The need for innovation in the design and mediatization practices of online learning systems has been questioned during the COVID-19 pandemic. On the one hand, in the context of crisis learning environments, teachers projected face-to-face teaching methods onto distance learning without considering the potential of technology. However, technology integration is a process that requires thorough planning and a methodical approach guided by pedagogical principles and technology integration frameworks. On the other hand, the evolution of mediatization practices has highlighted the challenges of mediatization, leading to a call for justification of the choice of mediatization tools. This chapter outlines a theoretical framework for technology integration along with recommendations for future research on mediatization. The essence of this work is to propose a classification of mediatization tools, which the authors intend to utilize in upcoming research to design a typology that guides the selection of those tools.
TopIntroduction
The Covid-19 pandemic has raised questions about the need for innovation in the design and mediatization practices of online learning systems. The traditional methods used by teachers to plan and mediatize for the crisis learning environments, failed to offer an adapted learning experience to the learners’ needs and the complicated crisis situation.
Nevertheless, adapting to this challenging situation remains a complicated undertaking. It involves setting up an engineering process to which teachers are neither trained nor experienced, rather than a simple matter of transposing face-to-face practices to online learning (Caron, 2021). According to Caron (2021), this engineering-focused process is a model of distance teaching referred to as pedagogical engineering model. It emphasizes the standardization and rationalization of methods to ensure rigor in the design, development and delivery processes of online technology-based learning environments. However, it contrasts with the artisanal model of distance teaching, which relies on a form of teaching improvisation (bricolage), where teachers project face-to-face teaching practices onto online teaching.
Moreover, two main constraints arise from the distancing and spatio-temporal disruption of the teaching and learning process (Peraya & Peltier, 2020a): “The first is the obligation to plan and organize the teaching and learning activities throughout the entire course. This requires both an overall scenario and a specific scenario for each of the course's activities. The second constraint is the of mediatization of resources and, progressively, of learning activities, then of the learning system.” These constraints should be at the heart of instructional engineering, according to Peraya and Peltier (2020a).
Furthermore, mediatization practices has been subject to change over the past several years that witnessed a significant upswing in technological advancements. Particularly, after the health crisis and the 4th industrial revolution, which entailed the incorporation of emerging technologies and new educational technologies into teaching and learning, as well as modifications in teaching modalities.
In the Debate-discussion section of the 29th issue of Distances et Mediations of Knowledge, Peraya and Peltier examined the factors influencing the evolution of instructional engineering and instructional design, in an era characterized by an abundance of information and content. They invited authors to submit their contributions in order to take part in the debate on this issue. Several authors, who have expertise in learning systems and mediated communication, participated in the debate to share their thoughts on potential modifications to instructional engineering in emergency and post-pandemic situations (Peraya & Peltier, 2020b).
Nonetheless, the same authors shed light on a significant gap in some of the received contributions. They emphasized the lack of attention paid to mediatization processes, which are an integral part of an effective use of instructional engineering. According to Leclerq, the neglect of these processes represents an underutilization of the potential of pedagogical engineering (Peraya & Peltier, 2020b). Likewise, this underestimation of mediatization was previously observed the in the production of audio and video capsules for pedagogical use, especially in the context of MOOCs (Campion et al., 2019; Peltier & Campion, 2017; Peraya, 2017). Besides, Peraya and Peltier argue that ignoring these processes would obscure the articulation between mediatization and its effects in terms of mediation. Thereby, hindering the possibility of examining the effects of learning systems on various aspects of learner’s behavior (Peraya & Peltier, 2020b)
The underemphasis placed on mediatization has raised important issues for consideration and provided significant insights regarding best practices for learning systems’ design and mediatization. However, considering the evolving technological landscape and the major shifts in teaching modalities and approaches, teachers face many challenges when choosing the proper mediatization tools.