Theorising knowledge practices: a missing piece of the educational technology puzzle

Abstract

Educational technology research has been characterised as lacking theoretical frameworks that can enable cumulative knowledge-building across the field. This article explores the value of Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) for addressing these issues by discussing research into the key question of integration of information and communication technologies in education. Specifically, it shows how LCT enables the theorisation of knowledge practices, the basis of education but undertheorised by existing research. Drawing on a major study of a technological initiative in all state secondary schools in New South Wales, Australia, the article illustratively uses one dimension of LCT to compare the organising principles underlying the initiative with those underlying the key subjects of mathematics and English. Analysis suggests that a 'code clash' with mathematics and a 'code match' with English might help explain their different patterns of integration of information and communication technologies. It also demonstrates how LCT can be utilised with multiple methods, enabling the integration of research into a wide range of educational topics and thereby contributing towards building knowledge across the field.

Foregrounding knowledge in e-learning design: An illustration in a museum setting

“…Part of the work of e-learning designers involves finding ways to articulate this knowledge so as to maintain its integrity. However, the organising principles of knowledge in a given field and their influence in the design of e-learning have received relatively little attention in educational technology research (Howard & Maton, 2011). This article explains why it is important to bring knowledge more firmly into the picture and, using Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) to do so, illustrates how the organising principles of knowledge practices within different fields can be incorporated into e-learning design.…”

“…(Chen, Maton, & Bennett, 2011); different approaches to knowledge practices within a field (Carvalho, Dong, & Maton, 2009;Dong, Maton, & Carvalho, 2015); or goals of educational policies and ways of working of subject areas (Howard & Maton, 2011). As well as clashes, the dominant code may also change, such as between subject areas, classrooms, and stages of a curriculum.…”

“…) at different levels of analysis (from national curriculum to individual texts) using a range of methods (documentary analysis, surveys, interviews, etc.). Empirical studies applying LCT conceptual tools can be found in educational technology (Carvalho & Goodyear, 2014a, 2014bHoward & Maton, 2011), engineering (Wolff & Luckett 2013), history (Matruglio, Maton, & Martin, 2013), journalism (Kilpert & Shay, 2013), music (Lamont & Maton, 2010), physics (Georgiou, Maton, & Sharma, 2014) and many other fields. In the rest of this article, we use the concepts to explore the organising principles of four disciplines of design -engineering, architecture, digital media, and fashion -through the analysis of interviews and survey with designers.…”

Technology, education and Arab youth in the 21st century: A study of the UAE

“…There is an acknowledged paucity of powerful theoretical constructs in research about the engagement of young people with educational technology (Bennett & Oliver, 2011;Czerniewicz, 2010;Howard & Maton, 2011;Selwyn, 2012Selwyn, , 2013, in part as a result of the complex and multi-disciplinary nature of the topic. For example, terminology used in research in this field varies substantially as disciplinary perspectives refocus on ICT and computer sciences, online or computer-assisted learning, education and technology, learning technology, sociology, anthropology, psychology, child development, economic or political aspects, or cultural and social development.…”

Rethinking the relationship between learner, learning contexts, and technology: a critique and exploration of Archer's morphogenetic approach

“…As Selwyn (2006, 417) points out, ' … education technology remains a marginalised area of educational studies'. This is a situation which may be seen as impeding the development of the field, running the risk of turning it into a narrow, derivative area of work isolated from the wider intellectual worlds of the social sciences and humanities (Bennett and Oliver 2011;Howard and Maton 2011;Jones and Czerniewicz 2011). In responding to a call for the 'careful use of social theory' as an 'essential component of developing rich understandings of the structures, actions, processes and relations that constitute use of digital technology in educational settings and contexts' (Selwyn 2012, 82), this article interrogates this praxis ontology in research of education technology, in particular as implied by Giddens' structuration theory, and evaluates examples of its use in the study of learning with technology.…”