Down the rabbit hole: Models and mess
The aim of this post is to make a point on the messiness of online learning practices. Theoretical models on learning design may give the impression that learning (or teaching) is a matter of design only. The Community of Inquiry (CoI, see Garrison et al. 2000), for example, is one of the most popular conceptual frameworks used for the modelling of online educational design. There are three types of presences in the model, representing the three dimensions that educators need to consider in online course design. Cognitive presence is the dimension where the students create meaning, share their knowledge, engage in discourse in a critical and reflective way. Social presence is the dimension of open communication, trust, and group cohesion. Teaching presence is about the design and facilitation of the learning. Each dimension has a neat set of indicators that can help researchers (and educators) to operationalize and/or measure the depth of each presence (see Vaughan et al. 2013). In a way, it is an ideal, nicely structured model of online learning, with overlapping dimensions and with a promise that "it is at the convergence of these three mutually reinforcing elements that a collaborative constructivist educational experience is realized" (Vaughan et al. 2013: 11). Careful CoI design and clear learning outcomes are the keys to success. Oh yes.
The model is excellent in terms of its comprehensiveness and simple structure. However, as an educator and researcher, I would be more interested in exploring what practices actually take place, what the participants actually do. How far is the ideal from the real? What sorts of situated learning practices take place in online courses? To what extent do the participants utilize online and offline resources (their parents or spouses, for example) in the construction of meaning? Imagine a learner who just pretends to sound nice and supportive, but deep inside has close to hostile feelings. Or imagine another one, who asks a parent or a fellow student to do the assignments on his or her behalf. Or a teacher, who sets learning goals just for the sake of having them in the course description.
Models provide a means to conceptualize something very complex and chaotic. Sean Michael Morris, an educator, author, and speaker in the field of education design, calls for a need for critical instructional design, arguing that all learning is hybrid, complex and individual. In one word: messy. He does not believe in pre-set, standardized, one-fits-all learning outcomes (Morris 2017):
"One of the key principles of critical instructional design is that concept of emergence, that outcomes are determined by the learning process, and not as much predetermined. (...) When I envision a course, my best hope is that students will be narrators (reliable, unreliable) and that it will be their characters that drive the story. Today is no exception. There are no outcomes here, nothing that I nor you could check off a list and say "I learned exactly what he said I would." Hopefully, what you’ll learn will emerge out of how you participate, what you decide to read, what rabbit holes you go down, the way you’ll listen (to me, to each other, to yourself)."
I especially like the idea of "what you'll learn will emerge out of how you participate". As educators, we need to be aware that students will take their individual learning paths, engage in various and messy learning practices that are not necessarily described by models. Conceptual frameworks and careful designs are good and necessary to have; however, we need to bear in mind what they are: theories that may not include every detail.
Sources:
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher educationmodel. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
Morris, M.S. (2017) A Call for Critical Instructional Design. Blog post. https://www.seanmichaelmorris.com/a-call-for-critical-instructional-design/
Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Edmonton: AU Press.— Chapter 1 “The Community of Inquiry Conceptual framework. http://www.aupress.ca/books/120229/ebook/01_Vaughan_et_al_2013-Teaching_in_Blended_Learning_Environments.pdf
The model is excellent in terms of its comprehensiveness and simple structure. However, as an educator and researcher, I would be more interested in exploring what practices actually take place, what the participants actually do. How far is the ideal from the real? What sorts of situated learning practices take place in online courses? To what extent do the participants utilize online and offline resources (their parents or spouses, for example) in the construction of meaning? Imagine a learner who just pretends to sound nice and supportive, but deep inside has close to hostile feelings. Or imagine another one, who asks a parent or a fellow student to do the assignments on his or her behalf. Or a teacher, who sets learning goals just for the sake of having them in the course description.
Models provide a means to conceptualize something very complex and chaotic. Sean Michael Morris, an educator, author, and speaker in the field of education design, calls for a need for critical instructional design, arguing that all learning is hybrid, complex and individual. In one word: messy. He does not believe in pre-set, standardized, one-fits-all learning outcomes (Morris 2017):
"One of the key principles of critical instructional design is that concept of emergence, that outcomes are determined by the learning process, and not as much predetermined. (...) When I envision a course, my best hope is that students will be narrators (reliable, unreliable) and that it will be their characters that drive the story. Today is no exception. There are no outcomes here, nothing that I nor you could check off a list and say "I learned exactly what he said I would." Hopefully, what you’ll learn will emerge out of how you participate, what you decide to read, what rabbit holes you go down, the way you’ll listen (to me, to each other, to yourself)."
I especially like the idea of "what you'll learn will emerge out of how you participate". As educators, we need to be aware that students will take their individual learning paths, engage in various and messy learning practices that are not necessarily described by models. Conceptual frameworks and careful designs are good and necessary to have; however, we need to bear in mind what they are: theories that may not include every detail.
Sources:
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher educationmodel. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
Morris, M.S. (2017) A Call for Critical Instructional Design. Blog post. https://www.seanmichaelmorris.com/a-call-for-critical-instructional-design/
Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Edmonton: AU Press.— Chapter 1 “The Community of Inquiry Conceptual framework. http://www.aupress.ca/books/120229/ebook/01_Vaughan_et_al_2013-Teaching_in_Blended_Learning_Environments.pdf
Comments
Post a Comment