In recent years, approximately since the mid-seventies, other perspectives have gained strength in the educational field in general and in the curriculum in particular, well differentiated approaches to the structure of technical-scientific rationality that has covered Educational Technology.
This emergence of other rationalities is generating what in a few words we could describe as the loss of academic and intellectual hegemony of a conception of education characterized by the search for positivist rationality, systematization and scientism.
This does not fall within the objectives of this work, and this has already been done by other authors of greater importance (see Escudero, 1984; Carr and Kemmis, 1987; Guarro, 1987; Kemmis, 1988; Gimeno, 1988; Marrero, 1990 to cite some of the most representative works that can be found in Spanish).
ARGUMENTATIONS
- The context of emergence and use of ET is typical of academic instances and environment, not of schools. It has been instructional psychologists, educational researchers, and teaching experts who have shaped the principles and procedures of the field. Neither the teaching staff nor the members of the support and guidance services have participated throughout the short history of TE.
- Teachers and educational centers have been considered as mere consumers of ET, not as agents with decisional responsibility over it. That is to say, its technical nature imposes that those who are the subjects who possess the knowledge and power to use ET are external agents to the schools.
- Underlying TE is a conception of the nature of the instructional process of a standardized and unidirectional nature. That is, if we accept the multidimensional characterization of the teaching processes in the classrooms (Doyle, 1983; 1986).
- TE totally disregards the thought and pedagogical cultures of teachers. For TE to generate an instructive or material design for an educational system is to create a product. The adequacy or not to reality is given by the congruence and internal goodness of the design.
In conclusion, the disciplinary field called Educational Technology has represented and represents within the curricular panorama an option on the curriculum and teaching characterized by the attempt to modernize and rationalize the phenomena and instructional processes.
This field in its first moments concentrated its attention on how to incardinate and introduce the teaching aids in order to increase the communicative efficiency between the teacher and the students, but it is in the decade of the seventies when it reached its greatest production and extension to the refocus your interest on instructional design.
Even one of the most representative authors in the field, Derek Rowntree (1982), closed his work Educational Technology in Curriculum Development stating the following:
"My last question is whether it is not about time we stopped using the term educational technology. Educational technology is one of the possible means to an end. Perhaps we would overcome many of the understandable misgivings our colleagues have towards us at the same time. time we would have a more open vision if we emphasize the end more than the means and we rename our profession as educational development "