THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF SMART TECHNOLOGIES: IS SMART EPISTEMOLOGY DERIVED FROM SMART EDUCATION?

I. Ardashkin, D. N. Borovinskaya, V. Surovtsev
{"title":"THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF SMART TECHNOLOGIES: IS SMART EPISTEMOLOGY DERIVED FROM SMART EDUCATION?","authors":"I. Ardashkin, D. N. Borovinskaya, V. Surovtsev","doi":"10.23951/2782-2575-2021-1-21-35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper deals with the impact of smart technologies on cognitive and educational activities and assesses the role of smart education in education and cognition from semiotics and epistemology. The authors of the article consider smart-technologies as modern information technologies of various profiles, developed mainly for the performance of the semiotic and epistemological functions of the person with its maximum possible replacement in different areas of life. The article notes that when evaluating smart technologies, some criteria are often overlooked, while the importance of others is exaggerated. In general, quantitative scenarios for the use of smart technologies prevail over qualitative ones. This situation leads to the fact that the main characteristics of smart technologies are replaced by secondary ones, causing overestimated expectations. For example, the authors examined the misconception that a student who studies a subject as part of online learning using smart technology begins to participate in an epistemological situation from a semiotic perspective. It is because online learning makes students “discover” knowledge independently, without the necessary methodology and teacher support. An overwhelming amount of research sees this situation as an achievement, and the authors consider it to be a negative factor. However, according to the assessment of the consequences of smart learning, the best results are shown by students who already possess some methodological knowledge. At the same time, the vast majority of students show a decline in their performance in online education. The authors of the article note that from an epistemological point of view, such a property of smart technologies as a functional substitution of the subject is very consonant with some constructivist trends in epistemology and cognitive sciences, admitting “cognition without a subject.” These smart technologies’ parameters in education and epistemology allow some studies to voice ideas about the possibility of forming smart education and smart epistemology as non-subject ways of knowledge and cognition. The article demonstrated that this situation is permissible if one does not distinguish between the concepts of “information” and “knowledge” and the processes of cognition and informing. It is shown that if this condition is ignored, then the concepts of “knowledge” and “cognition” lose their meaning since the process of cognition is a way of relating knowledge and information, and it is impossible without a subject. The authors conclude that smart technologies should be considered an additional tool used for similar, but not heuristic, creative and primary actions prioritizing the subject in education and epistemology.","PeriodicalId":118530,"journal":{"name":"Education & Pedagogy Journal","volume":"131 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education & Pedagogy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23951/2782-2575-2021-1-21-35","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The paper deals with the impact of smart technologies on cognitive and educational activities and assesses the role of smart education in education and cognition from semiotics and epistemology. The authors of the article consider smart-technologies as modern information technologies of various profiles, developed mainly for the performance of the semiotic and epistemological functions of the person with its maximum possible replacement in different areas of life. The article notes that when evaluating smart technologies, some criteria are often overlooked, while the importance of others is exaggerated. In general, quantitative scenarios for the use of smart technologies prevail over qualitative ones. This situation leads to the fact that the main characteristics of smart technologies are replaced by secondary ones, causing overestimated expectations. For example, the authors examined the misconception that a student who studies a subject as part of online learning using smart technology begins to participate in an epistemological situation from a semiotic perspective. It is because online learning makes students “discover” knowledge independently, without the necessary methodology and teacher support. An overwhelming amount of research sees this situation as an achievement, and the authors consider it to be a negative factor. However, according to the assessment of the consequences of smart learning, the best results are shown by students who already possess some methodological knowledge. At the same time, the vast majority of students show a decline in their performance in online education. The authors of the article note that from an epistemological point of view, such a property of smart technologies as a functional substitution of the subject is very consonant with some constructivist trends in epistemology and cognitive sciences, admitting “cognition without a subject.” These smart technologies’ parameters in education and epistemology allow some studies to voice ideas about the possibility of forming smart education and smart epistemology as non-subject ways of knowledge and cognition. The article demonstrated that this situation is permissible if one does not distinguish between the concepts of “information” and “knowledge” and the processes of cognition and informing. It is shown that if this condition is ignored, then the concepts of “knowledge” and “cognition” lose their meaning since the process of cognition is a way of relating knowledge and information, and it is impossible without a subject. The authors conclude that smart technologies should be considered an additional tool used for similar, but not heuristic, creative and primary actions prioritizing the subject in education and epistemology.
智能技术的认识论:智能认识论源于智能教育吗?
本文讨论了智能技术对认知和教育活动的影响,并从符号学和认识论的角度评估了智能教育在教育和认知中的作用。这篇文章的作者认为智能技术是各种各样的现代信息技术,主要是为了实现人的符号学和认识论功能而开发的,在生活的不同领域中有最大可能的替代。文章指出,在评估智能技术时,一些标准往往被忽视,而另一些标准的重要性被夸大了。一般来说,使用智能技术的定量场景优于定性场景。这种情况导致智能技术的主要特征被次要特征所取代,导致人们对智能技术的期望过高。例如,作者研究了一种误解,即学生使用智能技术作为在线学习的一部分来学习一门学科,就开始从符号学的角度参与认识论情境。这是因为在线学习使学生在没有必要的方法和教师支持的情况下自主“发现”知识。大量的研究将这种情况视为一种成就,而作者认为这是一个负面因素。然而,根据对智能学习的后果的评估,最好的结果是那些已经掌握了一些方法论知识的学生。与此同时,绝大多数学生在网络教育中的表现有所下降。文章的作者指出,从认识论的角度来看,智能技术作为主体的功能替代的这种属性与认识论和认知科学中的一些建构主义趋势非常一致,承认“没有主体的认知”。这些智能技术在教育和认识论方面的参数允许一些研究表达关于形成智能教育和智能认识论作为非主体知识和认知方式的可能性的想法。这篇文章表明,如果人们不区分“信息”和“知识”的概念以及认知和告知的过程,这种情况是允许的。如果忽略这个条件,那么“知识”和“认知”的概念就失去了意义,因为认知的过程是一种将知识和信息联系起来的方式,没有主体是不可能的。作者得出结论,智能技术应该被视为一种额外的工具,用于类似的,但不是启发式的,创造性的和主要的行动,优先考虑教育和认识论的主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信