Augmented sociomateriality: implications of artificial intelligence for the field of learning technology
There has been a conscious effort in the past decade to produce a more theoretical account of the use of technology for learning. At the same time, advances in artificial intelligence (AI) are being rapidly incorporated into learning technologies, significantly changing their affordances for teaching and learning. In this article I address the question of whether introduction of AI and associated features such as machine learning is a novel development from a theoretical perspective, and if so, how? I draw on the existing perspective of sociomateriality for learning and argue that the use of AI is indeed different because AI transforms sociomateriality by allowing materiality to take on characteristics previously associated primarily with a human agent, thereby shifting the nature of the sociomaterial assemblage. In this data and algorithm-driven AI-based sociomateriality, affordances for representation and agency change, thereby modifying representational and relational practices that are essential for cognition. The dualities of data/algorithm, representational/agentic augmentation, and relational/participatory practices act in tandem within this new sociomaterial assemblage. If left unchecked, this new assemblage is prone to perpetuate the biases programmed within the technology itself. Therefore, it is important to take ethical and moral implications of using AI-driven learning technologies into account before their use.
Aiken, R. & Epstein, R. (2000) ‘Ethical guidelines for AI in education: starting a conversation’, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, vol. 11, pp. 163–176.
Atteneder, H. & Collini-Nocker, B. (2020) ‘Under control: audio/video conferencing systems feed “Surveillance Capitalism” with students’ data’, 13th CMI Conference on Cybersecurity and Privacy (CMI), Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 1–7.
Barab, S., MaKinster, J. & Scheckler, R. (2003) ‘Designing system dualities: characterizing a web-supported professional development community’, The Information Society, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 237–256. doi: 10.1080/01972240309466
Bennett, S. & Oliver, M. (2011) ‘Talking back to theory: the missed opportunities in learning technology research’, Research in Learning Technology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 179–189. doi: 10.3402/rlt.v19i3.17108
Blackler, F. (1995) ‘Knowledge, knowledge work, and organizations: an overview and interpretation’, Organization Studies, vol. 16, pp. 1021–1046. doi: 10.1177/017084069501600605
Dhawan, S. (2020) ‘Online learning: a panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis’, Journal of Educational Technology Systems, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 5–22. doi: 10.1177/0047239520934018
Engelbart, D. (1962) Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework. Stanford Research Institute (SRI), Menlo Park, CA.
Fenwick, T. & Landri, P. (2012) ‘Materialities, textures and pedagogies: socio-material assemblages in education’, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1080/14681366.2012.649421
Flaherty, C. (2020) ‘Big proctor: is the fight against cheating during remote instruction worth enlisting third-party student surveillance platforms?’, Inside Higher Ed, 11 May. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/05/11/online-proctoring-surging-during-covid-19
Greeno, J. (2006) ‘Learning in activity’, in The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, ed K. Sawyer, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 79–96.
Hall, R. (2011) ‘Revealing the transformatory moment of learning technology: the place of critical social theory’, Research in Learning Technology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 273–284. doi: 10.3402/rlt.v19i3.17115
Hancock, J. T., Naaman, M. & Levy, K. (2020) ‘AI-mediated communication: definition, research agenda, and ethical considerations’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 89–100. doi: 10.1093/jcmc/zmz022
Hutchins, E. (1999) ‘Cognitive artifacts’, in The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, eds. Robert A. Wilson & Frank C. Keil, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 126–128.
Johri, A. (2011) ‘The socio-materiality of learning practices and implications for the field of learning technology’, Research in Learning Technology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 207–217. doi: 10.3402/rlt.v19i3.17110
Johri, A. & Olds, B. (2011). ‘Situated Engineering Learning: Bridging Engineering Education Research and the Learning Sciences’, Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 151–185.
Johri, A. (2012). Learning to Demo: The Sociomateriality of Newcomer Participation in Engineering Research Practices. Engineering Studies, Vol. 4, Issue 3, pp. 249–269.
Johri, A., Olds, B. M. & O’Connor, K. (2014). ‘Situative Frameworks for Engineering Learning Research’, The Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, Eds. Johri, A. & Olds, B. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 47–66.
Johri, A. (2020). Artificial intelligence and engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, no. 3, pp. 358–361.
Jones, C. R. & Czerniewicz, L. (2011) ‘Theory in learning technology’, Research in Learning Technology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 173–177. doi: 10.3402/rlt.v19i3.17107
Latour, B. (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Leonardi, P. (2011) ‘When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies’, MIS Quarterly, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 147–167. doi: 10.2307/23043493
Norman, D. A. (1991). Cognitive artifacts. in Designing interaction: Psychology at the human-computer interface, ed John M. Carroll, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 17–38.
Ong, W. J. (2002) Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word, Routledge, New York.
Orlikowski, W. (2000) ‘Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations’, Organization Science, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 404–428. doi: 10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
Orlikowski, W. (2002) ‘Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in distributive organizing’, Organization Science, vol. 13, no. 3. pp. 249–273. doi: 10.1287/orsc.18.104.22.16876
Orlikowski, W. J. & Scott, S. V. (2008) ‘Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization’, Annals of the Academy of Management, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 433–474. doi: 10.5465/19416520802211644
Passey, D. (2020) ‘Theories, theoretical and conceptual frameworks, models and constructs: limiting research outcomes through misconceptions and misunderstandings’, Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 95–114. doi: 10.21428/8c225f6e.56810a1a
Pea, R. D. (1985) ‘Beyond amplification: using the computer to reorganize mental functioning’, Educational Psychologist, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 167–182. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2004_2
Suchman, L. A. (2007) Human–Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Sweeney, M., Rangwala, H., Lester, J., & Johri, A. (2016). Next-Term Student Performance Prediction: A Recommender Systems Approach. Journal of Educational Data Mining, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 22–51.
Sørensen, E. (2008) The Materiality of Learning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Tyre, M. & von Hippel, E. (1997) ‘The situated nature of adaptive learning in organizations’, Organization Science, vol. 8, pp. 71–84. doi: 10.1287/orsc.8.1.71
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
Wiener, N. (1954). The human use of human beings: Cybernetics and society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Williamson, B. & Enyon, R. (2020) ‘Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education’, Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 223–235. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995
Zhang, K. & Aslan, A. B. (2021). AI technologies for education: Recent research & future directions. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100025. pp. 1–11.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to Research in Learning Technology retain the copyright of their article and at the same time agree to publish their articles under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, for any purpose, even commercially, under the condition that appropriate credit is given, that a link to the license is provided, and that you indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.