Clark Kozma Position 1

Clark and Kozma Position Paper

Elizabeth Lynch
Issues in Instructional Technology
November 1st, 2015

Introduction
The Clark and Kozma debate, is about the facilitation and importance of media.
Robert Clark argues that media is just an extension of the teacher, media is not the main drive
behind our students success. Clark even stating that media are mere vehicles that deliver
instruction but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our

Clark Kozma Position 2

groceries causes changes in our nutrition (Clark). On the other hand Robert Kozma argues
that certain media can be suitable to accomplish certain learning tasks. Kozma states that the
question we need to be asking is In what ways can we use the capabilities of media to
influence learning for particular students, tasks, and situations (Kozma). Both parties saw
that technology as having pros, and saw it as an effective and cost efficient way to extend the
learning process. Clark made his original argument in 1983 and Kozma followed up in 1994
with his, and then it turned into a debate.
Debates Relevance to Todays Society
The time frame on when this debate started is very important. In the late 80s
and early 90s media and technology had a completely different meaning. Technology was as
immersive and constant as it is today. I do think that this debate holds relevance in the fact
that do we need teachers and schools or are students able to learn through some technology
enhanced medium. I however do not think that Clark and Kozmas defenses are relevant
anymore. The main reason I do not see relevance in their arguments is because they are not
taking into how students cognitive abilities have adapted to the constant use of technology.
We now live in the age of digital learners and our curriculum is being adapted to that as well.
Robert Clarks argument that media is an extension, and not a source for learning. Clark made
his original argument in 1983, and decided that if media did not affect the cognitive process
than media could be replaced without any change in the learning outcome. This Clarke
concluded was due to the instructional techniques. I do agree with that because I believe that
how you learn and understand material is key, whether that is wrapped in technology or not.
However Kozma argues that in certain situations technology can replace instruction, and I
also agree with him. I would say that their arguments are very similar in todays environment,
because we do have the technology to provide good instruction through technology and also

Clark Kozma Position 3

have it be the extension of the content. So while I think their arguments were relevant to their
society, I think today it is a very similar agreement that technology should be used to enhance
students learning.
Connection to Sweller and Mayerss Theories
John Sweller from the University of New South Wales, did his research on
cognitive load during problem solving. In Swellers article he describes several models to
enhance problem solving, the models beginning for different levels. Even noting in his article
that findings derived from the extensive research in recent years on the expert-novice
distinctions. (Sweller). Technology is a great tool to use with the different levels, and once
again it can be a mix of both Clark and Kozmas arguments. For the novice students it might
be a good tool to see the information as many times as needed, and for the experts it might be
a good tool to just extent to lesson. Richard E. Mayer from the Department of Psychology at
the University of California did a similar research on the cognitive load in multimedia
learning. In the article multimedia learning is defined as presenting words and pictures that
are intended to foster learning (Mayer). In the article they defend why multimedia learning is
a viable option, and it can then go back to Clark and Kozma arguments. Looking at it from
Clarkes point of view, Clarke would see this a defense because someone could still be
facilitating the learning, but then be using multimedia tools as extensions of the learning
environment. Kozma would view it as support for him, because it would be a way in which
technology could be used in positive way and have a influence on the cognitive ability of the
students.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Clark and Kozmas debate is still relevant, but not to the entirety it was
back in the early 90s. Teachers are curriculum makers are still deciding if technology should
be an extension or could replace instruction. However, there is now a lot more to take into

Clark Kozma Position 4

account, students are part of the digital age and technology is a constant variable in their lives.
That constant effect of technology is going to change their cognitive skills, and in turn is
going to change how they process and learn information in a school environment. So the
great debate then almost becomes one, how can we incorporate enough technology so
students will learn and can students learn from technology. There are many cognitive skills
that students need to be able to process information, such as problem solving, and technology
can help. So as stated before it just becomes, how much technology is incorporated into
classes.

References
Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media. Review of Educational
Research, 53(4), 445.
Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research Review of
Educational Research J1 Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179.
Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will Media Influence Learning? Reframing the Debate. Educational
Technology, Research and Development, 42(2), 7.
Clark, R. E. (1994). Media Will Never Influence Learning. Educational Technology, Research
and Development, 42(2), 21.

Clark Kozma Position 5

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in
multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 4352.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on
learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257285.