A few weeks ago I was invited to be part of a group that has the mission to formalize a concept of digital media applied to education. Among the first tasks that we have ahead, we must establish objectives and purposes. All within a conceptual framework. Of course there are a significant number of such conceptual frameworks, the discussion lies in which of them are suitable for our reality. Maybe someone would think it would be interesting to find an author of recent times, say someone who has written about these issues within these last two decades.
However, taking as referents authors who can be considered classics and foundational, can be an interesting idea. After all, even when it comes to applying digital technologies to educational contexts, the center of the issue lies in education. Not in the application of technology as an entertainment or as some marketing issue.
So the proposal of a concept of digital media can go around considering a taxonomy based on the nature of the human being that learns and teaches. In the human being, not in technology. In the end, we can find different applications and digital artifacts that serve to amplify the human experience of learning and teaching. The four impulses that John Dewey held as foundational of the learning being, are the central column of several pedagogical approaches and certainly a plausible approach to defining the uses of technology in the classroom.
Discussions in the field of educational technology present a plethora of questions to be discussed. From the selection or compendium of a conceptual framework, going through establishing realistic and measurable objectives (SMART objectives, but this is a topic for another article) and even the selection of applications and platforms to implement all of the above. Given this wide panorama, the experts have discussions and their points of view seem disjoint and often divergent. To the point of unbridgeable divergence, which refers to a radically different conception of basic questions such as what does it mean to learn or teach?
In any case, assuming a deep conceptual framework as Dewey's pedagogical model can be, it does not guarantee that experts agree fully on their visions. Not even in what would be the object of study. This implies that each of these theories are proposals that must be analyzed, using the institutional prism, using the educational ideology and the institutional educational project as a central parameter in the definitions that must be followed.
From the study presented by Bertram C. Bruce and James A. Levin:
There are other valid frameworks one might adopt. Some choose to emphasize hardware differences; others software. Some might focus on the content or grade level of application. Many choose to focus on function. Our point is not to preempt all other views, but rather to suggest that there are many legitimate ways to conceive of educational technology. This observation, which some might say is obvious, often goes unrecognized. As a result, many authors argue points that presuppose one perspective, without an apparent realization of how much their case relies upon that presupposition.
From the document "Educational Technology: Media for Inquiry, Communication, Construction, and
Expression". By: Bertram C. Bruce and James A. Levin