This presentation forms the basis of a tutorial discussion about two core readings.

1. Week 1 Academic
Dialogue
Trudy Sweeney
EDUC 9701 S2

2. Introduction
This presentation draws on the following two references:
 Oliver, M. (2011).Technological determinism in educational
technology research: Some alternative ways of thinking
about the relationship between learning and technology.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(5), 373-384.
 Ng’ambi, D. (2013). Effective and ineffective uses of emerging
technologies:Towards a transformative pedagogical model.
British Journal of EducationalTechnology, 44(4), 652-661.
doi:10.1111/bjet.1205

3. Technological determinism
& educational technology research
 Oliver (2011) argues that “research on the
educational uses of technology frequently over
emphasizes the influence of the technology”
(p. 373).
 “The use of technology should not be
understood to operate on a causal model: it
does not have straight forward ‘impact’ in
some some mechanical way on the practices
that it encounters” (p. 381)

4. Technological determinism
& educational technology research
 “A growing body of work argues for the need for the development of
a critical perspective on educational technology use, one that looks
beyond the immediate context of learning gains and patterns of
interaction to question the ways in which technology has been
taken up in the first place” (p. 373).
 There is a need to focus on the social, political, economic, cultural
and historical context within which educational technology is used
(and not used).The purpose is not to reveal some claims about e-
learning as being false or untruthful, but “call into question ways
of talking about and justifying e-learning that obscure a more
complicated reality (Freisen 2009, p. 181)” Cited in (Oliver, 2011, p.
374).

5. Technological determinism
 “If technology determines particular kinds of social effect,
even if a ‘soft’ or technicist form, this raises important
questions of power and morality. Such questions are not
often asked of technology and learning yet, … the very idea
of agency is called into question, particularly when
technology is assumed to have the power to determine
choices” (p. 375).
 For example, technology has been bought on a massive scale
often based on the assumption that it will cause
improvements in learning outcomes. However, teachers can
struggle to integrate these into their practice and marginalise
its use so that effects are minimised (p.376).

6. ActivityTheory:
One position to consider the relationship between
technology and action.
AT builds on the work ofVygotsky and attempts to understand learning in terms
of people’s intentional actions within social settings.At it’s core is the
proposition that actions are mediated – the unit of analysis is of a subject (a
person) working towards an object (objective) using a tool.

7. Summary: It is not about the technology!
 Avoid simplistic claims about the impact, effect
and technical causation of technology and
concentrate instead on descriptions of practice,
accounts of purposeful action and negotiated
meanings (p. 382).

8. Discussion and Summary of the
article:

9. “This paper argues that pedagogically sound
uses of ETs [emerging technologies] leverage
the broader context of existing practices
(cultural-historical context) to design
learning activities that transform both the
teaching and learning practices” (p. 652).

10. Distributed intelligence:
- Learner and technology interaction resulting in
knowledge construction.
- A widening of learners’ access to multiple
perspectives using ETs.
For example students sharing PowerPoint
presentations or blog posts with peer comments;
Twitter posts using a course hashtag; notes to co-
created teaching resources.

11. Distributed expertise:
- Access to expert knowledge
- Sharing knowledge/ideas to as a community of
practice.
- Distributed expertise can be seen as a sub-category of
distributed intelligence which relates more directly to
working practices. The collaborative and discursive
construction of tasks, solutions, visions, breakdowns
and innovations within and across systems.
- Students accessed distributed expertise through listening
to experts’ podcasts and used a Ning to engage with
expert podcasters (p. 659).

12. 1. Set an
educational
goal
2. Facilitate
students to
create something
using ETs
3. Students
present and
record their
creation
4. Students
reflect on the last
2 processes
5. How might
I use ETs next
time?
• Metacognition
• Inquiry based learning
• Student – centred learning
• Collaboration
• Bloom’s Taxonomy (knowledge 
evaluation process)

13. ETs have the potential to transform teaching
and learning by fostering collaborative
knowledge production by leveraging
distributive intelligence and distributive
expertise.

14. Conclusion
 “Technology should not be understood to operate on a causal
model; it does not have a straight forward ‘impact’ in some
simple, mechanical way on the practices it encounters”
(Oliver, 2011, p. 381).
 It is important adopt a critical view of the use of ICT for
teaching and learning that involves questioning the very idea
of agency, particularly when technology is assumed to have
the power to determine choices.

15. Discussion Questions
 Question 1: Share one example of how is ICT has
recently been used in your classroom and why?
 Question 2: Why are some emerging technologies
avoided by educators even though they have the
potential to improve students’ learning?
 Question 3: How could you leverage Ng’ambi’s notion
of distributed intelligence and/or distributed expertise
to use ICT in transformative ways?
 Question 4: What are the major implications for
Ng’ambi’s five-phase pedagogical guidelines?