Written By: Jezreel Madsa
“It identifies and analyzes the concepts, root ideas, and strands of thought that have existed in the definitions of educational technology since the first official definition was published in 1963. It explores the conceptual themes in the original definition, the themes that survived, and new themes that emerged in subsequent definitions published in 1972, 1977, and 1994.”
The three definitions, according to Alan Januszewski, serve as the “benchmarks” for comparing and analyzing the changing meaning of educational technology. Indeed History is very important insofar as it helps us to know why concepts changed and why they are changed at the present. Furthermore, the study of it can even help maintain traditions and help individuals stick to their roots, especially if their roots are esteemed enough. The historian of Educational Technology bolsters my point when he said,
“Concepts
are not spontaneously created or generated but are determined by prior thought.” -- Alan Januszewski
History
is the window that serves as the humanity’s vantage point for their inquiry of
the past. Every concept widely accepted today did not just pop their existence
up out of nowhere. They rather develop and blossom as time moves along the
corridors of the future. Like buds that gradually blooms into a flower over a
period of time; the same thing is true with any concept.
The
concept of Educational Technology has a nebulous vague historical pedigree, albeit
few scholarly books are published that treats with deliberate scrutiny the
historical dimension of Educational Technology. Some conjectured that it
started off during the Pre-Socratic Age, others went on to postulate a pretty
much earlier dating, earlier than Pre-Socratic – which to me is quite problematic
and dubious, since we hardly have enough manuscripts that provide warrant for
such dating.
However,
there is a reliable agency in the field of Educational Technology which
endeavors to identify and analyze the concepts without divorcing them from its
historical linkage—the Association for Educational and Communication Technology
(AECT) provides this definition:
“It identifies and analyzes the concepts, root ideas, and strands of thought that have existed in the definitions of educational technology since the first official definition was published in 1963. It explores the conceptual themes in the original definition, the themes that survived, and new themes that emerged in subsequent definitions published in 1972, 1977, and 1994.”
The three definitions, according to Alan Januszewski, serve as the “benchmarks” for comparing and analyzing the changing meaning of educational technology. Indeed History is very important insofar as it helps us to know why concepts changed and why they are changed at the present. Furthermore, the study of it can even help maintain traditions and help individuals stick to their roots, especially if their roots are esteemed enough. The historian of Educational Technology bolsters my point when he said,
“Historical investigations bring this hidden
motivation to light. Historians of educational technology contribute to the
self-awareness of the field. They do this by helping to make the lost and
hidden purposes conscious ones. This will, in turn, open these purposes and
patterns to a critical appraisal. And that may promote discussion, including
discussion about the moral and ethical responsibilities of the profession.”
TO BE CONTINUED
TO BE CONTINUED
Comments
Post a Comment