This week’s readings have opened new windows into the rapidly intertwining worlds of history and technology. Possibly the most interesting facet of this evolution of history is the speed at which it is taking place. Graeme Davison’s article although almost a decade old and somewhat outdated highlights this speed. He describes that “the academic world often seems to be divided between techno-freaks and Luddites, those who unreservedly welcome the new technology and those who try to hold it at bay.” That was ten years ago, and Davison was referring to simply using a computer in daily life. At the time of his writing there was still great debate over the future of technology in the classroom but “Most of us, however, have quietly absorbed the computer into the pattern of our academic lives, only occasionally pausing to consider how it is also changing the character of what we know and how we know it.”
In under a decade the technology has progressed to the point that there are entire history classes on how best to employ new high tech tools in both scholarship and teaching. Most of the progress to this point has fallen on the shoulders of teachers rather than students. As many of the articles we have read for this week point out, there is a tremendous amount of work required to teach HTML and other web design skills. Getting to the point where we are able to apply these technological skills is like learning an entirely new language. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I was under the impression that technology is supposed to make learning easier for students and have tangible benefits. Michael Coventry’s article “Moving beyond “the Essay”: Evaluating Historical Analysis and Argument in Multimedia Presentations” was profoundly disturbing as it appears that technological skills are becoming the focus of historical instruction rather than an asset to make teaching history easier.
Technology is not something that’s going to disappear, and in general it makes all tasks of life more efficient. This includes teaching history, but we must be careful to avoid making technology the end rather than a means to an end. Coventry appears to be excited about “moving beyond the essay” but fails to recognize that there are tangible benefits to an essay, namely that it helps to develop basic cognitive and critical skills that are essential to good history. It is in refining these abilities that good history is made, not in a fancy presentation on a glowing screen.
Kevin –
I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments that technology, although enriching the teaching and learning experience, has practically doubled the time some educators must allocate to teaching a course. I think, and hope, that this is just the typical cycle to learning how to adapt and employ new technology. Some of the articles we have read have alluded to this adaption period. We have hope since progress has already been made with the html editor. According to some of the educators that had written more recent articles, the html editors are much easier to learn and use — for both the teachers and the students. Perhaps in five to ten years we will be able to say that about using new media in classrooms across a broader spectrum of issues.
Gary
Comment by Gary — October 3, 2006 @ 5:19 pm