You are here:

Gender and Educational Technologies: Relational Frameworks for Learning Design
Article

, University of Alberta, Canada

Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia Volume 9, Number 2, ISSN 1055-8896 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Technology-based models of teaching and learning are re-ceiving both social and political attention in the post-second-ary sector. However, instructional design practices have, up to now, been rooted in a domain constructed in, and reflect-ing, androcentric values. In this paper the traditional, rational framework and outcomes-driven design of most computer-based educational applications is contrasted with the rela-tional knowing supported by new technologies such as com-puter- mediated conferencing. A set of heuristics is proposed to guide feminine learning design relative to the social con-struct of gender and technology.

Citation

Campbell, K. (2000). Gender and Educational Technologies: Relational Frameworks for Learning Design. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(2), 131-149. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 8, 2023 from .

© 2000 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Cognition and Technology Group a t Vanderbilt (1990). Anchored ins truc-
  2. Cognition and Technology Group a t Vanderbilt (CTVG). (1991). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. Educational Technology, 31(9) , 34-40.
  3. Cognition and Technology Group a t Vanderbilt (1992). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(1) , 65-80.
  4. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52-70.
  5. Cognition and Technology Group a t Vanderbilt (CTVG). (1993). Designing learning environments that support thinking. In T.M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.) , Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 9-36). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  6. Elkjaer, B. (1992). Girls and information technology in Denmark: An account of a socially constructed problem. Gender and Education, 4(1/2), 25-40.
  7. Flax , J . (1989) . Postmodernism and gender relations in feminist theory . Signs , 12 (4) , 621-643 .
  8. Ganguly , K. (1992). Accounting for others: Feminism and representation. In Rakow , L.F. (Ed.) , Women making meaning: New feminist directions in communication, pp. 60-79. New York: Routledge.
  9. Haraway , D. (1991). S im ians , cyborgs, and women: There invention of nature. London: Free Association Books.
  10. Haraway , D. (1985). A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology, and socialist feminism in the 1980 ’s. Socialist Review, 15(80) , 65-107.
  11. Inkpen, K. (1995). Playing together beats playing apart, especially for girls. Proceedings of CHI ’95: Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM Press, 258-259.
  12. Inkpen, K. (1997 , June). Three important research agendas for educational mulltimedia: Learning, children, and gender. Proceedings of Educational Multimedia ’97 , Calgary, AB.
  13. Inkpen, K. (1998 , June). Playing together on a single machine: Compu tersuppor t for collaborative learning. Keynote address presented a t the
  14. Kalbfleisch , R . (1996 , December) . The female factor . Canad ian Compu ter Reseller , 14-18 .
  15. Kirkup, G. (1995 , July). The importance of gender as a category in open and distance learning. Paper presented a t the conference Putting the Learner First: Learner-Centred Approaches in Open and Distance Learning. Cambridge, UK.
  16. MacKeracher , D. (1996). Making sense of adult learning. Toronto: Culture Concepts.
  17. Morrell , C . (1991) . Uncommon knowledge: Women in science and women
  18. Oliver, K. (1999 , February). Computerbased tools in supporto f In terne tbased problemsolving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
  19. Plant, S. (1997). Zeros and ones: Digital women and the new technocu lture. NY: Doubleday.
  20. Spender , D. (1995). Na t ter ing on the Net: Women, power, and cyberspace. Australia: Spn ifex Press.
  21. Spertus , E. (1991 , August) Why are there so few female computer scientists? A lab Technical Report 1315. Artificial MIT.
  22. Stacey, E. 1999. Educational environments online: Using CMC effectively. Online at http://www2.deakin.edu.au/edonline/estacey/staceyirvine.htm
  23. Tannen , D. (1990). You just don’ t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: Ballantine Books.
  24. Tannen , D. (1994). Gender gap in cyberspace. Newsweek , May 16 , 54.
  25. Turkle, S. (1992). The social construction of computers: Hammers or harpsichords? In Gail Kirkup and Laurie Smith Keller (Eds.) Science, Techno
  26. Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the InterneT. New York: Simon& Schuster.
  27. Von Prummer, C. (1993 , June). Women friendly perspectives in distance education. Keynote address in Feminist Pedagogy and Women-Friendly
  28. Wylie, M. (1995). No place for women: Internet is a flawed model for the Infobahn. Digital Media, 4(8) , 3.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections