When I was pondering the names of “Educational Technology” degrees last year, we were in the midst of examining the identity of the field. Now, I am happy to announce, that our program at the University of Texas at Austin has a new name: Learning Technologies. Though a name doesn’t mean that we will change the work we do, it does capture the field and essence of our work in a better way. We are definitely not the first to go through this change. Purdue, Georgia, Penn State, Georgia State, Michigan State, and the University of Minnesota have all moved towards this direction.
Evrim Baran
Hi George,
I am also seeing this shift within the conferences and professional organizations. Could you please elaborate more on your decision of choosing “learning technologies”? Why do you think it captures the essence of your work better than “educational technology”?
Thanks,
Evrim
George Veletsianos
Hi Evrim – thanks for your comment. The term “Instructional Technology” predominantly refers to the focus within our field on the systematic design of instruction. Our research is broader than that and we hope to signify that with a name change. We focus on learning environments (whether those are formal or informal; created by an instructional designer or created by a learner [in the case of PLEs], and learning ecologies. Thus, the term “learning” is a better representation of our research focus and of the field. With regard to “Educational Technology,” we avoided that name because is was term used in the 90’s to refer to programs focusing on K-12 technology.
Evrim Baran
Hi George,Thanks for your reply. It is helpful to see why you prefer “learning technologies” over others. I believe there is so much in the names that connote the philosophy and vision behind the programs, and many times they are ignored or accepted as they have always been. I see this a lot within the field of education, using the words without clear definitions and lack of connections with the epistemological roots. In educational technology particularly, there is already a cottage industry of different categories, names etc. Your articulation, therefore, will help to reduce the ambiguity. I am also curious if you see any intersections with the learning sciences field, and/or if that is part of a broader learning technologies field?