The word “Technology” seems to bring to mind the word “change”. Whether this change is seen as positive or negative depends on whose opinion is being made, or in what area this change is being seen, but it is change nonetheless.
In Papyrus to Cyberspace, James O’ Donnell states, “Every time we move in this direction, we find there is both loss and gain.” This reminds me of the old saying, “one step forward and two steps back” by which it is meant that with every step in the direction of progress, there will always be regression of some degree, as well. At the same time, it made me think that perhaps what is being referred to is that in the population, there will always be both enthusiasm and disdain. Every time we hear about a new piece of technological equipment, or a new app, we are inclined to believe that it will make our lives easier, or save time in some way, or allow us to use our brains less, but is it really so? Will it in fact take up more of our awake time, and lessen our sleep time, use more electricity, or gas or batteries, cause anxiety or frustration or stress?
O’Donnell continues with, “Another change that comes with new forms of information technology, new forms of the written word, is unpredictable change in human roles and human geography.” Later in the audio, James Engell states, “The technology gets you only so far, and then beyond that you have to go through meaning and experience and language and articulation.” I take this to mean that the technology can be a useful tool but it simply cannot take the place completely of an emotional experience or an understanding or a relationship between people, or the culture of a place. Perhaps technology can advance us to a new state but it is up to us to determine what we do once there.
In “Democracy and Education: The Missing Link May Be Ours”, John Willinsky opens by comparing political change, both positive and negative, that has occurred over the last century and continues by saying, “…we now face a rather different order of political change with the rapid development of the Internet (Willinsky 2002, p. 1).” I found it very interesting when Willinksy discussed the changes occurring in the patient and doctor relationship. It was very similar to Engell’s description of the changes that have happened with the student and teacher relationship. With such availability of medical information that can be accessed online, people are bringing information to their doctors without the knowledge if it is reliable or even understanding it at all (Willinsky 2002), the same way that students are now able to shape the learning and guide curriculum in the way the teacher traditionally would. I myself am guilty of doing such things, especially since my daughter was born and I Google photos and try to diagnose every rash, cough, fever, and sniffle before scheduling an appointment with the doctor. Is this public access and incredible availability actually harming us? Is it preventing us from seeing a doctor face-to-face because we think we can find the answers ourselves? In all honesty, it probably causes even more worry for me once I Google these images and try to decide which information matches the symptoms.
I took away several ideas from Willinsky’s article and the Papyrus to Cyberspace audio but this dichotomy of positive and negative change that accompanies every new technological movement was what resonated with me the most. I know that I am guilty of getting excited about a new app or finding some exciting news or information on the Internet without checking it’s reliability and sources first, but I know that these things have also opened my eyes to other discoveries, as well. 
There has been some discussion about reading from paper vs. a screen. I have been trying to make the change over to screen but I often do find that I “read” better from paper. My worry of wasting paper, however, usually forces me to try harder reading from the screen. I think back to being an undergrad student and spending so much time in the library photocopying journal articles and how much money was spent doing so, and also on purchasing textbooks. I must admit, it is a very nice change to not need to spend money on either of those things! Again, it is a question of at what cost do we enjoy the benefits of change? As educators, how to we ensure that our students reap the benefits of having access to so much information?
References
Engell, J. (Presenter) & O’Donnell, J. (Presenter). (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace [radio broadcast]. Retrieves from https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/4290/files/609973/preview
Willinsky, J. (2002). Education and Democracy: The Missing Link May Be Ours. Harvard Educational Review, 72 (3), 367-392.
kimseto
May 26, 2018 — 6:45 pm
Hi! I really enjoyed reading your post and agree with much of what you highlighted. At my school, I can certainly feel the divide in opinions on technology. Despite the encouragement from our administration to integrate more technology into our practice, some teachers remain reticent and wary. Some have mentioned that all the frustrations that come with technology (such as reliance on battery life, expenses, obsoleteness), does not make it worthwhile to change their teaching practices.
You also spoke about the changes in teacher-student relationships as students become more tech-literate than their professors. With the presence of Google, teachers’ roles have shifted from content experts to one of a facilitator. The changing of roles may make some teachers feel insecure, especially for those who teach lower grades as their young students are not as savvy with the Internet. This is at least something that I have observed in my school, so I’m not sure if it is just an isolated case! Any thoughts?
You also mentioned a real problem of how many people tend to seek help from Dr. Google before they find a real professional. This problem goes beyond the medical sphere unfortunately. The expansiveness of content in cyberspace can be both incredibly resourceful but also as Dr. O’Donnell describes it, a “dissemination of trash.” If educated adults such as ourselves can be susceptible to false information online, how do you suppose our youth are impacted by it? This is a real concern, which is why I believe media literacy needs to be at the forefront of education. We need to adapt to the changing frontiers of cyberspace and we need to do it quick!
Kim
Anonymous
May 31, 2018 — 8:45 pm
Hi Kim,
Thank you so much for your comment. Whenever I’m reflecting on something, I sometimes stop and wonder if what I’m saying is valid or even makes any sense at all so I’m glad to hear from someone who has similar thoughts!
Most of my teaching experience is with younger children, who unfortunately seem to be mostly exposed to just watching tv or playing silly games on their parents’ tablets or phones. I do think it’s interesting when some have looked up the weather forecast though, and offer their ideas during calendar time! I have a young daughter myself and I am very aware of what she watches and how she uses my ipad. We definitely need to start educating children when they’re younger about the falsities on the internet and reliable information and websites. We can start by teaching them how to respect the equipment and use it safely for sure. Thanks again!
Marcia
mackenzie moyer
May 27, 2018 — 6:17 am
Marcia, thank you for your post.
I find myself in the same dilemmas regarding paper-vs-digital. I really like books, and I really like taking notes. What I’ve found useful his to dog-ear book pages with interesting passages, then come back to those at a later time and type out a quote and some thoughts.
With articles, I don’t seek to print them out. What this means is that the books I have are easy to access when I have a thought (“Oh this may be in book XYZ I read a bit ago…let me go check it”) while the articles are not (“Oh gods, where is the link…let me Google it…what was the title…what class was it from?” etc.).
I think your analysis of tech potentially taking more and more time is spot on. Actually, I’ve read that medieval peasants worked something like 2-4 months per year with harvests. I can’t imagine even taking 2-4 months of vacation, let alone only working that! And, of course, the fracturing of the community and the family, all in tandem with technological development. It seems that tech is really forcing us to extract more and more of our energies from less and less time.
mackenzie moyer
May 27, 2018 — 6:27 am
Oops, here’s the rest of my comment:
I think patients Googling will only contribute to the overall shift in healthcare towards “patient centred” care. All to often I have found my healthcare experiences left wanting, whether through poor bedside manners, process/experience design, or general lack of two-way communication.
With people Googling, the dialogue is opened up, albeit in a flawed, “OMG, I have a lifethreatening illness!!!” (when it’s but a scratch), way. Perhaps we will find doctors encouraging patients to self-educate on certain terms before coming in. As a patient, I’ve also found in healthcare the confounding use of medical jargon and a lack of empathizing with the client’s likely ignorance.
There’s also the issue of pharmaceutical companies piggy-backing off of this trend with the whole “Ask your doctor” ad campaigns.
Thanks for the post,
-Mackenzie
Marcia
May 31, 2018 — 8:50 pm
Hi Mackenzie,
Thank you so much for your comment. I do find the changing doctor-patient relationship intriguing, especially since I grew up in Canada and now live in the United States. There are definitely differences in the care you receive. Luckily, I have very good medical insurance and see amazing doctors and nurses. It is definitely not the same story when your options are limited though. Whenever I visit my doctors here in California, I leave with printouts summarizing the visit, everything we talked about, and often information printouts of what was diagnosed and information about medications that have been prescribed. I remember reading several years ago that in Canada especially, people only grudgingly see their doctors and prefer to try to solve health issues themselves, only seeing professionals if it is absolutely necessary. I think this has to do with wait times and simply not having enough time to make an appointment and take time away from work and life to actually go. It is a sad thought that people do not put their health first but as you pointed out, we are hesitant to take vacation time and work much more than is likely good for us. Anyway, thanks again for your comment!
Marcia
Katie Cox
June 7, 2018 — 5:11 pm
Hi Marcia
Thanks for your post! We’ve been talking about change a lot recently at work, and how you can either look at this in a positive or negative way, so your post feels quite timely.
Like you, I thought O’Donnell (1999) put it best when he said “both doom and utopia come into history far less often than we expect” and that it’s “usually a muddle of losses and gains.” Looking back at history we see these extreme reactions quite a lot, anytime any innovative or drastic change affects humans and our way of life.
I think it’s easy to get caught up in an emotional reaction to any new form of technology. Take myself. My initial gut reaction to devices like Alexa is, no way, I don’t want that kind of technology in my home. However, I come to this reaction without any research into the product and limited information about what products like Alexa could actually help me with. (Maybe it would revolutionize some aspect of my life!) If I were being reasonable and introspective, I would look into this more and try and figure out if this kind of technology is worthwhile and why my reaction is what it is, instead of going with my initial negative response which isn’t really based on logical thought.
I also really enjoyed reading about Plato’s reaction to writing (Ong, 2002), and his belief that it would diminish human intelligence and decrease memory. It illustrates how easy it is to get caught up in the doom or gloom frame of mind when it comes to change, and changing technology in particular. It’s somewhat comforting to see one of the most respected intellects get caught in this trap as well. While I believe technology does change, it’s important to be introspective, logical, and analytical when examining such change. (Although perhaps that’s my literary-focused brain that’s championing analytic thinking.)
References
O’Donnell, James J. (Presenter). (1999). Cambridge Forum [Radio broadcast]. Cambridge, MA: Public Radio
Ong, W. (2002). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.