Conceptions of Time in Educational Technology
Considerations for Equity-focused Design
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i4.4056Abstract
The adoption of technology-enhanced online learning platforms is transforming teaching and learning practices within and outside the university. As online learning and educational technology become increasingly ubiquitous, there is a need for equity-minded scholarship attending to the social, cultural, and political implications of the technology sustaining online learning. While prior literature has made important strides framing education technology within conversations of equity and justice, there is a lack of empirical research analyzing marketing material of education technology. This presents a significant gap in understanding for education researchers, as marketing material plays a significant role in shaping public perceptions of technology, and can be widely read among students, instructors, and university stakeholders before directly engaging with the tool. Given recent scholarly interest in the ways subjective understandings of temporality are implicated in learning design, the present study connects burgeoning interest in temporality towards corporate marketing material of learning design. Drawing on artifact analysis methods, we analyzed blog posts from Coursera and customer success stories from Microsoft that describe how their products are designed to support online learning. Our research questions include: (1) How does marketing material from two education technology companies shape subjective understandings of temporality in online learning? (2) How can these temporal representations be leveraged to promote equity-oriented pedagogical design? Results from our analysis show how time is constituted as an efficient and agentic resource, and as an orientation towards future careers. We discuss how these findings have implications for equity-oriented pedagogical design by linking conceptions of time to neoliberalism and humanization.
References
Adam, T. (2019). Digital neocolonialism and massive open online courses (MOOCs): Colonial pasts and neoliberal futures. Learning, Media, and Technology, 44(3), 365–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1640740
Altbach, P. (2014). MOOCs as neocolonialism: Who controls knowledge? International Journal Higher Education (75), 5–7. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2014.75.5426
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. University of Texas Press.
Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim Code. Polity.
Busch, L. (2017). Knowledge for sale: The neoliberal takeover of higher education. MIT Press.
Bylsma, P. (2015). The teleological effect of neoliberalism on American higher education. College Student Affairs Leadership, 2(2), 1–14.
Cameron, M., Lacy, T.A., Siegel, P., Wu, J., Wilson, A., Johnson, R., Burns, R., and Wine, J. (2021). 2019–20 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:20): First Look at the Impact of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic on Undergraduate Student
Enrollment, Housing, and Finances (Preliminary Data) (NCES 2021-456). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2021456
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Harvard University Press.
Curnow, J. (2016). Towards a radical theory of learning: Prefiguration as legitimate peripheral participation. In S. Springer, R. White, & M. Lopes de Souza (Eds.), The radicalization of pedagogy (pp. 27–49). Rowman and Littlefield.
Decuypere, M., Grimaldi, E., & Landri, P. (2021). Introduction: Critical studies of digital education platforms. Critical Studies in Education, 62(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1866050
Fortman, J. (2023). Neoliberalism and the rise of online proctoring. Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, 22.
Fortman, J., & Quintana, R.M. (2023). Fostering collaborative and embodied learning with extended reality: Special issue introduction. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 18(2), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09404-1
Freire, P. (2020). Pedagogy of the oppressed: 50th anniversary edition. Bloomsbury.
Giroux, H. (2004). Cultural studies, public pedagogy, and the responsibility of intellectuals. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 1(1), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/1479142042000180926
Goli, S. (2021, April 19). Announcing new products, tools, and features to support learners, educators, and institutions with their rapidly evolving teaching and learning needs. Coursera Blog. https://blog.coursera.org/announcing-new-products-tools-and-features-to-support-learners-educators-and-institutions-with-their-rapidly-evolving-teaching-and-learning-needs/
Goli, S. (2022, May 4). New products, tools, and features to enhance teaching and learning on Coursera. Coursera Blog. https://blog.coursera.org/new-products-tools-and-features-2022/
Hébert, C. (2021). Online remote proctoring software in the neoliberal institution: Measurement, accountability, and testing culture. in education, 27(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.37119/ojs2021.v27i1.507
Holmes, A. G. D. (2020). Researcher positionality—A consideration of its influence and place in qualitative research—A new researcher guide. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 8(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.34293/ education.v8i4.3232
Jacobson, D., & Mustafa, N. (2019). Social identity map: A reflexivity tool for practicing explicit positionality in critical qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919870075
Kono, K. G., Taylor, S. (2021). Using an ethos of care to bridge the digital divide: Exploring faculty narratives during a global pandemic. Online Learning Journal, 25(1), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i1.2484
Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.005
McKenna, S. (2022). Neoliberalism’s conditioning effects on the university and the example of proctoring during COVID-19 and since. Journal of Critical Realism, 21(5), 502–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767430.2022.2100612
Microsoft. (2022a, April 28). Florida university gives students hands-on skills, job-hunting success with Microsoft courseware. https://customers.microsoft.com/en-us/story/1497653661934691216-stleouniversity-microsoftlearnforeducators
Microsoft. (2022b, March, 16). Career planning for the modern workforce—How university college cork used career coach to transform the student experience. https://customers.microsoft.com/en-us/story/1482863734987932486-ucc-higher-education-microsoft-teams-en-united-states
Microsoft. (2022c, March, 23). USC’s Viterbi iPodia program invests in collaborative hybrid learning to break down barriers in traditional education with Microsoft teams. https://customers.microsoft.com/en-us/story/1485500421243115963-usc-viterbi-ipodia-program-higher-education-teams
Microsoft. (2022d, May 2). McMaster University’s DeGroote School of Business collaborates with Microsoft to design advanced digital literacy curriculum. https://customers.microsoft.com/en-us/story/1340374277301100039-mcmaster-edu-teams-canada
Microsoft. (2022e, May 17). The University of Texas at San Antonio increases collaboration and strengthens cybersecurity with Microsoft 365. https://customers.microsoft.com/en-us/story/1504947573850586709-utsa-higher-education-microsoft-365-en-united-states
Microsoft. (2022f, July 13). CAE, Staffordshire University extend virtual patient simulations, drive better healthcare education with Azure. https://customers.microsoft.com/en-us/story/1472319410271039702-cae-higher-education-azure-iot-hub
Nguyen, K., James, N., Papendieck, A., Quintana, R. M., & Tierney, G. (2022). When, where, and at what pace? Space and time in equitable learning and design. In C. Chinn, E. Tan, C. Chan, & Y. Kali (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference of the Learning Sciences—ICLS 2022, (pp. 1755–1762). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.
Papendieck, A. 2018. Technology for equity and social justice in education: A critical issue overview. Texas Education Review, 6(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.15781/T2891278V
Quintana, R. M., Fortman, J., & DeVaney, J. (2021). Advancing an approach of resilient design for learning by designing for extensibility, flexibility, and redundancy. In C. González, T. Thurston, & K. Lundstrom (Eds.), Resilient pedagogy: Practical teaching
strategies to overcome distance, disruption, and distraction (pp. 77–92). Utah State University. https://dx.doi.org/10.26079/a516-fb24
Quintana, R. M., & Tan, Y. (2019). MOOC replication across platforms: Considerations for design team decision-making and process. European Review of Online and Distributed Learning 22(2).
Reilly, E. D., Williams, K. M., Stafford, R. E., Corliss, S. B., Walkow, J. C., & Kidwell, D. K. (2016). Global times call for global measures: Investigating automated essay scoring in linguistically-diverse MOOCs. Online Learning Journal 20(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i2.638
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE.
Shah, D. (2019, December 2). By The Numbers: MOOCs in 2019. The Report by Class Central. https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2019/
Shah, D., Pickard, L., & Ma, R. (2023, April 10). Massive list of MOOC platforms around the world in 2023—class central. The Report by Class Central. https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-platforms/
Shahjahan, R. (2014). Being “lazy” and slowing down: Toward decolonizing time, our body, and pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(5), 488–501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2014.880645
Trausan-Matu, S., & Slotta, J. D. (2021). Artifact analysis. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. Friend Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International Handbook of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 551–567). Springer.
Uttamchandani, S. (2021). Educational intimacy: Learning, prefiguration, and relationships in an LGBTQ+ youth group’s advocacy efforts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 30(1), 52-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2020.1821202
Walker, J. (2009). Time as the fourth dimension in the globalization of higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 80, 483–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2009.11779029
Watters, A. (2020, June 21). The ed-tech imaginary. HackEducation. https://hackeducation.com/2020/06/21/imaginary
Witthaus, G. (2023). Refugees and online engagement in higher education: A capabilitarian model. Online Learning Journal, 27(2), 46–66. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i2.3762
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Jacob Fortman, Rebecca Quintana, Jacob Aguinaga
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
