Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2018, No.1, pp.93-106
UDC: 
165.62

Phenomenology of digital educational technologies

Volkova S. V. 1 (Petrozavodsk; Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation)
1 Petrozavodsk State University; St. Petersburg State University
Abstract: 

Introduction. The ontological and epistemological aspects of digital technologies are significant but currently poorly investigated areas in educational philosophy. The purpose of the article is to clarify the concept of conscience with reference to the specificity of e-learning digital technologies and its challenges for education and to conduct analysis of the requirements imposed on conscience experience of stakeholders in education by digital technologies.
Materials and Methods. Based on the phenomenological philosophy, the article argues that modern digital technologies, such as power-point presentation, computer simulation, virtual communication, raise issues about conscience, body and time. The necessity for estimation of the phenomenological reflection and description is in facilitating the identification of such relevant research concepts as “conscience and time”, “conscience and comprehension”, and “conscience and body”.
Results. The author argues that power-point technology is based on a phenomenological approach to understanding the concepts of conscience and time, and considers time as inherent form of structuring human conscience. The author shows that digital technologies provoke students to understand what they see in the clip-like manner. As a consequence, the possibilities of hermeneutic perception and communicative competences of students are suppressed. The disembodied character of stakeholders (students and teachers) in the context of virtual communication may constrain to see personal identity of human being and preclude the development of pedagogical tact. The study suggests that teachers can help their students when they take into account not only verbal, written languages and presentations but also gestures and body orientations, and relationships between these different modalities.
Conclusions. In accordance with the purpose of the article, the author concludes that phenomenological concept of conscience is appropriate to the specificities of e-learning educational technologies and simultaneously points out that gaining intentional-reflective, synthetic and lived conscious experience should be the main requirement for students. Without this understanding students and teachers’ being transforms into mere functions of machinery – devices for recognition and translation of information, while the experience of the “ divided subject” turns out to be the most frequent anthropological correlate of digital educational technologies.

Keywords: 

Phenomenological approach to consciousness; Intentionality; Inner time consciousness; Embodiment; Divided subject; Gesture; Education; PowerPoint presentation

References: 
  1. Abdelrahman L. A. M., Attaran M., Hai-Leng C. What does PowerPoint mean to you? A Phenomenological Study. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2013, vol. 103, pp. 1319–1326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.462
  2. Aagaard J. Media multitasking, attention, and distraction: A critical discussion. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 2015, vol. 14 (4), pp. 885–896. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11097-014-9375-x
  3. Adams C. PowerPoint, habits of mind, and classroom culture. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 2006, vol. 38 (4), pp. 389–411. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220270600579141
  4. Adams C. PowerPoint’s Pedagogy. Phenomenology and Practice, 2008, vol. 2 (1), pp. 63–79. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7939/R37W67K18
  5. Adams C., Yin Y., Madriz L. F. V., Mullen C. S. A phenomenology of learning large: the tutorial sphere of xMOOC video lectures. Distance Education, 2014, vol. 35 (2), pp. 202–216. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.917701
  6. Atit K., Gagnier K., Shipley T. F. Student Gestures Aid Penetrative Thinking. Journal of Geoscience Education, 2015, vol. 63 (1), pp. 66–72. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5408/14-008.1
  7. Feenberg A., Friesen N. (eds) (Re)Inventing the Internet: Critical Case Studies. Rotterdam, Netherlands, Sense Publ., 2012, 135 p. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-734-9
  8. Flavin M. Disruptive Technology Enhanced Learning: The Use and Misuse of Digital Technologies in Higher Education. London, Palgrave Macmillan Publ., 2017, 150 p. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57284-4
  9. Friesen N. Dissection and Simulation: Brilliance and Transparency, or Encumbrance and Disruption?. Techne: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 2011, vol. 15 (3), pp. 185–200. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/techne201115320
  10. Hall M., Harrow M., Estelle L. Digital Futures: Expert Briefings on Digital Technologies for Education and Research, Elsevier Publ., 2015, 68 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100384-8.00014-5  
  11. Holmes J. D. Great Myths of Education and Learning. UK, Wiley Blackwell Publ., 2016, 224 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118760499
  12. Kernbach S., Bresciani S., Eppler M. Slip-sliding away: a review of the literature on the constraining qualities of PowerPoint. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 2015, vol. 78 (3), pp. 292–313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490615595499
  13. Kim M., Roth W.-M., Thom J. Children's gestures and the embodied knowledge of geometry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics education, 2011, vol. 9 (1), pp. 207–238. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9240-5
  14. Murray J.-A. Participants’ perceptions of a MOOC. Insights, 2014, vol. 27 (2), pp. 154–159. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1629/2048-7754.154
  15. O'Donnell A. Contemplative Pedagogy and Mindfulness: Developing Creative Attention in an Age of Distraction. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 2015, vol. 49 (2), pp. 187–202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.12136
  16. Prestridge S. The beliefs behind the teacher that influences their ICT practices. Computers & Education, 2012, vol. 58, issue 1, pp. 449–458 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.028
  17. Peters M. A. The university in the epoch of digital reason: Fast knowledge in the circuits of cybernetic capitalism. Analysis and Metaphysics, 2015, vol. 14, pp. 38–58. URL: https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/10959/2-Peters%281%29.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
  18. Peters M. A., Jandric P. Dewey’s Democracy and Education in the age of digital reason: the global, ecological and digital turns. Open Review of Educational Research, 2017, vol. 4 (1), pp. 205–218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1395290
  19. Peters M. A., Jandric P. Philosophy of education in the age of digital reason. Review of Contemporary Philosophy, 2015, vol. 14, pp. 162–181. URL: https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/9561/14-Peters%26Jandric-1.pdf.pdf?sequence=6&isAllowed=y
  20. Pozzer-Ardenghi L., Roth W.-M. On performing concepts during science lectures. Science Education, 2007, vol. 91 (1), pp. 96–114. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20172
  21. Rosenberger R. Technologies of Education: Classrooms and Chat Rooms, Scalpels, and Screens. Human Studies, 2013, vol. 36 (2), pp. 307–313. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10746-013-9266-0
  22. Roth W.-M. On the pregnance of bodily movement and geometrical objects: A post-constructivist account of the origin of mathematical knowledge. Journal of Pedagogy, 2014, vol. 5 (1), pp. 65–89. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jped-2014-0004
  23. Shaw R. Heidegger and E-Learning: Overthrowing the Traditions of Pedagogy. E-Learning and Digital Media, 2014, vol. 11 (2), pp. 123–134. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/elea.2014.11.2.123
  24. Walsh C. S. Digital culture & education (DCE) embraces ‘slow citizenship’ into the future. Digital Culture & Education, 2014, vol. 6 (4), pp. 388–392. URL: http://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/walsh_editorial_6_4_2014.pdf
  25. Yin Y., Adams C., Goble E., Madriz L. F. V. A classroom at home: children and the lived world of MOOCs. Educational Media International, 2015, vol. 52 (2), pp. 88–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2015.1053287
Date of the publication 28.02.2018