Impact of Computers on Learning

¶ … Computers on Learning Educator Richard Clark once argued that "The best current evidence is that media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causes changes in our nutrition" (Clark, 1983, p. 445). Essentially, Clark argued that using a specific medium to provide instruction did not necessarily lead to improved learning.

For example, he noted that media studies were so unpredictable that performance or time improvements cannot be attributed to a specific medium, but instead can often be explained by changes in instructional methods or novelty. Clark (1983) went on to note, "The choice of vehicle might influence the cost or extent of distributing instruction, but only the content of the vehicle can influence achievement" (p. 445). Clark's statement had a dramatic impact on the field of educational technology.

Jones (1999) notes that after the publication of Clark's paper, "media research tends to focus on media as the means and not the end of educational technology." Recently, Kozma (1991) has argued that medium and instructional method are more closely related than Clark suggested. Kozma suggested that the learner and the medium interact significantly during the learning process. He noted that the learner often collaborates actively with the specific medium in order to develop specific knowledge. In Kozma's analysis, learning is active and constructive.

The learner takes the specific, available cognitive resources available to him or her, and creates knowledge through the process of relating information from a specific medium to information that is available in memory (Kozma, 1991). As such, Kozma called for further research linking specific media to learning benefits. Kozma's analysis is supported by the specific understanding of the influence of media and technology famously forwarded by Neil Postman. In his book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman argues that every communication medium has an inherent theory of knowledge, or epistemology.

As such, America's way of thinking has historically been dominated by the main form of communication (or media). Early America was dominated by reading and writing, and language and discourse in the "eighteenth- and nineteenth-century America tend(ed) to be both content-laden and serious, all the more so when it takes its form from print" (Postman, 50). Postman further argues that the arrival of television dramatically changed America's theory of knowledge. Television as a medium dramatically changed public discourse in America.

Notes Postman, "No matter what is depicted or from what point-of-view, the overarching presumption is that it is there for our amusement and pleasure" (87). As such, Postman argues that a specific medium can deeply change our very perception and understanding of the world about us. Clark's assertion that the medium has essentially no impact on learning is inherently inconsistent with Postman's assessment that the medium defines our understanding and knowledge.

Notes Postman, "each medium, like language itself, makes possible a unique mode of discourse by providing a new orientation for thought, expression, and sensibility" (10). Further, Clark's understanding that media does not influence student achievement seems based more on his analysis of experiments that showed little connection between media and learning, rather than any philosophical assessment of the role of media in learning and knowledge. As such, research is still needed to better evaluate.