Hybrid technology comprehension
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v16i28.136297Keywords:
Technology comprehension, STS, Hybridity, LatourAbstract
The purpose of this article is to investigate both political and theoretical potentials for developing technology comprehension (TC or ‘teknologiforståelse’ in Danish) as a hybrid subject area and professional field. A hybrid subject area is one that is not based on a dichotomy between humans and technologies, subjects and objects, but rather recognizes and incorporates the interrelated or hybrid nature of both humans and non-humans. The article opens with a summary of research on hybridity from the field of Science and Technology studies (STS) with a special focus on Bruno Latours work on the modern constitution, processes of purification and hybridization. Then follows an analysis of political documents which may prove constitutive for the future direction of TC if implemented in the public school system. And finally, the article discuss how the STS-concepts of network, translation, matters of concern and performativity may inform further development of the competence areas of TC in a more hybrid direction.
Downloads
References
Adams, A. A. (2008). PowerPoint and the Pedagogy of Digital Media Technology. PhD thesis, Department of Secondary Education, University of Alberta https://era.library.ualberta.ca/items/50038bce-9689-4c37-b6cf-840aea564fe4
Akrich, M. (1992). The De-Scription of Technical Objects. I W. Bijker & T. Pinch (Red.), Shaping Technology, Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (s. 205–224). MIT Press.
Alliancen for teknologiforståelse. (2022). Alliancen for teknologiforståelse – fælles forståelse. https://deg.dk/files/media/document/Alliancen%20for%20Teknologiforst%C3%A5else.pdfAndersen, L. B. (2013). A travelogue of 100 laptops—Investigating Development, Actor-Network Theory & One Laptop per Child [Aarhus University]. http://laptopstudy.net
Andersen, L. B. (2021). Krydsende teknologiforståelser i teori og praksis: Fra problem til potentiale. Learning Tech, 10, 100–126. https://doi.org/10.7146/lt.v6i10.125621
Andersen, L. B., Danholt, P., Halskov, K., Hansen, N. B., & Lauritsen, P. (2015). Participation as a matter of concern in participatory design. CoDesign, 11(3–4), 250–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2015.1081246
Bijker, W., & Law, J. (Eds.). (1992). Shaping technology building society: Studies in sociotechnical change. MIT Press.
Callon, M. (1986). Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation—Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieux Bay. I J. Law (Red.), Power, Action, and Belief—A New Sociology of Knowledge (s. 196–223). Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Caspersen, M. E., & Nowack, P. (2013). Computational Thinking and Practice—A Generic Approach to Computing in Danish High Schools. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference, 136, 137–143.
Crawford, K., & Joler, V. (2018). Anatomy of an AI System: The Amazon Echo As An Anatomical Map of Human Labor, Data and Planetary Resources. AI Now Institute and Share Lab. https://anatomyof.ai
Danholt, P., & Gad, C. (Red.). (2021). Videnskab, teknologi og samfund: En introduktion til STS / Peter Danholt og Christiopher Gad (1. udgave). Hans Reitzel.
DiSessa, A. A. (2001). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy (1. paperback ed). The MIT Press.
DLF. (2021). Politik vedr. Teknologiforståelse. https://www.dlf.org/media/14186841/politik-teknologiforstaaelse.pdf
EMU. (u.å.). Teknologiforståelse. EMU - Danmarks læringsportal. https://emu.dk/grundskole/teknologiforstaaelse?b=t5
Emam, K. E., & Koru, A. G. (2008). A Replicated Survey of IT Software Project Failures. IEEE Software, 25(5), 84–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2008.107
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.
Hansbøl, M. (2014). Flere veje til at begribe og håndtere teknologi i professionsarbejdet. 3, 36–44.
Hansen, T. I. (2020). Teknologiforståelse som praktisk klogskab—Om variation og virksomhedsformer i teknologiforståelse som fag. Unge Pædagoger, 2020(1), 25–35.
Hachmann, R. (2022). The Cyber Weapon: Decomposing Puzzles in Unplugged Computational Thinking Practices with Computational Objects. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz, 36(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-022-00756-8
Hughes, T. P. (1993). Networks of power: Electrification in western society, 1880 - 1930 (Softshell Books ed). John Hopkins Univ. Press.
Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Indiana University Press.
Illeris, Knud (2011). Kompetence: Hvad - Hvorfor - Hvordan? Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur
Jensen, C. B. (2020). Cli-Fi, Education, and Speculative Futures. Comparative Education Review, 64(1), 150–152. https://doi.org/10.1086/707328.
KL. (2021). Fælles retning for folkeskolen—KLs perspektiver på hvordan vi sammen udvikler en lokal folkeskole, hvor alle børn og unge trives, lærer og får byggesten til et godt liv. KL. https://www.kl.dk/media/28972/faelles-retning-for-folkeskolen.pdf
Knowles, B. (2021). ACM TechBrief: Computing and Climate Change. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3483410
Latour, B. (2006). Vi har aldrig været moderne: Et essay om symmetrisk antropologi. Hans Reitzel.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton University Press.
Latour, B. (2018). Ned på jorden: Hvordan orienterer vi os politisk? (Torsten Andreasen, Overs.; 1. udgave). Information.
Latour, B. (1993). On Technical Mediation—Philosophy, Sociology , Genealogy. Common Knowledge, 3(2), 29–64.
Latour, B. (2004). How to Talk About the Body? The Normative Dimension of Science Studies. Body and Society, 10(2–3), 205–229.
Latour, B. (1993). The pasteurization of France. Harvard University Press.
Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Duke University Press.
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy (First edition). Crown.
Pickering, A. (2017). The Ontological Turn: Taking Different Worlds Seriously. Social Analysis, 61(2). https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2017.610209
Regeringen. (2022A). Danmarks digitaliseringsstrategi—Sammen om den digitale udvikling (s. 72). Finansministeriet.
Regeringen. (2022B). Ansvar for Danmark—Det politiske grundlag for Danmarks regering (s. 63).
Regeringen, KL, & Danske Regioner. (2022). Digitalisering der løfter samfundet—Den fællesoffentlige digitaliseringsstrategi 2022-2025 (Nr. 978-87-94088-41–1; s. 36).
Riise, A. B. (2022). En afklaring af fremtiden for teknologiforståelse i skolen kan nå at komme i 2022. Folkeskolen.dk. https://www.folkeskolen.dk/it-it-i-undervisningen-praksisfaglighed/en-afklaring-af-fremtiden-for-teknologiforstaelse-i-skolen-kan-na-at-komme-i-2022/4643114
Serres, M. (1995). Conversations on science, culture, and time. University of Michigan Press.
Sørensen, K. K. (2020). KL: Teknologiforståelse skal være et obligatorisk fag. Skolemonitor. https://skolemonitor.dk/nyheder/art8012962/Teknologiforst%C3%A5else-skal-v%C3%A6re-et-obligatorisk-fag
Sørensen, E. (2010). The materiality of learning: Technology and knowledge in educational practice (First paperback edition). Cambridge University Press.
DiSessa, A. A. (2001). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy (1. paperback ed). The MIT Press.
Stengers, I. (1999). For en demokratisering av vitenskapene. Spartacus.
Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Books.
Edwards, P. N. (2003). Infrastructure and Modernity: Force, Time and Social Organisation in the History of Sociotechnical Systems. In T. Misa, P. Brey, & A. Feenberg (Eds.), Modernity and Technology (pp. 185–225). MIT Press. http://pne.people.si.umich.edu/PDF/infrastructure.pdf
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power (First edition). PublicAffairs.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Lars Bo Andersen, Peter Danholt, Helene Friis Ratner
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the Journal of Learning and Media are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported Licens.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication; simultaneously articles are licensend under the Creative Commons Attribution license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerviatives (by-nc-nd). Read about this license at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
---
At LOM.dk, you will also find articles from the discontinued Journal for the Continuing and Further Education of the Danish Universities (UNEV). Note that special rules apply to UNEV articles:
It is the authors and any other copyright holder who have the copyright of articles published under the auspices of UNEV, and access to the articles is contingent on users acknowledging and complying with the associated legal guidelines:
- Users may download and print one copy of any UNEV publication for private studies or research.
- The redistribution of articles or the use of these for revenue-funded activities or commercial purposes are not allowed.
- It is not allowed to distribute the URLs of UNEV articles.
