unknown source
Debating the Clark/Kozma views of method or media was enlightening. They both have very good points to consider.
My takeaway from Clark is a warning not to become so enamored with gadgets and technology that we lose sight of good sound learning theory. To me he’s arguing the classic “form follows function.” First make sure you have an outcome in mind (a goal for your learners), your content is sound, and that you have a pedagogically appropriate means to transmit the content (method). You ain’t got nothing if you aint’ got good info and a good pedagogical approach.
Kozma, on the other hand, is saying that we don’t really need to separate the media from the method. He says that media can enhance our methods and influence the learners capacity to learn. I think he’s saying form and function go hand in hand to create an overall more enriching experience from which a person can more easily learn.
These are very simplified views of a fairly complex argument, but at this stage in my learning I need simplified views. I suspect I will better relate with and be better able to judge the nuances of each argument as I add more experience and understanding. But right now I tend to lean towards the “you’re both right” and “you’re both wrong” easy way out. I do think that media can influence learning, regardless of whether or not it is the final cause. But I don’t think media should be the first consideration. Knowing your learner is probably the first step in the process of transmitting knowledge. Finding an appropriate method second, and a delivery mechanism third.
As a side note, I thought it was really cool that another class had a similar activity and Clark took the time to comment on a student’s blog.
