructional products, collaboration of representatives of each target culture proves very valuable in identifying less obvious sources of cultural bias. Much is expected from whom much is given. Evaluators and developers have the responsibility to reveal the “hidden” messages of instructional programs and products through rigorous formative evaluation strategies such as observations, interviews, and reviews involving members of the relevant minorities or prospective international users (Reeves, 1997). Let all instructional design and evaluation communities strive to contribute a quota in establishing evaluation as a force of liberation and equity.

References:
Reeves, T. (1997, March-April). An evaluator looks at cultural diversity. Educational Technology, pp 27-30.
Poole, J. A. (2005). Journey toward multiculturalism. English Journal, (94)3, 67-70.

McLuhan Tetrad Wiki Task

Our body speaks many different languages depending on the circumstance and issue at hand. That said, I would conclude that technology has proven to be a great tool in helping humans to diffuse tensions that may be wrongly communicated by body language. Technology has proven very effective as a communication tool with someone that does not totally agree with your position on some matters, doing so with minimal physical contact. Instant messaging, e-mail or a phone conversation proved very useful in times like this. It is like dinning with the devil, you will require a spoon with a long stem. When opinions differ or taking a different stand on sensitive matter the least physical contact provides for least confrontation.

Yes technology has made human social interactions obsolete in many instances, but there is a positive aspect of that which can be easily overlooked. Wives are complaining about less time spent with their spouse while watching him spends a great deal of time playing video games and watching sports on television. There seem to be less and less quality time spent with family in enjoying wholesome meals and been role model for the kids. Technology has in many cases taken the adolescents of the streets reducing external bad influences, dealing drugs, street fighting and some cases created safer environments. Kids can invite friends over to enjoy playing games and engage in some other recreational activities. Therefore the human interactions are not completely removed but enhanced since you do not necessarily come in contact with strangers. We are able to control what our kids are exposed to as opposed to been outside the family settings.

Technology has allowed humans to travel worldwide by land and sea in less time, feeling refreshed and in a relaxed, safer and of course made traveling something to look forward to. According to McLuhan, "Any technology tends to create a new human environment... Technological environments are not merely passive containers of people but are active processes that reshape people and other technologies alike." (1962). He was also quoted as saying “food for the mind is like food for the body: the inputs are never the same as the outputs.” We may conclude that technology has allowed us to feed our minds with things we see and come in contact with in our travels and even at home. What we make out of these environments and technology is completely controllable.

Yes technology changes and touches our lives in many ways, individuals will have to determine for themselves how much is too much using the principle of “too much of anything is not good.” McLuhan rightly stated that “We become what we behold. We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us.”
What McLuhan writes about the railroad applies with equal validity to the media of print, television, computers and now the Internet. "The medium is the message" because it is the "medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action."

References:
www.marshallmcluhan.com/main.html
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/mcluhan.html

Clark/Kozman Articles

Clark (1983) took a position that media do not influence learning under any conditions. Clark raised a question about exploring the conditions under which media will influence learning. It posits the need to consider the capabilities of media, and the methods that employ them as they interact with the cognitive and social processes by which knowledge is constructed. The Clark/Kozma media effects debate will continue to have significance as a foundational issue in which novice practitioners of instructional design and curriculum development will need to become conversant. Ross (1994) sums up the situation:
Assigning too much influence to media can lead to the design/ development of sloppy, ineffective instructional materials that are accepted by technologists and users simply because they utilize CBI, interactive video, or other 'high-status' delivery media. Assigning too little influence to media, on the other hand, may discourage reflective thinking by designers about which media can best convey the instructional strategies needed to achieve instructional objectives (p. 6).
Thus, media effects discussions point out the complexities and deep interrelationships among the various parts of instruction and human cognition. In short, the media vs. the message debate and it's transformation into appropriate interactivity choices to establish deeper cognitive relevance, helps to keep educational technologists focused on learning. Learning is an active, constructive, and social process by which the learner strategically manages available cognitive, physical, and social resources to create new knowledge by interacting with information already stored in memory (Shuell, 1988). From this perspective, knowledge and learning are neither solely a property of the individual or of the environment. Rather, they are the reciprocal interaction between the learner’s cognitive resources and aspects of the external environment (Greeno, 1988; Pea, 1993; Perkins, 1993; Salomon, 1993) and this interaction is strongly influenced by the extent to which internal and external resources fit together (Snow, 1992)
The study of science can be very abstract in nature leading to more questions been asked at the end of learning than was answered. No doubt the ThinkerTools project (White 1993) used in the representation of objects in motion was salient to novice students whose prior knowledge is either insufficient to create mental models of Newtonian motion or inaccurate such that the trajectories that they supply are contrary to scientific principles (ETR&D, Vol. 42, No. 2). It goes to say that to some extent media can be very useful in influencing learning. I am convinced beyond reasonable doubt that media and learning have mutual benefits to each other. However, the use of media in disseminating information should be left to individuals to decide. I remember Linda a learning specialist who is no doubt very good at what she does but the use of computers, television and varying technology proved handicap to her. Using any of these media in training kids detracts from the good she brings to the audience whereas the information has always proved very valuable. Linda clearly agreed that she is not compatible with technology and would rather flip through the television channels by walking up to the TV and manually change it rather than use the remote control. Learning, regardless of the individual can be influenced if individuals can have a set reward in sight if the learning is accomplished. Telling myself that I will go to movie and eat out if I successfully learn what is required for my test or homework. These rewards do not necessarily have to be anything big, but having such motivation would no doubt influence many to learn with reward in mind. Considering that a lot of money may be involved to implement media worthwhile, it will be wrong to suggest that learning may never take place without it or to imply media as a must for learning to occur.

References:
Clark, R. E. (1994a). Media and method. The media influence debate: Read the fine print, but don't lose sight of the big picture. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 42(2), 7-10.

Clark, R. E. (1994b). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 42(2), 21-29.

Kozma, R. B. (1994a). A reply: Media and methods. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 42(2), 11-14.

ETR&D, Vol. 42, No. 2, 1994, pp. 21-29 ISSN 1042-1629

History of Technology’s use in Education

Technology in education was originally considered to be merely audiovisuals or limited to physical means other than the teacher, chalkboard, and textbook via which instruction is presented to learners. After the interest in instructional television faded, the next technological innovation to catch the attention of a large number of educators was the computer. Although wide-spread interest in the computer as an instructional tool did not occur until the 1980s, computers were first used in education and training at a much earlier date. Reflection on the date of initial usage of computer and the prevalence of computers today, shows an epidemic of technology. Not only are there several computers ranging from basic micro computers, but there are several depending on need and budget. The enthusiasm surrounding this tool was identified as a lead to increasing interest in its use for instructional purposes.
It is shocking to know that many educators were attracted to microcomputers because they were relatively inexpensive. I remember paying almost $2000 for my first computer in 1997. That computer was equipped with only 64MB of RAM, 10GB hard drive, no CD writeable drive. It however came loaded with all useful application software such as Microsoft office and a host others with no extra cost. Today you can purchase a much improved computer for less than that however you will have to pay for most third party software. It was stated that distance education via the Internet has seen as low-cost method of providing instruction to students who, because of variety of factors, might not otherwise have been able to receive it. I however disagree with this notion based on personal experience. There are a number of attached fees surcharged to distance learning I can argue that it is sometime detrimental to quality learning depending on the professor and the students commitment and effective mean of communication. There were instances when student need to get hold of the instructor for clarification and the instructor proved elusive until it was too late.
Furthermore, Most of the media research studies conducted over the years have compared how much students have learned after receiving a lesson presented via a particular medium, such as film, radio, television, or the computer, versus how much students have learned from live instruction on the same topic. Studies of this type, often called media comparison studies, have usually revealed that students learned equally well regardless of the means of presentation (Clark, 1983, 1994; Schramm, 1977). In my opinion, these forms of instructions are inseparable from each other. The most effective instructions have proven to be a combination since different people learn things in many different ways.





References:
Robert A Reiser, Educational Technology, Research and Development. Washington: 2001. Vol. 49, Iss. 1; pg. 53, 12 pgs