Having therefore attempted to escape reductionist models which present 'on-line' teaching as either inevitable or an environment that can be discussed in isolation from the larger picture which determines its shape and function, the paper now turns its attention toward the structure of the larger picture. Given that my professional focus is to reflect upon the conditions which shape the ways in which we organise our meanings, the paper therefore poses the problem of technology and education as a problem of meaning management. If signs, or words, are to be viewed as products of history, the paper hopes to invite reflection upon the historical contexts which have shaped our views and our expectations regarding technology in education. It is expected that the discussion which will follow over the next days will not be reduced to these questions alone. The paper which precedes the discussion is rather lengthy and possibly stimulates a variety of feelings and issues well beyond the expectations of its author.
Computers offer the possibility to connect computers together across the world.
It is important to draw this distinction because communication is not a function of connecting computers together. To allow people to communicate is to reflect upon the different forms that communication can take and to adjust the capacity of computers to the demands of these different forms. While such discussions may form a learning support for some learners, the limited scope of such discussions and the artificiality of the environment which tells learners that now is the time to talk and learn reduce the potential of communication that otherwise can be exploited through computers and other means. Computers offer the capacity to store and retrieve information at random. Again, exploration cannot be equated with the computers' capacity to store information and its random access.