Devon C. Duhaney, International Journal of Instructional Media; 2005; 32, 1, Academic Research Library pg. 7
Dedy Gunawan, School of Education, Flinders University, guna0019@flinders.edu.au
According to Devon C. Duhaney, the author of “Technology and Higher Education: Challenges in the Halls of Academe”, there has been a great change in technology and its use. Devon believes that it could increase the technology integration in higher education and training institutions to support teaching and training. To strengthen his opinion, the author presents examples and evidence about the use of technology in education and training institutions from some studies and surveys conducted by some research institutions. He concludes instructional delivery modes have also changed from traditional styles of teaching to the modern ones.
The author, however, notes a number of challenges in integrating technology in spite of its effectiveness and efficiency. The first challenge is the higher education institutions should compete to attract students from any areas. So, they must strengthen the recruitment skills as well as to try to retain the recruited and guide them to successful completion. The availability of funds could be another problem in the competition. Several issues, like the number of international students, availability of study programs in foreign country, quality of courses, competition between higher education institutions in developed and developing countries could also influence recruitment and retention rates of higher education institutions.
The second challenge the author states is about access and equity. The availability of the technologies and access to them are not anymore a big problem, even for those who cannot afford a PC, since there is an increasing number of computers and the effort to make them available. The problem is, however, not in the equality of chances in using the tools but more on the quality of using them.
The author insists that the technology integration in higher education institutions support the teaching and learning objectives. Because more institutions use a number of materials on line, set up on line discussion boards, and provide on line courses they must ensure the quality is equal to those traditionally presented. Mercy and Drissel (2002) try to solve this problem by stating that to guarantee the transformative learning in technology integration, it is important to understand four principals of learning: learning occurs in context, learning is active, learning is social and learning is reflective. Brown and Warschauer (2006), in another hand, implies that a teacher preparation program should provide adequate modeling of technology integration as well as providing qualified mentors who technologically proficient.
Another concern following the integration of technology, according to the author, is changing assessment strategy. Students do not only work on pencil-based assignments but multimedia as well. When there is a question about cheating, the author uses Pallof and Pratt’s opinion to answer. Pallof and Pratt argue that giving assignment with critical thinking and expose students in group learning could minimize the students cheating, since it will give sense of responsibility to them.
The author states that the faculty has also changed its role accompanying the more frequent of technology use in teaching and learning. The faculty must apply student-centered approach in order that students are more active in their learning. The other roles the faculty does is to help students learn how to learn, use electronic tools more effectively, and giving students assistance in using available resources. Faculty must carefully plan every lesson to help the students in meeting the aim of learning. Faculty must also create more creative and imaginative design and structure of courses.
Because many teaching activities produce materials that are available on line, the faculty must review the basic concept of intellectual property rights and fair use. The author seems to agree with Moore and Kearsley (2005) that the Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act of 2005, by remedying the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, provides more flexibility in the use of materials for distance education.
What the author states about the increase of technology integration in teaching and learning seems to be true. To strengthen his statement he has taken some examples from studies and surveys done by some research institutions. Hallet (2005) gives further support by giving more evidences that teachers all around the world use wide ranges of technology, such as CPS units, iPod, Wi-Fi Laptop, PDAs and so on.
In some places, however, the author should have given more data and examples for better explanation. About the availability of the technologies and the opportunity of the access, for example, the author seems to use a case study in developed countries that is, then, generally stated. The author would have explained better if he could have presented the data of technology availability both in developed and developing countries.
Another statement that needs further explanation is about cheating. Although the author uses Pallof and Pratt’s opinion about how to reduce cheating, still, he should have given more explanations as well as examples and evidences about it. The readers will seem to give question how giving assignment with critical thinking and expose students in group learning could reduce students cheating without those explanations.
An important thing the author must do is to explain the meanings of faculty. What does it refer to? In Indonesia, faculty refers to a more administrative work than the academic one. So, it is not the faculty responsibility to apply students-centered approach but the teachers’. Since many universities in different countries use the term faculty it could have different meanings. Hence, the author needs to give a more detailed explanation about the role of faculty in several meanings.
This article, however, has opened our mind about how to integrate technology in higher education institutions more effectively. The author tries to wake us up that technology does not automatically give benefit to higher education. There are many things to do to synchronize them. The challenges presented in this article are not merely the author’s responsibility to answer but also all educators for better quality of education.
Reference:
Brown D & Warschauer M, From University to the Elementary Classroom: Students’ Experience in Learning to Integrate Technology in Instruction, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, Academic Research Library, California, 2006
Discoll & Mercy P, How People Learn (and What Technology Might Have to Do with It), ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology Syracuse, New York, 2002
Hallet V, Teaching with Technology; Podcasts, Bac Channels, and Bookless Libraries Come to Campus, U.S. News and World Report, Washongton, 2005
