Clark and Kozma Position Paper

By: Ashley Frogg

Issues in Instructional Technology

Section E01 Fall Semester 2016

My Position
I support Clark’s position because I believe that media only highlights the type of

teacher you currently are. If you are an effective teacher, then media will highlight your

effectiveness. If you are a weak teacher, then media will highlight your ineffectiveness.

It is not the device, nor the media an educator choose to instruct from, but the

educator’s understanding of the content, student, and medium that all work together to

bring maximum student achievement. I will follow that up with the saying that technology

will never replace teachers, but teachers who use technology will. There are so many

great uses of media that can in integrated into the content, but it is the educator’s

understanding of the student that will maximize the learning. An educator does not have

to know how to use all various media mediums, but they do have to understand their

students and how they learn best. Then, the educator, knowing the student, can take

their knowledge of the content and enhance it with media to develop the learner.

Clark’s Viewpoint

Clark’s viewpoint is that teaching methods have the most impact on learning. Clark

states that “technology not only does not influence learning, but it will never influence

learning, and that media is neither sufficient for or necessary to learning” (Clark, 1994).

Therefore, Clark maintained that media is only a platform for learning, but it has no

influence on student achievement. Clark maintained that instructional methods are what

impacted learning, not media.

Kozma’s Viewpoint

Kozma’s viewpoint is that using media as a platform for your teaching has an impact on

the students’ learning. Kozma defined media as, “can be defined by its technology,
symbol systems, and processing capabilities” (Kozma, 1991). He goes on to say that

media can create the background knowledge that many learners are missing, which

causes them to not be able to learn certain material. THerefore, media can help

learners “understand complex concepts” by “connecting them to prior knowledge”

(Kozma, 1991).

Today’s Relevance

Clark’s viewpoint is still relevant today because look at all the schools pushing devices

into their buildings. There is no research that can support that the device, itself, or one

particular medium is doing anything to advance student achievement. Thus, why taking

high performing teachers out of their current schools and putting them in low performing

schools has little to no effect. There are so many variables that go into student

achievement. Many companies are trying to lean on Kozma’s debate and get teachers

to add their particular media to their teaching to create accelerated student

achievement. Those same schools are quickly learning that Clark’s stance has some

validity. No matter the media they choose to integrate into their schools, they cannot put

all the teachers, students, and communities into that same box. While one media may

be very successful for one teacher, it cannot be said that it would be successful for all.

Change From Today

I am not sure Clark or Kozma could be changed by viewing today’s classrooms. While,

Kozma would be very encouraged while visiting schools with a heavy emphasis on

media. He would see schools that are having students create content and see the

paradigm of school being changed from consumers to producers. He would find

strength in his viewpoint. Whereas, Clark could step into other schools, who are 1:1 and

have all the media,but are still stuck in the consumer stage. He would see the students

doing the same worksheets, but digitally, which has no impact on learning. It would

support his stance that it is the instruction taking place that is making the difference.

Sweller and Mayer

Sweller’s cognitive load theory states that schemas, or combination of elements, as the

cognitive structures that make up and individual’s knowledge base (Sweller, 1988). He

goes on to say that the difference in an expert and a novice learner is the development

of their schemas. He goes on to say that the design of the learning is what will maximize

or minimize the learner’s ability to acquire the knowledge. He says we can limit the

workload by integrating sources of information.

Mayer introduces the multimedia principle. It state that “people learn more deeply from

words and pictures than from words alone” (Mayer & Moreno, 2003). He goes on to say

that learning is an active process that if our brain cannot put the information into a

pattern that makes sense to us, then we cannot learn it.

Sweller and Mayer’s Resolution

Sweller and Mayer’s theories can be used to resolve the Clark and Kozma debate by

saying that there is power when media is integrated into instruction in a specific way.

When the media is integrated into the learning that fits the learning style of the student,

you will see student achievement.

Current Research

Current research on media and instructional technology cannot be discounted. Students

in classrooms today are not the same students that were in classrooms in the 20th

century. We are no longer preparing students for factory job, but for the 21st century.

Marc Prensky called the students we currently have in our classrooms, “Digital Natives.”

They do not know a time without the internet. Therefore, they are changing the way

teachers deliver content (Prensky, 2008). Students sit in our classrooms with more

technology in their pocket than the United States used to send the first man to the

moon. As educators, we have to capitalize on this. We have to show students how to

find answers on their own and escape the era of standardized testing and spoon

feeding them the answers. We have to show students how to explore and unlock their

creativity. We have to change the current paradigm of school from letting students being

consumers of the content to producers of the content. Mark Prensky said it best, “our

kids’ future depends on it” (Prensky, 2008).

Works Cited

Clark, R. (1994). Media Will Never Influence Learning. Educational Technology Research and

Development, 42(2), 21-29. Retrieved from http://articles.westga.edu:2308/stable/30218684

Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research Review of

Educational Research J1 – Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179.

Kozma, R. (1994). Will Media Influence Learning? Reframing the Debate. Educational Technology

Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19. Retrieved from http://articles.westga.edu:2308/stable/30218683

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2203). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning.

Educational psychologist, 47.

Prensky, M. (2008) Backup Education? Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-

Backup_Education-EdTech-1-08.pdf.

Sweller, J., Ayers, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. (electronic resource). New York, NY:

Springer New York, 2011.

Sweller, J., Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning, Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285

(1988).