ICT, Pedagogy, and the Curriculum: Subject to Change

Cover Buku ICT, Pedagogy and Curriculum

Cover Buku ICT, Pedagogy and Curriculum

Silakan download ebooknya di sini

This book explores the impact new information and communication technologies are having on teaching and the way children learn. The book addresses key issues across all phases of education, both in the UK and internationally. ICT, Pedagogy and the Curriculum looks at the relationship between ICT, paradigms of teaching and learning, and the way in which curriculum subjects are represented. Three principal areas are addressed:

(1) the wider perception of ICT in society, culture and schooling; (2) the challenges to pedagogy; and (3) the way in which ICT not only supports learning and teaching but changes the nature of curriculum subjects.

The tensions between the use of technology to replicate traditional practices and the possibilities for transforming the curriculum and pedagogy are explored. This book offers an original and distinctively critical perspective on the way in which we understand ICT in education. It will be of interest to all primary and secondary teachers and those in initial teacher training concerned about current technology initiatives in education and how to respond to them.

Avril Loveless is a Senior Lecturer in ICT in Education at the University of Brighton.

Viv Ellis is Lecturer in English Education at the University of Southampton.

5 thoughts on “ICT, Pedagogy, and the Curriculum: Subject to Change

  1. Salam Sejahtera Pak Edi….
    Saya senang bahwa bapak adalah terfokus kepada isu-isu terkait ICT dan Pendidikan, dan artikel-artikel anda adalah yang terbaik yang saya pernah membaca di Indonesia (selain artikel-artikel saya🙂.

    Dari artilel ini itu sangat jelas bahwa peran dan keuntungan dari ICT dalam pendidikan masih adalah isu yang di-debat terus dan tidak jelas.

    Saya hanya membaca artikel-nya sampai “Third, it is important to note the reasons why earlier experiments in educational technology failed to deliver on their promises. Not the least important of these was indifference—or, indeed, active resistance—on the part of teachers. This was, it should be emphasised, not simply a form of conservatism, or merely a failure to keep up with the times. It was partly a result of the technological emphasis of the reformers, and their failure to provide training and support that would help to embed these new media more centrally in the curriculum and in teachers’ practice. But it was also a result of teachers’ awkward insistence on their own professionalism, and an accompanying reluctance to allow the curriculum to be dictated from outside, by television companies or by the publishers of these new educational media.”

    Saya sudah meng-copy banyak sekali bagian dari artikel-nya untuk diskusi, tetapi sebaik-nya kita membahas secara langsung, bukan di sini.

    Re: “Not the least important of these was indifference—or, indeed, active resistance—on the part of teachers. This was, it should be emphasised, not simply a form of conservatism, or merely a failure to keep up with the times.”

    Banyak sekali guru pada tahun 90an (termasuk saya) sangat-sangat bersemangat dan “embraced” teknologi baru ini. Tetapi karena janji-janji teknologi-nya (seperti banyak generasi teknologi sebelumnya) sangat mengecewakan maupun mengancam perkembangan pelajar-pelajar secara individual (tujuan pendidikan utama) kami balik ke pendidikan yang betul meningkatkan mutu dan kemampuan manusia Pembelajaran-Aktif dan Kontekstual. Masalah-nya bukan teknologi, tetapi sifat-nya pembelajaran yang berbasis teknologi (sangat merugikan kecuali kalau ingin membangun generasi robot).

    Re: “active resistance—on the part of teachers”

    Ya ini alasan yang selalu muncul oleh mereka yang mendorong teknologi-nya, yang mempunyai kepentingan sendiri, biar mereka profesor jurusan TP di universitas, konsultan, atau orang bisnis…. Tetapi mereka tidak ingin tahu sebabnya ada “active resistance—on the part of teachers” – “karena data-nya tidak sesuai dengan kepentingan mereka.”

    Kalau di Indonesia kasus-nya adalah lebih gampang, karena mutu manajemen kita tidak mampu menjaminkan pendidikan yang mana saja yang bermutu untuk semua, dan ICT adalah teknologi yang “Paling Tidak Tepat Guna” untuk Pendidikan Umum Yang Bermutu di Indonesia, kan? ICT dapat membunuh kreativitas, sangat terbatas oleh kekurangan infrastruktur, maupun biaya perawatan yang sangat mahal, banyak sekolah tidak dapat merawat sekolah saja, maupun ratusan komputer (puluhan juta secara nasional)…. http://TeknologiPendidikan.Com/

    Saya akan membaca semua artikelnya nanti dan semoga kita dapat membahas isu-isunya secara langsung….

    Salam Teknologi Pendidikan

Tinggalkan Balasan

Isikan data di bawah atau klik salah satu ikon untuk log in:

Logo WordPress.com

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Logout / Ubah )

Gambar Twitter

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Facebook

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Google+

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Logout / Ubah )

Connecting to %s