Week 2

–Why did Clark believe that media had no effect on learning? Evaluate Clark’s stance.
–Why did Clark change his position?
–What is a cognitive product?
–How does Clark’s research affect technology in the classroom?

Clark believed that the type of media did not affect learning. He argued that one type of media did not teach material any better than any other type of media. This is where the name "No Significant Difference" comes from. There was no significant difference in learning, according to Clark, when different medias were used. Clark also believed that media did not influence or motivate learning. He believed that all media produced the same amount of learning. I think a good quote from the article that captures his position is when he is quoted saying that technology does not effect learning "any more than a truck [affects] the quality of the goods it brings to the market."

I do not really agree with Clark's stance. I especially do not agree with him when he says that technology does not motivate learning. I think technology really could motivate kids to learn more, especially since students today are so in touch with technology. It is such a big part of their world, so it might make the material more familiar to them, and thus more interesting to them, and so they would be more motivated to study it. For example, I think students would be much more motivated to play a game that involves multiplication than they would be to memorize multiplication tables.

Clark changed his position after a study that compared learning in different physics classrooms, some with media and one without. Although the students in both classrooms learned the same material, the ones in the technology classrooms learned the same amount in one week that the regular classroom learned in a four weeks. Thus, Clark had to change his position slightly to account for the fact that, even though technology may not change what you learn, it can affect how quickly you learn it.

I think it's definitely important to consider Clark's research and point of view when thinking about technology in the classroom. You should consider, for example, his idea that technology does not really affect what you learn. A teacher should think about this, and then decide if he thinks a technology he is considering is really worth the effort. For example, is it worthwhile for him to spend twenty minutes of class setting up the technology if it won't affect how his students learn the material? However, I think it is also important to consider the other side of the argument, and to consider the fact that Clark might be wrong. For example, if the above teacher things that the technology will engage his students more than a traditional lecture, then perhaps he should go against Clark's ideas and use it anyway. Also, it is important to consider the research that shows that technology can help speed up learning. The teacher in this example might spend twenty minutes on set up, but he might save two hours of class time in the end, which is time that could be spent on other activities or material.