A critical-realist response to the postmodern agenda in instructional design and technology: a way forward

Abstract

Although providing an invigorating foundation for instructional design and technology theory and research, the postmodern agenda would benefit from clearer articulation and further refinement of ontological, epistemological, and methodological positions. Consequently, we reveal possible weaknesses in the radically constructivist-inspired position and, in the spirit of scholarly dialogue, counter with a critical-realist perspective that presents a potentially more innovative and defensible approach to the discovery of scientific knowledge about teaching and learning infused with technology. Without doubt, we concur with postmodernists that issues of agency, identity, race, gender and ethnicity must be addressed and given a central position in instructional design and technology research and practice. Under the critical-realist designator, case study, ethnographic, artsbased, and phenomenological methodologies are appropriate and can co-exist. Our point of distinction is that as a scientific venture, instructional design and technology as a discipline must be more public and transparent in warrants, claims and discourse for proposed change to take place. We conclude by indicating future lines of inquiry inspired by the criticalrealist perspective, detailing topics in technology integration and digital games.Keywords Critical-realism Á Epistemology Á Instructional design and technology Á Methodology Á Scientific claims Á Postmodernism For close to two decades a steady stream of work that promotes a postmodern posture has infiltrated instructional design and technology (IDT) literature on theory and research (Bryson and De

Mobile, but Are We Better? Understanding Teacher’s Perception of a Mobile Technology Integration Using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Framework

“…While research efforts are often focused on the instructional design of learning technologies, understanding the integration of technologies that support constructivism requires a holistic approach of the classroom experience to understand the barriers to adoption. Evans (2011) and Amory (2010) argued functionality, such as teacher classroom management support, student engagement, and collaboration (e.g., student to student, teacher to student), are additional features that allow technologies to successfully facilitate constructivist within the classroom. This systemic perspective helps outline the broader opportunities for technologies that support student-centered pedagogy, that is, technologies that allow learners to engage in collective meaning-making within their instructional context.…”

Hacia una visión contemporánea de la Tecnología Educativa

“…Creemos que la investigación actual en TE debería tener en cuenta planteamientos de otras ciencias humanas y sociales que podrían enriquecer nuestra comprensión de la compleja relación entre tecnología y educación en los tiempos que vivimos. Uno de ellos, escasamente explorado, es el realismo crítico que intenta superar las limitaciones tanto de los enfoques positivistas como interpretativos (Archer, Bhaskar, Collier, Lawson y Norrie, 1998;Evans, 2011;Scott, 2005Scott, y 2013. Otro enfoque prometedor es el sociomaterial (Decuypere & Simons, 2016;Fenwick et al, 2015).…”

The Sustainable Tool for Human Resources Quality in Educational Practices

“…In order for societies to keep up with the age and to respond to new expectations, development and change must be continuous. In order to achieve this within a systematic framework, there is no doubt that education programs and processes should be open to innovations in order to train and employ individuals with the desired level equipment (Evans, 2011).…”