As my PBL group no doubt learned, brevity is not one of my defining characteristics. The ONL experience has been one of significant interest and has introduced me to many new perspectives, especially in the last weeks where the topics moved beyond our individual practices as dedicated educators to more general cultural and structural facets. Of particular note was the realisation of significant variations that seem to reflect geographic lines.

If I look back on the entire ONL experience, the PBL experience was certainly the newest aspect. Our group mostly functioned as a discussion forum with most meetings moving slowly and indistinctly towards a conclusion. This is probably not a structure that will be appropriate for many undergraduate courses, and relates to later reflections on the unavoidable presence of hierarchies, particularly in formal education. The question is what use is made of these hierarchies, whether to dictate the path followed as the smoothest one, or to allow more freedom and the possibility to get things a bit wrong, but prevent deviations that are significant enough to be damaging.

More practically, the need to actively consider digital literacies in all courses, and the Open University’s learning design tools [1] will be important for my future practice. Because, even with the return to campus-based higher education, I would be surprised if any degree programme will not be hybrid. Structuring community building, important irrespective of educational format, is something else that I hope to embed much more deliberately in my future practice. In face-to-face courses, this can be assumed to occur naturally through students continuing conversations after sessions, but this can allow the formation of cliques and the exclusion of students from under-represented and already excluded groups; even if there is no change to the learning design, thinking about these aspects, consciously acknowledging and actively considering and discussing them, is important.

Incidentally, there’s a recent reprint [2] where non-standard questions (which are very similar to ideas I’ve been blithering on about recently) reduce performance gaps that in traditional courses are strongly correlated to previous grades which are privilege/opportunity linked, thus reinforcing inequities, moving away from pre-determined ‘correct’ answers seems to have many benefits (more below).

Elmore’s four quadrants [3] examine relationships between learners and ‘teachers’. I come from a very hierarchical system, and have usually been very independent in my learning; however, more and more, I am idealising a distributed-collective approach in at least some areas of student’s experience. It is all very well that people can regurgitate set knowledge, but this can lead to echo chamber effects of received ‘wisdom’, that in some places can be extremely damaging [4]. A number of things are impossible to teach – there is no recipe or ‘correct’ answer. One of these is creativity; the ability to think beyond the constraints of the current(ly very damaging) system and imagine something else. In a time of crisis (and make no mistake, the early 2020s are a time of several simultaneous crises), slavish adherence to existing systems and hierarchies will only guarantee destruction. Changing learning norms to distributed and collective seems to be one possible part in a solution.

The Elmore model does not seem to include non-traditional (that is non-hierarchical) learning systems in formal, structured contexts. Or at least does not include them naturally. This is a particularly important area for me as I start working with ‘Students as Partners’ projects and ideologies where the ‘loss of power’ becomes a major source of resistance on the part of faculty [5].

There is, however, a model/structure that captures both the idea and most conceivable educational structures where experts are responsible for introducing and guiding novices towards a higher level of expertise. Unfortunately for some it is in French! However, to provide something of a spoiler and an advertisement for a future pedagogical based blog (to be run with a new colleague, though I am anticipating more of a cooperative form of each produce independent posts than collaborative co-writing), I include the summary here without explanation:

 

Model of teacher-student roles and interactions with differing rôles of and relationships between ‘l’accompagnateur’ (the ‘teacher’) and ‘l’accompagné(e)’ (the student/learner). [6] ‘Teacher’ and ‘student’ are used as convenient English words to refer to different levels of relevant experience.
Teacher is fully informed beforehand
Situation A: the goal is to bring students to a particular level; teacher directs and corrects students. Situation C: students are supported through difficulties; teacher helps the student finds their way, but remains unaffected.
Pre-determined student outcomes Situation B: the task requires a creative solution – students are initiated into practices; teacher has necessary skills (is an artisan), but problem’s solution is open. Situation D: students and teachers are differentiated by experience, but are in partnership (they ‘voyage’ together) to co-construct the solution; each develops new expertise. Open, or negotiated student outcomes
Teacher increases their knowledge

 

Who says even formal education cannot consist entirely of learners? Even those who are organising or responsible for the experience?

Finally: what a difference not having to worry about an international relocation or accommodate other’s demands makes to being able to really reflect on ideas and discussions and learn!

References:

[1] Reflection and resources from the Open University Learning Design team: http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/learning-design/?page_id=457 – accessed, 07/12/2021

[2] An equitable and effective approach to introductory mechanics; Eric Burkholder, Shima Salehi, Sarah Sackeyfio, Nicel Mohamed-Hinds, Carl Wieman; arXiv:2111.12504 [physics.ed-ph] (2021). 

[3] Modes of Learning, ONL; ‘Elmore’s Modes of Learning Framework’, Gizeh Perez Tenorio; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwHJh5_oipQ – accessed, 07/12/2021

[4] We need new stories, Nesrine Malik (2019), pg 210, chapter 6: ‘The myth of the reliable narrator’ (1st paperback edition, possibly pg 13, chapter 1 in later editions).

[5] Conceptions of Students as Partners, K. E. Matthews, A. Dwyer, L. Hine, J. Turner, Higher Education, 6: 957-971 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0257-y

[6] L’accompagnement des étudiants dans l’enseignement supérieur : une tentative de modélisation (Supporting students in higher education: proposal for a theoretical framework); Jean-Marie De Ketele, Recherche Formation, 77, p. 73-85 (2014) https://doi.org/10.4000/rechercheformation.2321.

Topic 5: the instructions said 400 words…