The Medium, the Message, the Scientist and the Teacher

Many questions I have been having about instructional/design/technology were posed in this set of readings. What is instruction? What is design? How does technology fit into instruction? Is it a method or a medium or a tool? Is it science? How can we make it more science-y?

Clark (1994) poses that if learning gains are the same, then one should choose the least expensive media to reach the goal. With my classroom-based experience and expertise in design (using computers), I have been finding a lot of these questions feel like "chicken or the egg” debates. Is the computer important in a classroom about learning to use the computer in design? Yes. It cannot be separated from the room. If my goal is to teach design, I can remove the computers and use historical design tools, like rulers, exacto knives, and paper. I am splitting hairs, because the objectives of an historic-tool-based course and a computer-supported course are very different, with the latter including demonstration of design skills in specific software environments.

Philosopher Marshall McLuhan wrote extensively about the influence of media on perception, famously referenced in the quote, “the medium is the message.” Clark (1994) took this to mean that “media and method [are] identical and inseparable” (p. 23), which he had earlier distinguished with his own separating definitions of “design technology” versus “delivery technology.” He incorrectly assumed McLuhan was referring to delivery technologies like print, books, television, radio, etc. as the medium, and the message the material to be heard/seen on it. Kozma (1994) further elaborates that Clark fails to consider that media have attributes, like sound, images, etc., that are not unique to only one medium, so should be considered differently.

The message McLuhan was referring to were the cognitive effects created by the medium, which was not a television, but the programing on it, complete with narration, editing, timelapses, graphics, soundtrack, etc. “The message of a newscasts are not the news stories themselves, but a change in the public attitude towards crime, or the creation of a climate of fear” (Federman, 2004). McLuhan wanted us to question media and the underlying messages it contains, and what kind of change that messaging will bring about. This type of decoding is referred to as visual literacy, a skill even more important in an age of endless manipulated real and fake imagery.

The debate seems to come to whether technology is more helpful or not, and more expensive or not in the instructional design and delivery process, and whether it makes the process take a longer or shorter amount of time. Clarke (1994) referenced a 1960s study about students learning drill-and-practice math comparing a group learning on a computer to a group learning in a traditional classroom. The study found that both groups increased the same amount, but that the control group (using teachers) had the students drill for twice the time as the test group. The author concluded the drill-and-practice method was the winner, since it was used in both cases, but failed to observe the computer group learned in half the time. Kozma (1994) presented a 1990s study of a video-based mathematics learning tool called The Jasper Woodbury Series. Students who integrated the math problem-solving skills with the video did better at figuring out a subsequent video problem than the second group who learned the skills without integrating it with the video by 100%. Speaking as a learner, integrated learning models are more fun anyway! My Spanish courses had a soap-opera mystery that included the investigator discussing the case and questions with the viewer. But it is expensive and can quickly become dated. We all found the shoulder pads distracting. Kozma (1994) points out “traditional models of ID do not address the complete interrelationships among media, method, and situation” (p. 17) and ID methods need to take advantage of a medium’s potential. He goes on to discuss statistically comparing a lot of methods.

I appreciated Boling & Smith (2018) pointing out the seemingly “false choice between science and not-science" and ID “does not need to cast itself as science to retain legitimacy, but can position itself within the design tradition and still drawn upon scientific principles as needed” (p. 359). ID can have a certain amount of improvisation, as there are many paths to the same outcomes. Those paths are influenced by time constraints, costs, and access needs.

The discourse on ID and technology raises questions about instruction, design, and technology's role. While Clark emphasizes media does not cause learning increases so should be selected based on cost, Kosma sees more optimism in studies comparing traditional and computer-based instruction effectiveness. McLuhan's notion that "the medium is the message" prompts a deeper examination of media's potential cognitive effects and the need for visual literacy at all stages of the design and learning process. Boling & Smith suggest a synthesis of scientific principles and design tradition in instructional design. Ultimately, navigating considerations like time, cost, and access needs, instructional design embraces improvisation to achieve educational goals in an ever-evolving landscape.

References

Boling, E., & Smith, K. M. (2018). The changing nature of design. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th Ed.), (pp. 60- 67). New York, NY: Pearson Education.

Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. ETR&D, 42(2), 21- 29.

Federman, M. (2004, July 23). What is the Meaning of the Medium is the Message?

Gordon, J., & Zemke, R. (2000). The attack on ISD. Training, 37(4), 42-53.

Kozma, R.B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. ETR&D, 42(2), 7-19.

Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Kereluik, K. (2009). The song remains the same: Looking back to the future of educational technology. TechTrends, 53(5), 48-53.

Zemke, R., & Rossett, A. (2002). A hard look at ISD. Training, 39(2), 26-34.