Balancing Educational Technology and Pedagogy: The Key to Effective Learning

Introduction

As educational technology continues to proliferate and pervade the educational landscape (Graham, 2020), a serious discussion is needed about the role and balance of technology in stride with pedagogy (this article will define the term pedagogy to also include the theory of adult learning, or andragogy).? Most technology available in the market space today focuses on content development, content management, student engagement, and engagement data.? Many of these tools do a wonderful job for what they are intended to do. However, educators know that there is an entire process that needs to happen BEFORE ever developing content: design. Design acknowledges pedagogy.? It is the blueprint of learning. Design considers the theory of cognition. Design uses best practice heuristics. It is the recipe that identifies the ingredients and defines how to put them together for the best possible learning outcome; the balance of art and science (Koehler & Mishra, 2008). This article explores the critically important relationship between pedagogy and educational technology.??

The Rise of Educational Technology

Educational technology has brought incredible advancements to many aspects of education, from individual education plans to adaptive learning, from video game theory to just-in-time learning (Bates & Sangrà, 2011).? But that same technology has also shifted the focus from the theory of teaching and learning to the practice of teaching and learning; the latter is no doubt important, but has it devalued the role of pedagogy in the educational landscape, particularly higher education??

The Pitfall: Technology Without Pedagogy

Mishra and Koehler (2006) state that technology can bring enumerable benefits to education, but it becomes an issue when the technology overshadows the principles of pedagogy.? Without the application of good learning design, unintended negative consequences can result:

1. Superficial Engagement: Interactivity in education is all the rage, but if the wrong heuristics are used or pedagogy does not underpin the interactivity, the engagement may only be a time filler and provide minimal learning value (Deterding et al., 2011). In short, without a solid pedagogical foundation, flashy graphics and gamification can actually devalue the learning opportunity.
2. Loss of Critical Thinking: A misuse of technology in education may actually discourage critical thinking (Hodges et al., 2020). When learners are passively led through a learning experience by technology, or engage in superficial learning interactions, the use of metacognitive and critical thinking/decision making skills can be diminished. Good pedagogy ensures appropriate learning structure regardless of the technology or tool used.??
3. Cookie-Cutter Approach: Bower (2016) suggests that educational technology solutions often take a one-size-fits-all approach, and with recent efforts to scale commercial tools within the Ed Tech space, it is not hard to find examples of this. Without pedagogical considerations, the effort to scale through technology applications may not support learner preferences and needs, potentially leaving some students behind. Good teaching and learning meets the learner where they are and supports their learning preferences, and technology should support and extend that goal.
4. Data-Driven Overload: While data analytics can inform instruction, an overemphasis on metrics can overshadow the nuances of effective teaching and learning (Siemens & Gasevic, 2012). Pedagogy considers the whole learner, not just the data points.
5. Profit Over Learning: In some cases, educational technology is driven by profit motives rather than educational outcomes (Selwyn, 2013). Institutions may prioritize flashy technology to attract institutions and students, potentially sacrificing the quality of education.

The Way Forward: Balancing Technology and Pedagogy

To ensure that educational technology enhances education, it must be designed with pedagogy as a foundation to support and extend teaching and learning principles:

1. Start with Pedagogy: Pedagogy should drive technology adoption, not the other way around. Begin by identifying what your learners need to accomplish and ensure that the technology aligns with and supports those objectives/outcomes (Laurillard, 2008).
2. Human-Centered Design: Keep the focus on the learner (Bonk & Graham, 2006). Technology should encourage active participation, drive critical thinking, and provide problem-solving opportunities; technology used should serve to support and extend those goals along the learning path.
3. Professional Development: Instructors and educators must have the skills and knowledge to effectively integrate technology into their teaching practices (Koh, 2017). Continuous professional development ensures that teachers have a range of technology options, know how various technology offerings support and extend good pedagogy and support the proper selection and use of technology in the classroom.
4. Personalization: Use technology to personalize learning experiences (Dede, 2010). Adaptive learning platforms, for example, can help tailor content to individual student needs, enhancing the effectiveness of pedagogy.
5. Critical Evaluation: Continuously evaluate the impact of educational technology on learning outcomes (Picciano, 2017). If it's not improving pedagogical practices or student engagement, it may not be worth the investment.

Conclusion

Educational technology has the potential to revolutionize education if used effectively (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008). However, it should never come before pedagogy considerations or in lieu of good heuristic selection—the art of quality teaching and learning. How technology is viewed and considered in the context of teaching and learning is critical: educators and institutions must prioritize sound pedagogical practices and then select/use technology as a tool to support and extend the teaching and learning experience. Only when we strike a balance between technology and pedagogy can we create meaningful, enriching, and truly effective learning experiences for all students. Remember, it's not about the gadgets; it's about how we use them to nurture the minds of tomorrow.

References

???? Bates, A. W., & Sangrà, A. (2011). Managing technology in higher education: Strategies for transforming teaching and learning. John Wiley & Sons.

???? Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. Pfeiffer Publishing.

???? Bower, M. (2016). A pedagogy of play: Integrating computer games into the classroom. Educational Media International, 53(1), 17-33.

???? Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn, 51-76.

???? Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011, September). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining" gamification". In Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments (pp. 9-15).

???? Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons.

???? Graham, C. R. (2020). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 729-739). Springer.

???? Hodges, C. B., Moore, S., Lockee, B. B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27.

???? Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) for Educators (pp. 3-29). Routledge.

???? Koh, J. H. L. (2017). Blended learning and teacher professional development: Towards an integrated online-offline approach. Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 3063-3076.

???? Laurillard, D. (2008). The teacher as action researcher: Using technology to capture pedagogic form. Studies in Higher Education, 33(2), 139-154.

???? Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

???? Picciano, A. G. (2017). Blended learning: Research perspectives (Vol. 2). Routledge.

???? Selwyn, N. (2013). Distrusting educational technology: Critical questions for changing times. Routledge.

???? Siemens, G., & Gasevic, D. (2012). Guest editorial–learning and knowledge analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 1-2.