At the beginning of April, I finished the first of four courses that make up H880 Technology-enhanced learning: foundations and futures. These are my takeaways from the course.
Academics love an acronym, but not a definition.
Technology-enhanced learning or TEL is the key concept of the whole module, but there’s no concrete definition. I found this very frustrating, as I’m used to providing my learners with a clear definition. The first learning outcome is usually Define X concept. This is a difference between the level I teach at (EQF 4/5) and Master’s level (EQF 7).
At one point I was ready to change the acronym of TEL to technology-enabled learning (which may make definitions easier), but I also realised that my own arrogance in deciding to use my own term would not be helpful. At postgraduate level, there isn’t always a set answer – it is up to me to critically review the definitions available and then use an appropriate definition backed up with evidence.
To come onto what TEL actually is, the definition I have been using is “TEL is using technology to improve the learner’s experience and/or outcomes.”
H880 had four areas of TEL, which I disagreed with, to be honest: citizen science, open learning, mobile learning and learning at scale. I found these areas limiting and perhaps a little dated. In my tutor group, we struggled to distinguish between mobile learning and any other type of online learning (unless we are talking app specific).
Pedagogy and design is more important than technology.
It’s really been highlighted to me in this course how technology should be used to enhance learning, not just for technology’s sake. I knew this already, it’s something I’ve seen since my early days at the ODI. Clients: “We want a dashboard, it doesn’t really matter about the data.” “Ok, but what is the story you’re trying to tell?” Clients: “…”
In terms of education, innovations still need to put learners first and use learning pedagogies. Otherwise they are just hype.
On this subject, I enjoyed the education apocalypse by Audrey Watters.
Connectivism and constructivism
MOOCs (being Massive Open Online Courses, a catchy name) were originally built on connectivism: making connections between what you’re learning and your existing knowledge. Social connections are also very important, and how connectivism complements constructivism (where learners build new knowledge on their pre-existing knowledge).
The value of open in teaching and learning
Learning in the open isn’t for everyone as it results in a certain vulnerability. When you’re learning, you aren’t an expert, you will make mistakes. Having said that, learning in the open can be really valuable. If you share your thoughts, you are inviting others to comment, contribute and help shape them. You are building up your connections and network in the area. You’re also providing others with inspiration, and taking inspiration from others, “a culture of reciprocity” to quote Martin Weller.
To co-opt the ODI’s data spectrum, perhaps it is important to move learners along the spectrum. Not aiming for full open learning as that may make some people uneasy and thus provide a barrier to their learning, but moving them towards more shared learning, rather than siloed closed learning.
A learning community
I am fascinated by how to create a community of practice, as it’s something that I’ve been doing with the Doubling Disability project, and have tried to do in the past but haven’t succeeded for a variety of reasons. From this course, I have some new theories on Communities of Practice, Communities of Inquiry and Connectivism to apply. I’m particularly interested in exploring how they relate to problem based learning.
Acquisition and participation metaphors
Anna Sfard (1988) wrote about two metaphors for learning: one being that learning is simple knowledge acquisition, that learners are empty vessels waiting to be filled by expert teachers. The second is of participation: that it is by doing the learning, by completing the tasks, by collaborating with other learners that participants are truly learning.
Looking at my own learning on this course through Sfard’s participation metaphor, I can really see how I have benefitted from social learning. I’ve always been reluctant in the past, partly as comment sections have rarely been full of illuminating discussions. However with H880 (the shorthand for this postgraduate course), there is a fantastic community of learners from all sorts of diverse backgrounds.
