What is the Evidence of Value for Money?
Educational technologies, when first introduced, were frequently compared with traditional face to face instruction which often ignored the reality that the different techniques were used to serve different cohorts of learners. It would be a valuable exercise, now, to carry out a comparison study of the effectiveness of "old" technologies and "new" technologies for similar cohorts.

The effectiveness of open and distance education, one of the main applications of educational technology for adult learners, has proven the value of technologies in providing access to quality learning in many different contexts. But as yet there is very little evidence that the newer technologies are any more effective, accessible or cost effective than methods that have been used for many decades, such as well- designed packages that may include print, audio and videotape, local tutorial sessions, telephone tutoring, and access to study skills and counseling support on an as-needed basis.

Often, the rationale for using the new technologies is the potential for increased interaction. However, interaction can be provided by much simpler means, such as designing the course in a way that facilitates group work and setting up simple arrangements for communication such as phone or fax linkages. The question is whether the advantages offered by a specific technology justify the increased cost in money and time for the provider and the learner.

Many of the "old" technologies enable learners to study according to their own schedule, allowing for more effective time management and enabling many learners to continue their paid work. By contrast, some of the newer more expensive technologies, such videoconferencing, require learners to be at a particular site at a particular time, actually reducing flexibility for the learners and often requiring more time commitment.

In many cases, funders can be seduced by the novelty of new technologies and initiate pilot projects without regard to their long term sustainability. Tony Bates observes:

Funds will flow from government and the private sector for educational trials, partly to encourage 'I technological development and hence commercial competitiveness and partly to stimulate services to a point where the take-up of the service makes it economical, or at least justifies earlier infrastructure investments.

It is therefore even more essential that educators ask themselves-and potential sponsors-questions regarding access, costs, teaching purposes, user-friendliness and organizational implications before embarking on projects which may have technological glitz but may not either be valid educationally or economic as a sustainable system.13

What else could be done with the money?
An issue to be considered is the "displacement cost": what programs, courses or services are being reduced or cut at the same time that there is increased expenditure for technologies? While a direct relationship between funding cuts in some areas and expenditures on technology may be difficult to prove, these allocations do indicate priorities and choices, and can be examined on the basis of the values that underly the decisions.

For example, William Birdsall comments on a report about a single mother using a computer and the Internet to access a course because she was unable to afford childcare.14 This situation begs a number of questions, particularly why money was available for computers but not for childcare and whether the mother was forced to consider that her investment in technology was also an investment in childcare since it did not require that she attend classes. There are many other such examples of investment in the use of technology rather than in human services.


Back Contents Next