Magnetic and multistable: reinterpreting the affordances of educational technology

Aagaard, Jesper

doi:10.1186/s41239-017-0088-4

Cited by 28 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While nothing in the laptop determines that it be used for distractive purposes, students are habitually inclined to do so. Succumbing to this temptation is frustratingly easy since it occurs independently of conscious decision-making, and students describe how they sometimes close their laptops to resist this magnetically attractive affordance (Aagaard 2018).…”

Section: Phenomenology: Distraction As Embodiedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the rhetoric of tech addiction: why we should be discussing tech habits instead (and how)

Aagaard

2020

Phenom Cogn Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past few years, we have become increasingly focused on technology use that is impulsive, unthinking, and distractive. There has been a strong push to understand such technology use in terms of dopamine addiction. The present article demonstrates the limitations of this so-called neurobehaviorist approach: Not only is it inconsistent in regard to how it understands humans, technologies, and their mutual relationship, it also pathologizes everyday human behaviors. The article proceeds to discuss dualsystems theory, which helpfully discusses impulsive technology use in terms of habit instead of addiction, but can be criticized for its mentalist celebration of conscious control. Finally, the article introduces a phenomenological approach whose conceptualization of habit manifests many of the experiential qualities that we try to capture with addiction, but remains non-pathologizing and opens a space for learning: While tech addiction is bad and must be eliminated, good tech habits can be trained and cultivated. :44). In the past few years, however, we have seen an increasing awareness that everyday technology use is often impulsive, unthinking, and that it sometimes draws attention away from other activities. In public discourse, there has been a strong push to understand such technology use in terms of addiction. The purpose of this article, however, is to displace this concept with the notion of habit. In making this argument, the article discusses three contemporary approaches to technology use: Neurobehaviorism, dual-systems theory, and phenomenology. The first approach is concerned with addiction, the latter two are concerned with habits. Each section in the article introduces one of these three approaches, provides an account of its key assumptions, and proceeds to discuss its implications. To enhance readability, I here provide a schematic preview of the end-result (see Table 1):

show abstract

Section: Phenomenology: Distraction As Embodiedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the rhetoric of tech addiction: why we should be discussing tech habits instead (and how)

Aagaard

2020

Phenom Cogn Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is one reason postphenomenology insists on the prefix 'post', 3 although it is still a branch of phenomenology that shares some key insights with the classical phenomenological tradition of Husserl, the early Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty. Two such insights are the ontological claims that 1) the subject is always enmeshed and situated in the world as a living body, and 2) that 3 For a discussion on the differences between between postphenomenology and 'classical' phenomenology, see (Aagaard, et al 2018) and (Ihde, 2009). consciousness is intentional; it is always directed towards an object-real or imaginary (Aagaard et al, 2018).…”

Section: Postphenomenology and Mediation Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two such insights are the ontological claims that 1) the subject is always enmeshed and situated in the world as a living body, and 2) that 3 For a discussion on the differences between between postphenomenology and 'classical' phenomenology, see (Aagaard, et al 2018) and (Ihde, 2009). consciousness is intentional; it is always directed towards an object-real or imaginary (Aagaard et al, 2018). The commitment to these ontological claims shapes the way materiality and technological artefacts are understood as mediating objects within the postphenomenological framework.…”

Section: Postphenomenology and Mediation Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The concept of mediation designates that artefacts actively shape human-world relations and thus also the various ways subjects are intentionally related to the world via objects (Ihde, 1990, p. 72, Verbeek, 2005. This is apparent when one looks not only at how devices like smartphones are used to connect with contacts or browse the internet for information, but also at how different types of affordances makes these types of artefacts attention magnets (Aagaard, 2018). They mediate human-world relations at both an existential and a hermeneutic level.…”

Section: Postphenomenology and Mediation Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mediating imaginaries

Tafdrup

2020

NJSTS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this article is to illustrate how visions of the future—sociotechnical imaginaries— mediate and thus shape sociotechnical practices involving educational robots in a Danish school context. In the analysis I show how imaginaries are manifested both in technological artefacts, teachers’ discourse and in policy documents from political bodies such as the OECD and the Danish Agency for Digitisation (DIGST). To show this manifestation, I apply two concepts: The Science and Technology Studies (STS) concept of ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’ as formulated by Sheila Jasanoff (2015) and the concept of ‘mediation’ known from postphenomenological tradition. I develop an analytical framework based on these two concepts and coin a third — ‘symbolic mediation’ — to present and analyse a case study based on an ethnographic field study that included semi-structured interviews conducted in a Danish school setting. The case study shows how the use of the robot NAO—an educational technology—is driven by two related imaginaries that both serve as arguments for implementing and using the robot—the imaginary of the digital future and the imaginary of educational optimization.

show abstract

“…The 'educational' element of educational technology is not simply common-sense or implicit. We need to develop visions that go beyond conceptualising digital technology as an instrument within instructional design (what might be called the classic object of interest within the field of educational technology) or a systemic conditioner of education as a specialized communication process (Aagaard, 2018). Instead, discussions about the pedagogic underpinnings of the technologies being used in university teaching and learning are much-needed and long over-due.…”

Section: #2 We Need To Talk About Pedagogymentioning

confidence: 99%