The latest technology and the most popular pedagogy of the day cannot be effective unless individual learner needs drive the educative process. When considering styles of teaching and learning, the central question for all educators is what should drive the process of learning – the preferences of the teacher or the needs of individual learners.

From a pedagogical standpoint, the Internet is an interactive communications medium that can be used to encourage active, meaningful, and authentic learning (Romig, 1998). In the face of this unlimited resource, traditional, teacher-centered instruction has become pedagogically limiting in comparison to any variety of technology-based classroom activities, because active learning tools promoting active learning are built into technology-based instruction.

Guiding adults is not easy and requires leaders to adopt a positive strengths-based approach in the way they interact with others. Biech (2007) states that a good leadercan take staff on their ownpersonal journey by establishing relationships with them, having a vision for the changes that need to be made, trusting others, and being trusted as a leader. When people feel they are making a difference in the classroom, they becomemoreinvolved in their workand their job performance improves.

Technologies are cognitive tools help learners to elaborate on what they are thinkingand to engage in meaningful learning (Jonassen, 2000).

Technology-rich instructional approaches encourage teachers and students to become partners in the learning process, working together to make incremental technology changes to classroom lessons and activities. An important first step in crafting technology-rich lessons and activities is assessment. Informal opportunities for assessing student technology skills and comfort level exist in the adult education classroom, but for more formal, systematic assessments, the internet is a great tool.

PEDAGOGY of the OPPRESSED

learning is influenced more by the content and instructional strategy in the learning materials than by the type of technology used to deliver instruction.

A technology-enhanced transformative learning environment in support of de-veloping reflective practitioners can be a situated learning environment just by dint of integrating it into clinical learning settings where students are developing the skilled know-how and practices of the profession. The tasks, discussions and other learning activities afforded by the technology learning system will be in support of the hands-on learning taking place in the health setting and should be incorporated into the clinical training to create the perception of a single learning environment. A situated learning environment will afford students the ability to practice and ap-ply knowledge and skilled know-how and also participate in social learning such as discussions, group activities and individualized work that will encourage the reflection that leads to transformative learning.

in the technology-centred approach, the focus is on using technology in education through providing access to cutting-edge technology. The main problem with the technology-centred approach is that during the 20th century it has produced several major cycles of big promises, some implementation in schools... and failure.

there appears to be a theoretical shift more often than not from Behaviorist learning practices to Constructivist learning practices because of the increased use of educational technologies, and stemming from the fact that many available technologies support Constructivist learning platforms.  However, there are still many learning practices that focus on more Behaviorist learning techniques, and there are arguments in support of their validity as well.  That with the most support currently is more of a blending of the two theories, for they can be used in conjunction as well while utilizing educational technology.

tech access shapes how heavily adults use the internet for professional learning. More than one-third of professional learners with lots of tech assets say they did all or most of their learning online

And finally, because low-skilled adults are adults, we tend to think that they can take the ball and run with it. But many low-skilled learners have had negative experiences with learning in the past, and haven’t developed some of the skills needed to direct their own learning. And, many may lack confidence in their ability to take charge of their own learning. Providing support, feedback, guidance, and coaching along the way is key to their success.

The Adult Learning Model of Faculty Development draws from the research, theory andpractice of adult learning and adult education program planning. This new model recognizes facultyas adult learners and faculty development as adult education.

Adult learning theories are not just a collection of jargons, concepts, and ideas about how adults learn. These theories help you plan your course during conception, development, and execution, in a way that will facilitate the learning process. Here’re four reasons why instructional designers MUST get acquainted with these theories: To create relevance by mapping courses with perceived learner needs To devise instructional strategies in alignment with real learning contexts To choose the technology that best supports the instructional strategy To plan instructional strategies relevant for digital-age and on-the-go learners

To improve the training and education of the largely unskilled workers, China must introduce Western teaching/learning theories to training academies throughout China and tie training and education directly to the seven viewpoints of lifelong learning instead of to politics, nationalism, or political agenda. “Politics takes command” should be a thing of the past.

Approaches in the use of assistive technology in inclusive education focus on using technologyto train or rehearse, and to assist and enable learning

One of my students wrote in a recent online class, “Students learn from their teachers, not from electronic gadgets.” Do we understand how students learn in a technology-based environment, one-on-one with the laptop or mobile phone? Can we estimate possible changes in the students’ cognition, learning style, behavior, attitudes, values, and social relationships under the influence of electronic devices?

Every language teaching method has technologies to support it (Warschauer & Meskill, 2000). From early grammar-translation and audio-lingualism to the later communicative language teaching, all of these meth-ods have implications for how to best integrate technology into the class-room (Warschauer & Meskill, 2000). The use of technology in a language classroom involves teacher-technology interaction, students-technology in-teraction, teacher-students interaction, and interaction among students.

Adult learning theorists have served to confirm the importance of adults creating knowledgefrom self-directed, learner-centered activities that draw from life experiences (Gorham, 1985; Knowles, 1978). According to Kemp et al.(2014), teacher-student communication is going through a significant shift that reflects “the culture of a new generation of students, as well as the rapid spread and advancement of communication technology.” (p. 19)

Whether or not technology should be used in the classroom is no longer debated; instead, the emphasis is ensuring that technology is integrated into instruction to promote student achievement and future success. This requires educators who are able to learn and apply their knowledge about technology consistently in the classroom.

In addition to utilization of internal technology integration expertise, principals often bring in outside experts to train teachers how to use specific technology tools. These may be provided by vendors or may be independent national-level trainers or consultants. Regardless of the provider, technology training experiences always should comply with best practices regarding adult learning. Like for non-technology related training, technology professional development should occur within learning communities, be differentiated by learning needs, facilitate active engagement by participants, be recurrent and build upon past learning rather than only occurring once, be aligned with desired curriculum standards, and be rooted in learning and teaching needs rather than the technical aspects of a particular tool (Learning Forward, 2011).

In designing the area we were keen to avoid a technology-driven approach; wewanted to promote interactive and feedback-driven learning experiences. To thisend our focus was on interactive content and assessment.