As a technology in and of itself, the timeline provides a wonderful view of the history of learning technologies. So much of what we use in life to communicate, including paper, words, pictures, writing utensils, books, etc. is taken for granted. Looking at this timeline provides the viewer with a perspective one typically does not take on the development of learning technologies. Starting with cave paintings, which are wisely stated to be a learning technology and not ÒartÓ as we in the western world like to think of them as, and ending not just in the present but actually almost two full centuries in the future, this timeline shows the slow but steady progression of learning technologies. One characteristic of history that is noticeable from the timeline, provided that it is reasonably accurate, is that the rate of development for learning technologies started very slowly and as the centuries passed, began to speed up very quickly.
Considering that it is a series of entries with each entry linked to a web site that describes that entry, the timeline does a nice job of elaborating on what each entry is actually referring to. That is to say, if a viewer were to look at the timeline without the presence of the links, he or she would probably not know exactly what the timeline was referring to. The one addition I might like to see in a future version of the timeline is a more integrated explanation of the entries. I would like to have the details and maybe some graphics right there on the same page. In order to avoid depth-breadth problems, I would divide the timeline into three or four different ÒerasÓ and have each era on a separate page.
Not only are these links provided to entries that took place in the past and in the present, but to events that have yet to occur. The links to future events are quite intriguing. People are always making predictions of what technologies will develop next and how theyÕll be used. We see the evidence of this imaginative work in movies, books, and television shows. Yet I find these links to be mildly humorous. People are good at using their imaginations when it comes to the prediction of new technologies, but rarely are they good at using their common sense in conjunction with their imaginations. Flipping through new issues of Popular Mechanics, readers can look at a special section that shows the different predictions that PM made for technology decades ago. Sometimes these predictions are reasonably accurate. Sometimes they miss the mark completely though. I believe making predictions about these technologies to be slightly risky simply because the predictor might very well be eating his or her words sometime in the future.
The use of these predictions in this timeline is a double-edged sword. These predictions are not very practical as a tool in the present. They can provide us with a look at how our minds are geared towards the development of new learning technologies. But as I said, rarely are these predictions accurate. On the other hand, if this exact same timeline could be viewed in the year 3922, it would be an excellent time capsule. I know that looking at the waterproof furniture predicted in a 1950s Popular Mechanics, which would allow housewives to hose down everything, always gives me a chuckle. My point is that the future never develops the way we believe it will and displaying these predictions is a questionable move.
Overall, the timeline is a piece that gives an excellent view of technological history and an interesting, if sometimes bleak, view of the future. It seems to be well thought-out and well constructed.
page last updated: Spring, 2002