Tolmie (2001)

Tolmie (2001) Examining learning in relation to the contexts of use of ICT
If as an educationalist you think of learning as ‘in the head’ (Bredo) and the surroundings being external, you cannot possibly ‘know’ what is being learned without using external measurement tools (some sort of assessment method). This ‘symbol processing’ means that we own have our interpretations and representations; but this must be influenced by the culture we are situated in, as we need common understanding or at least communication (such as language) to share this knowledge. But what, then, is ‘tested’; the knowledge or the skills of communicating these? The context within which the learner is learning – the surroundings and the paraphernalia – and the learner’s ability to use these, may determine the level or ‘grade’ of the knowledge, once it is no longer ‘in the head’.
This article was interesting from the perspective of assuming that a tool, such as a computer, will affect how a learner learns, as well as the making note of the likely impact of other contextual aspects, such as institution and gender groupings. Tolmie’s paper, from the outset, makes an assumption that ‘something is happening in the head’, as opposed to purely mechanical occurrences, (in the abstract the use of ‘interplay’ suggests correlation between a variable and the context). There is, however, an awareness of the ‘…complexities of the educational process…’ and this may have determined why various contexts were assessed, specifically because they were variable.
In the study about gender effects, the learning was physically located within a secondary school; but was this the intended question, or are we suggesting that the location of the learning was situated, due to the interactions, and not ‘in the head’? The focus was on what learning took place as a result of pair work, using physics software (and its associated dialogue?); the software prompts were mentioned as part of the technological toolbox, and were not originally considered as part of the learning process. The issue of gender seemed to be assumed as a ‘female’ culture, as it was generalized, rather than it being viewed as individual, personal characteristics, inputs and/or effects. There are numerous studies related to gender and learning and this view is consistent with one of Murphy, where the females ‘helped each other’.
In taking some sort of sociological stance, it is assumed that a range of variables, not just gender, will be assumed to ‘be dependent on’, ‘be a function of’ or be ‘affected’ by; the context is irreconcilably linked to the learning.