This post explores analysis and findings in research literature that points to a need for more flexibility and attention to culture in the process of instructional design and integration of instructional technology in emerging economies.
In reflecting on a
previously conducted survey, Zhang and Shin (2002) compare the open and
distance education models of China, India and Hong Kong. This study considers
types of courses, delivery methods, student demographics, including gender and
access, funding and staffing. They also show that India’s flagship open
learning institution (IGNOU) is primarily staffed by part-time adjunct faculty
and that ICT initiatives lag behind the other two countries. These
researchers conclude that the China’s program is indigenous and Hong Kong and India’s
are imported.
In “Taking
Ownership: Strengthening Indigenous Cultures and Languages Through the Use of
ICTs” Lieberman (2003) considers the dynamics of using ICTs for the benefit of
indigenous cultural causes. He develops this overview by starting from the
broad perspective of the impact of globalization on indigenous cultures then
narrowing his focus to the impact of ICTs. Though Lieberman acknowledges both
actual and potentially negative consequences of ICTs on indigenous cultures,
his aim in this article is to identify examples of positive initiatives and
explore the potential for further use and benefits. He highlights indigenous
culture ICT initiatives for community building, language revitalization,
education, commerce and environmental protection and considers these
initiatives with attention to policy, capacity building, usage and
implementation. Throughout the article, Lieberman emphasizes the imperative of
indigenous empowerment, self-determination and ideological sustainability in
order to reach positive ends through ICTs.
Lieberman does not
only focus on the use of ICTs in education, yet his examples of political and
economic uses still lie in a form of education- the dissemination of
information. By grounding his examples in the broader discussion of the impact
of globalization and ICTs on indigenous cultures, Lieberman (2003) highlights
some of the central questions about the socio-cultural implications of
educational technology. Does widespread use of ICTs: Encourage homogenization of cultures? Replace
indigenous forms of learning or the wisdom of tradition and elders? Reinforce
detrimental economic hegemonies? His answer to these questions seems to be,
“Possibly”; however, he states, “it is preferable to take a pro-active and
culturally sensitive approach to technology introduction.” The argument he
makes in this article is that 1) the use of ICTs is already widespread and
inevitable, and 2) policies towards productive and positive uses of ICTs may
mediate the potential for negative consequences.
In the context of
higher-education, Ezer (2006) interviews faculty and students in India to get
an impression of the attitudes towards ICTs and ICTs in education in India. Ezer
explores what Indian faculty and students believe to be the purpose of ICT. In particular,
he poses the question of whether ICT and ICT education should work towards the
benefit of individuals or society. He lays the groundwork for his findings
about attitudes towards ICT and ICT education by discussing the authority
dependent roots of the educational system in India. He concludes that students
and faculty show optimism about ICT and seem to have whole heartedly adopted
the Western model of individualistic, rational and imperialistic success. He
uses his conclusion to claim that this model does not follow Ghandian
philosophy. Ezer’s research is particularly relevant to the case in this
research because attitudes towards ICTs by faculty and students in India
interact significantly with the purpose of the training program, the students’ experience
in the training program and the potential market for the i3Dv product.
In a chapter on
African Education Perspectives on Culture and E-learning Convergence, Kinuthia
(2007) highlights the complexities of encountering culture in e-learning environments
while stressing its importance as a factor in design decisions. Resistant to
prescriptive models, she proposes acknowledgement of the multiple perspectives
involved for “jointly-negotiated advances” in e-learning.
Research on distance education in the global context also provides insight from
nations with developed economies, revealing the same need for attention to
culture (Marchessou, 1999). For example, in a chapter for the Handbook of
Distance Education reviewing literature on “Learning in a Global Society,”
Visser (2007) characterizes cognition as a complex “ecological phenomenon”
(p.641). He explores implications of global diversity on learning networks and
discusses implications for interinstitutional collaboration. Albrechtsen,
Mariger and Parker (2001) review the history and current trends of distance
education in Europe and Japan and emphasize the challenges of language and
cultural differences in Europe, calling it a “Babel effect” (p.109).
References
Albrechtsen, K., Mariger, H. & Parker, C. (2001). Distance Education and the Impact of
Ezer,
J. (2006). Gandhi's third assassination: Information and communications
technology education in India. Information
Technology for Development, (12)3, 201-212.
Kinuthia,
W. (2007). African Education Perspectives on Culture and E-learning
Convergence. In A. Edmundson (Ed.) Globalized
e-learning cultural challenges (pp. 60-72). Hershey, PA: Information
Science Publishing.
Lieberman,
A.E. (2003). Taking ownership: Strengthening indigenous cultures and languages
through the use of ICTs. Retrieved February 11, 2008 from Learnlink website:
Marchessou, F. (2001). Some ethical concerns in ed-tech
consultancies across borders. Educational
Technology Research & Development, 48(4), 110-114.
Visser, J. (2007). Learning in a global society.
In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of
Distance Education (Second Edition ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
No comments:
Post a Comment