Paradox Lost

[Click on title for link]

The Paradox of Technology: What’s Gained and Lost? is a paper written a decade ago C. A. Bowers, an American educator. It is still relevant and thought-provoking. Written during the late 90s, Bowers argued that Western society was becoming dependent on communication technologies that it understood in terms of application, but was unable to fully appreciate the connections between the culturally diverse forms of knowledge that it was losing through the introduction of such ubiquitous technologies.

Bowers makes a number of thought-provoking observations:

1. Computers amplify explicit, context-free forms of knowledge, while their programmers usually overlook implicit and culturally specific analog experiences and ways of knowing.
2. Computers amplify a conduit view of language, while hiding the metaphorically layered nature of language, as well as masking how language on the screen reproduces a specific form of cultural intelligence.
3. Computers amplify a Western view of the individual as autonomous in matters of rational judgment and moral decision making.
4. Computers reinforce a Western way of experiencing time, which involves a linear sense of movement into the future and away from the past. What separates this way of experiencing time from other cultural patterns of temporality is that the autonomous individual decides whether anything from the past has relevance.

Bowers continues. . .

Yet only if we understand these amplification and reduction characteristics will we see the connections between computers and the forms of knowledge that lead to a consumer, technologically oriented culture.

Bowers goes on to suggest some of the technology issues that need to be included in curriculum reform discussion:
• The cultural mediating characteristics of computers that threaten cultural diversity and ecological sustainability.
• Technologies developed in traditional, more ecologically centered cultures versus the modern, Western approach to technology.
• The characteristics of technologies based on the principles of ecological design.
• The relationship between different forms of technology and the commodification of knowledge—and how the expansion of market forces undermine the viability of communities and natural systems.
• The impact of different forms of technology on traditions that contribute to the self-sufficiency of community life.
• The influence of technologies on patterns of thinking, values, and the metaphorical language that influences how relationships are understood.
• The social justice issues that are connected to different forms of technology.

. . .Bowers concludes.

In effect, this list covers the basic knowledge needed for democratizing decisions about technological innovation and globalization. If education were to include a systematic study of these issues, we would see a far more intelligent discussion of technology and, hopefully, fewer decisions based on the myth that equates technological innovation with progress.

Reference:
Bowers, C. A. (1998). The Paradox of Technology: What's Gained and Lost? Thought & Action, 14 (1) pp. 49-57

See also: Is technology neutral?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Education versus “learnification” what’s at stake?

Will the effects of pandemic pedagogy accelerate learnification?  Gert Biesta ,  Dutch-born education philosopher  who is associated with the reclaiming teaching movement,  highlights that the discourse of “education” has become disconnected from “learning.” This shift began during the 1980s, accelerated as a consequence of the proliferation of educational technology over the past twenty years, and is likely to increase with data-gathering and extended reality becoming ubiquitous within educational systems. Biesta makes the point that language constructs reality and that the language of learning has privileged process , but has excluded questions of purpose and content and relationships within dynamic human interrelationships that should define teaching and learning (Biesta, 2012). The sole concern of learnification becomes the individualistic process of learning, rather than the purpose , context , and relationships that are central to education as both a ...
Read more

A matter of conviviality: a note on the "Big Tent" metaphor in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL)

Image
  Big Tent Debate in SoTL Center for Engaged Learning  Elon University, North Carolina, 18 September 2013. The “big tent” metaphor has thus far characterised much of SoTL’s thinking about its inherent diversity. Huber and Hutchings (2005) identify the “teaching commons,” as the process of coming together to encourage discourse within and outside of our disciplines about how we teach and how students learn. These Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching colleagues encourage scholars to make their inquiries not private but communal enterprises that cultivate discipline-specific methodologies in an ongoing pursuit of deepening our understanding of teaching and learning. They urge us to create a “big tent” for SoTL (Huber & Hutchings, 2005, p. 30).  Mary Huber & Pat Hutchings with Tony Ciccone (2011, p. 9) clarified the "big tent" debate in SoTL as based on a distinction made between advocates of constructionism . Constructionist learning is the creation by...
Read more

The Teaching Portfolio in Principle and in Practice

"Changing the status of the  problem  in teaching from terminal remediation to ongoing investigation is precisely what the movement for a scholarship of teaching is all about." (Bass, 1999: 1).  A: From "scholarly teaching" to "scholarship of teaching (and learning)" Ernest L. Boyer (1990), advocated that the idea of scholarship in higher education needed to be broadened to include teaching as well as the dimensions of discovery, integration (later changed to engagement), and application. Boyer made a strong case for a “scholarship of teaching”, but he never clearly defined the term. Pat Hutchings and Lee Shulman (1999) made the following distinctions: 1.  Excellent Teaching : i nvolves teaching well, engaging students, and fostering important forms of student learning. 2.  Scholarly Teaching : in addition to the characterises of excellent teaching, scholarly teaching  entails practices of formative assessment and evidence gathering, is informed not only b...
Read more