If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard this expression, I couldhave retired long ago. This hyperbole is especially true for learning technology,as the history of our field is littered with unfulfilled expectations oftechnology miracles (who can ever forget those awesome pizza-sized videodiscs?).Surely, this New Year will likely bring many more promises of new learning-technologywonderfulness. How many times will we be told that the next big thing willchange everything? How many times willwe be disappointed?
The fact is, technology may make learning more efficient, but itdoesn’t necessarily make it more effective. You cannot fix bad training withtechnology alone, but using technology with bad training can make it worse. Thereare much more important factors, including at times—dare I speak heresy—greatteachers.
I wanted to discuss this further, but I realized, after 69 columns(whew!), I finally don’t have the words. Fortunately, Derek Muller does. Watchhow Derek balances the promise—and the fallacy—of relying solely on technology to improve learning.
The video is 7:22 long, but worth the time. Take a look and come backto me when you’re done. I’ll wait.
Now, after viewing the video, you might dismiss it as focusing too muchon “education,” and not enough on “training” or “adult learning.” But this misses the point. What Muller issaying, and what researchers have found for decades, is that technology aloneis not enough. All else being equal, studies as to whether one technology isbetter than another generally show no significant differences.
This is why it is often so difficult to show that any particulartechnology teaches better than another, or that technology-based trainingteaches better than a well-designed instructor-led experience. It is also why mosteLearning business cases are made on the equally important benefits of efficiency, rather than effectiveness,e.g., cost per user, reach, scalability, timeliness. When we do use learningtechnology in well-designed and innovative ways that cannot be duplicated inthe classroom, e.g., simulations, gaming, distance collaboration, and otherinstructionally immersive techniques, we can then begin to realize some effectivenessadvantages of the technology. Unfortunately, we don’t see this often enough atall.
It is how we use technology to enhance learning, not the technology itself,which counts. What matters much more are learning design, learner preparation,engagement and support, learning facilitation, and yes, in classroom settings,how good the teacher is. This is all about instructional design, pedagogy,learning psychology, effective communications, and organizational culture. Itis also about practice and feedback in applying learning to tasks—in work andin life.
Sothe next time someone—a colleague or a vendor—comes to you with new technologyand promises you the moon, remember that technology is not a learning strategy.It is an enabler. The question we should all be asking is, “What do we want toenable and how are we going to do it?”
