Philosophies

O’Reilly (2005) defines the term Web 2.0 “the emerging tools and services where the emphasis of use had shifted from the web as a source of information to a web that was more participatory characterised by user-generated content and peer critiquing”.  This blog will discuss the philosophies of technology and teaching, followed by three theories of learning and how they relate to online learning, before finally examining a newly developed forum for teachers.

I read with interest the article by Kanuka (2008) about philosophies of technology and teaching and I have to agree that in order to have a coherent policy of adoption of online learning an educator should know their own philosophy. In some ways I am in two minds where I stand with regards to the philosophies of technology. There is no doubt that technology can extend the scope of what the teacher is able to achieve, as educators who adhere to the Uses Determination philosophy suggest  but having said that I am not in the Social Determinism camp for example. I do not envisage that universities will cease to exist physically as Drucker (as cited in Kanuka, 2008) asserted. (I seem to remember some years ago that Cambridge High’s library did cease to exist for some years only to be reinstated some time later). I think I fall more into the Technological Determinist camp on two accounts. I tend to agree with modern scholars such as Nobel (1998) who fear the loss of academic freedom and the commercialization of education (Kanuka, 2008). This can mean that programmes lack “engagement, reflectivity and depth” (Kanuka, 2008, p6). I also have to agree with their argument that the “modern technologies and growing neo-liberalism are creating a rising capitalistic climate that includes political –economic interests such as commodification, commercialization, and corporatization of education” (Kanuka, 2008, p.6).  I see our education institutes as increasingly operating on a business model with managers in charge in some cases rather than educationalists. When institutions are operating in this manner, online learning can be seen as a way to save costs with increased staff/student ratio along with fewer rooms being used.

However, all this sounds very negative and I have to say in many instances it is but I am also an adopter of technology agreeing with Garrison and Anderson (Kanuka, 2008, p.6) that it can impact “in a positive way resulting in increasing the quality of learning experiences”.  So given that I adhere to this type of philosophy, it was interesting to see that I tend to have a Progressive style of teaching in that I follow a problem-solving curriculum aimed at personal enlightenment and social advancement (Kanuka, 2008). The technology that accompanies this is the Uses Determinism which sees technology as neutral rather than Technological Determinism which is interesting given that I see myself as adhering to the latter philosophy. 

Practically, not only can online learning reach those learners who may not otherwise have the opportunity to join in a community of learning, for example students in remote areas but it also has many benefits within the classroom. In asynchronous learning, students can access the material anytime, anywhere which “facilitates just in time learning, rather than just in case” learning (Klein & Smith, 2009, p. 304).  Materials can then be relevant and up to date (Ally, 2004b). This form of learning can also lead to deep processing if students take care and invest time in their posts. However, I find with some students, at least initially, there is the temptation for a more casual form of communication. This can be overcome with good online design and good communication with the students. In synchronous online learning there can be real time interaction which can help approximate face-to-face learning. I liked the way Ally (2004b) tied in the three theories of Behaviouralism, Cognition and Constructivism in online learning by taking aspects and incorporating these into course design. I also liked the idea of Ausubel’s (1960) advance organisers to help plan online learning. I think for a very good, high quality programme to be implemented, one that is designed for all students’ learning capabilities and learning styles, the educator should be experienced in the field. It also should not be forgotten that online learning can increase teacher workload. Klein and Smith (2009) make the point that in some instances it could become unsustainable. I think teacher workload with online learning can be a very real problem which relates back to the reasons for instituting this form of learning in the first place, that is, to enhance student learning or as an economic measure.

Finally, on a more practical level, the article by Canole (2010) resonated greatly with me. The time required to not only design lessons incorporating online learning but also to master the ever evolving nature of technologies can be daunting.  In addition, with a course which has already been designed, there can be problems navigating the required technologies. 

I had a look at the Cloudworks site designed by the Open University Learning Design Initiative and found not only was it easy to use but was specifically for professional purposes thus avoiding the problem of using social media in the professional environment (Canole,2010).  From what I could gather, there did not seem to be any threads to each cloud but rather each posting was just added to the last one. I did notice also that some postings were made some time ago and had few replies. In fact, one discussion just petered out. I think there are advantages with a face to face discussion and the ability to come to a conclusion could be one whereas on a discussion board it can be avoided if careful planning is not implemented.  However, I can see Cloudworks as being very useful at a conference or at a Professional Development day for example. This community of practice would have a big advantage in overcoming the barriers when implementing new technology.

In conclusion, new technology has exciting possibilities but it can be fraught with problems if not embedded carefully into a course by experienced educators.

References

Ally, M. (2004b). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In T. A. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds). Theory and Practice of Online Learning (pp. 3-31). Athabasca University.

Ausubel, D.P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(5), 267-272.

Conole, G. (2010). Facilitating new forms of discourse for learning and teaching: Harnessing the power of Web 2.0 practices. The Journal of Open, Distance and e- Learning 25(2), 141-151.

Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 91-118). Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/99Z_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf.

Klein, M. & Smith, K. (2009). In R. Hunter, B. Bicknell, & T. Burgess (Eds.), Crossing Divides: Proceedings of the 32^nd Annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia (Vol.1). Palmerston North, NZ: MERGA.

O’Reilly, T. (2205). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved March 20, 2014. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.nz/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NpEk_WFCMdIC&oi=fnd&pg=PT1&dq=What+is+Web+2.0:+Design+patterns+and+business+models+for+the+next+generation+of+software