My online wanderings brought me to two interestingly
connected “places” yesterday. The first was the homepage of
IRRODL (a journal I
frequently read, and highly recommend). The second was a set of comments posted
to one of my UOIT MEd student’s blog sites. I’ve been debating what these two
places mean. And I want to invite the participants in #EDUC5101G and #EDUC5103G
(and anyone else) into that conversation.
First, I read about how IRRODL has updated its name from the
International Review of Research in Open
and Distance Learning to the International
Journal of Open and Distributed
Learning – a change prompted by the evolving landscape of educational
technology, and a shift away from the negative, “exclusive” connotations of the
term “distance” learning towards the more “inclusive” connotations of “distributed”
learning. “Distance” learning implies (rightly or wrongly) that there is are transactional
distances imposed upon the learner – it implies that somehow they are being
disadvantaged, and that efforts are required to remediate those distances. “Distributed”
learning implies that educational technologies are being leveraged to the
advantage of the learner. A small change in word choice, with huge implications
for educational technology discourse and public perception. A change that
echoes my observations in my doctoral dissertation (2015, pp. 14-15) that
As technologies available for the
mediation of teaching and learning evolve, the distinctions between traditional
face-to-face education, distance education, and mobile learning are beginning
to disappear. This trend is described as ubiquitous learning, where learning “anywhere,
anytime” is supported through advances in one-to-one computing technologies,
including mobile devices (Education-2025, 2013). Wheeler (2014) advised that if
educational institutions such as universities are to continue to meet the needs
of changing learner demographics, they should place more emphasis on the use of
technology to facilitate blended and distributed approaches to teaching and
learning… Ally (2014) also noted that teachers need to be better prepared to
integrate new technologies into teaching and learning practices.
Second, I read conversations in comments on a student blog
site about the limits of distributed learning (I’ve chosen to follow my
colleagues at IRRODL and adopt that term). James Elsdon remarked on Kenneth Van
Dewark’s blog that there are some professional training areas where “online
education [can be] difficult to carry out effectively.” He noted how some
professions (such as law) may even impose bans on accreditation of online
training programs. James also remarked that STEM degrees (Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics) are difficult to deliver through online avenues.
What I’d like for participants in #EDUC5101G and #EDUC5103G to consider it
whether or not these limitations to the effective scope of distributed learning
or real, or just perceptions. Having spent 10 years in the Middle East, I saw
that these perceptions were widely held. But they were misinformed perceptions.
They were based on beliefs that:
- “distance” learning meant no meaningful learning activity
(just readings packages and essays);
- it was easy for learners to cheat, and difficult to
ascertain the veracity of a graduate’s credentials; and
- that online learning was wholly inferior to, and a poor substitute
for face-to-face training.
I even heard anecdotal reports that some major
post-secondary institutions in the region refused to acknowledge any
credentials (for faculty) that were awarded by (even reputable, government
regulated and independently accredited) online institutions. But over the
course of 10 years I watched as those perceptions changed. I began to see
institutions and government ministries welcome online credentials, and start
looking to them as viable training alternatives in their increasingly
knowledge-based economies. I’ve seen the volume of literature on investigations
into the efficacy (and perceptions) of distributed learning increase
dramatically in recent years.
I’m still wondering about comments that law societies oppose
online learning because they feel that “the ‘Socratic methods of teaching and
learning’… cannot be achieved through the delivery of online classes.” Do traditional
lecture halls also impose transactional distances upon learners (because they
are historically rooted in passive reception of content transmitted by an
expert)? Do modern educational technologies empower learners by facilitating
(not guaranteeing) increased Socratic engagement? Does the assertion that a
particular field cannot be studied through distributed methods come from sound
educational theory and practice? Or does it come from misperception and fear of
the unknown or, worse, elitist protectionism?
I’m also still wondering about comments about STEM degrees
and medical training. In particular, I’m curious what my students think about
the perception that some areas of study, such as education, are better suited
to distributed learning. Do educators not also deal with ‘real people?’ Are we
not also required to interact with (even if mediated via technology) learners?
And do our professional actions not also have profound consequences? Yes –
there are some things that require one-on-one guidance during training and credentialing,
simply because they involve real and immediate danger. But, are educational
technologies evolving to the point that such danger can be mitigated, and
one-on-one guidance effectively distributed? Look at the example of using
Google Cardboard and virtual reality (VR) to figure out, in advance, how best
to approach a unique and difficult surgical procedure. What about the
possibilities of using Google Glass (or other augmented reality (AR)) platforms
to establish a remote expert presence?
My task now for participants in #EDUC5101G and #EDUC5103G is
this – Join this conversation. Respond to these observations, musings, and
concerns. #EDUC5101G students should consider this a ‘challenge’ for their Week
2 blog posts:
- What does the change in discourse from “distance” learning
to open and “distributed” learning mean?
- Are some areas better suited to distributed learning than
others?
- Are there examples (in Canada, or internationally) of
successful use of distributed teaching and learning methods to facilitate more
challenging (i.e. Law, Medicine, STEM) subject areas?
- What technologies and methods are emerging that could break
down barriers that might still exist to distributed learning in some subject
areas?
I’m looking forward to seeing where this conversation takes
us.
Rob
References
Ally, M. & Prieto-Blázquez, J. (2014). What is the future of mobile
learning in education? Mobile Learning
Applications in Higher Education [Special Section]. Revista de Universidad y
Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC), 11(1), 142-151. doi http://doi.dx.org/10.7238/rusc.v11i1.2033
Power, R.
(2015). A framework for promoting teacher
self-efficacy with mobile reusable learning objects (Doctoral dissertation,
Athabasca University). Available from http://hdl.handle.net/10791/63
