Educational Technology vs Instructional Technology

The "1994 Definition of the Field" talks about the definitions: rather than technically based on special knowledge in a context of research, the general definitions explain how a term is to be understood in the context where it is used.

To define, parameters/assumptions should be clarified. Consider scope, purpose, viewpoint, audience and essential characteristics. 1994 definition treated Instructional Technology(IT) more as a field of study as well as practice compared to that in 1977. I think this is a very good trend to move the definition from practioner's role to a field of study. In my opinion, the Instructional Technology is not only a technology to help people develop practical skill, but also an art that focuses on how to teach, how to design the theory so that the learners can benefit most from it. As the assumptions made in the "1994" paper, research and practice in the field are carried out in conformity with the ethical norms of the profession, and make best use of human and material resources to achieve effectiveness.

Discussion on Educational/Instructional Technology.

One most comprehensive sys-oriented definition was given by Robert Gagne: Instructional Technology is concerned with studying and establishing conditions for effective learning. One argument about it is
whether to assume that establishing conditions for learning includes establishing learning environment? My personal view point is: it should include establishing learning environment. If from a wider perspective, learning not only happens between the instructors-learners, learners-learners, but takes place between the learner-environments as well. For example, we learn it is going to rain from the environment that there are heavy clouds in the sky. Instructros in listening class will try to avoid any distracting noise from the classroom so that the students can concentrate. Usually people learn fast and effective when a suitable learning environment is established. In this sense, if the purpose of learning is to achieve efficiency, learners do learn by getting stimulus and hints from the learning environment, why should establishing learning environment not be included in establishing conditions for learning?

One thing I found interesting in the paper is that the 1994 definition is closer to the 1963 and 1971 ones than the later definitions. The paper explains that it is because they share the similar stated goal and the 1963 one was based more on theory and practice thanon the functions emphasized in later definitions. My question is : why later definitions do not emphasized on function? What kind of factors give rise to this change? Is it possible that in the future, the focus will shift back to functions?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the paper: Component of the Definition:
1. Theory and practice: knowledge base to support practice. Practices benefits KB through information gained from experience.
2. of design, development, utilization, management and evalution;
3. of processes and resources.
4. for learning: instruction is a means to learning. It is purpose is to affect and effect learning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------