I absolutely agree with Phil's statement that "when e-learning has 'grown up' we won't talk about it as anything 'different' from normal learning" and this is what I advocate in my writings as well. However, in order for e-learning (or blended-learning, or technology-enhanced learning..etc) to grow as a discipline there is a need for deeper and better research in both the philosophical and sociological foundations of the "blend"of technology+learning. This is where I see tremendous difference between Europe and the USA writings in the field. In European conferences and publications you are more likely to read a good (?) theoretical section that puts e-learning or blended learning in a context for the reader to engage with..this varies from still ill-defined concepts like socio-constructivism (with often misuse of core principles by Vygotsky or Carl Rogers ) to post-modern approaches like connectivism. I find that writings from extremely well respected top journals, although they always cover themselves with a theoretical framework of some sort when it comes to discuss the focus is on findings of immediate use and not on a deeper contributions to our theoretical understanding of them.hence the area hasn't really grown or matured yet! In Europe and in particular mainland Europe we still have the luxury to philosophise a bit and perhaps move the thinking further...maybe I am wrong..but this is my personal experience of having done my PhD in online tutoring and trying to synthesise ideas from both parts of the Atlantic! I always found the USA too fast to digest.
To me what is really been blended in blended learning is nothing more than old with contemporary understanding of learning design . I keep reminding myself that there is a technology out there to do the most 'crazy' and most 'trendy' thing in my class..what I need is to allow myself to blend my old experiences with the new things that I see or practice (similar to the principles of connectivism)...but not to forget to check that these new blends do not go against my instinct (including my ethos) as an academic . Difficult balance, I know. I get the feeling that some countries they rush into the game of blending and then they can't identify in the end the new blend they produced and what to make of it..if that's make any sense!
I would look into the Networked Learning Conference (every two years) ..authors like Terry Anderson, Stephen Downes, Etienne Wenger , George Siemens as well as the excellent work by the London Knowledge Lab and the Centre for Technology Enhanced Learning in Lancaster have definitely pushed both the theoretical and practical thinking in the area...but we need more adventurous thinkers to join the field!
I would be interested in reading other people's views on that
All best wishes
Dr Panos Vlachopoulos, B.Ed,M.Ed,PhD,FHEA
Programme Director PGCPP
Lecturer in Academic Practice
Centre for Learning Innovation and Professional Practice
Aston University
Birmingham
B4 7ET
UK
-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lindsay Jordan
Sent: 08 June 2012 14:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Blended is one thing - what about 'distributed'?[Scanned-Clean]
Would just like to add to Nick's recommendation of McConnell's work - an excellent read - McConnell was way ahead of his time.
In terms of examining distributed learning models I think a great place to explore is the CCK11 online course - http://cck11.mooc.ca/
Lindsay Jordan
University of the Arts London
-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Neame ,Charles
Sent: 08 June 2012 13:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Blended is one thing - what about 'distributed'?[Scanned-Clean]
Thanks Nick, for your useful and interesting comments. Your reference to "distributed learning" got me wondering, in a Friday afternoon kind of way, what various understandings we may all have of the notion of "distribution"... I find myself currently in discussions about the "the distributed academy" and am not at all sure what that means...
Best wishes,
Charles
Dr. Charles Neame
The Glasgow School of Art
167 Renfrew Street
Glasgow
G3 6RQ
Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: 0141 353 4560
Mob: 07968 076674
www.gsa.ac.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nick Bowskill
Sent: 07 June 2012 19:09
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: What is "blended" in blended learning?[Scanned-Clean]
Dear Phil,
Thank you for those papers.They were useful and enjoyable. I accept that the term e-learning is problematic. I might also argue that the notion of classroom learning is no less awkward.
I read through both papers with interest and had a sense a particular conception of e-learning as packaged/programmed materials within VLEs etc. In both papers there appeared to be a particular view of e-learning that seemed valid within its own parameters. Perhaps I might offer a broader view of the field that understands e-learning in different ways (with implications for the idea of blended learning).
I would suggest anyone wishing to broaden that 'programmed' and 'screen-based' view of e-learning might look at work by Charles Crook on collaborative learning with computers in the classroom. I would also suggest the work of David McConnell on the same collaboration within the networked space. These are books that each pre-date both your papers and provide a very different way of thinking about the role of technology and learning. They discuss the idea of technology in both co-present interaction and in spaces in which learners are distributed. I highlight these papers to suggest some ways of framing the field differently.
I also think you may be interested to explore the literature on the use of new classroom technologies. This literature further blurs the boundaries between between co-present and distributed learning where both are supported by technology. It calls into question conventional notions of 'the classroom.' Similarly, the advent of mobile and augmented reality technology render the early conceptions of 'programmed learning' as a very particular conceptualisation.
In other words technology is as much inside as outside the classroom.
This adds further complication to the general notion of 'blended learning.' It may be that like classroom learning, e-learning is always a term in need of clarification. Both begin as general. Both are problematic.
It is my honour to be Programme Manager for the SEDA online workshop 'Developing the Developers' which should be running again in September time. Everyone is very welcome to participate in this as a way of exploring a wider notion of e-learning. Last time, for example, we had the pleasure of an online 'guest' tutor from a University in Egypt.
She participated and hosted an interesting session on inter-cultural aspects of e-learning . Again, this is worth mentioning to indicate a much broader and richer notion of learning that involves technology.
My point is that with the ubiquity of technology all terms need negotiation.
I would also argue that we need to re-think 'staff development' within such an understanding.
Regards,
Nick
--------------------------------------
Nicholas Bowskill,
Faculty of Education,
University of Glasgow
Shared Thinking - a Collectivist Pedagogy
Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info
On 7 June 2012 16:59, Phil Race <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks, Isa and Anders.
> I've never liked (nor used) the term 'blended learning'. I think it's
> meant to mean 'joined up thinking' regarding putting together online
> learning and face-to-face teaching.
> Nor do I like the term e-learning any more. Most of it is just
> i-learning (i.e. information online, not learning on line). Since
> 'edentate' means 'without teeth', perhaps elearning means 'without learning'!.
> Way back in 2005 in the 1st edition of my 'making learning happen' I
> published a chapter 'putting the learning into e-learning'. I attach a
> fuller version of this than the one there was room for in the book. In
> my
> 2010 edition, where wasn't room for an updated version of this chapter.
> However, back in 2007, with Ruth Pickford in 'making teaching work' we
> had another go, at 'making e-learning work'. I attach this too.
> I still make the point that when e-learning has 'grown up' we won't
> talk about it as anything 'different' from normal learning, and I
> think we won't need 'blended' learning either.
> all best wishes,
> Phil
> www.phil-race.co.uk
>
> On 7 June 2012 12:03, Isa Jahnke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear European researchers and academic workers,
>>
>> the term "blended learning" is a usually a mix of .... ? Sure,
>> easy....or not? Actually, what does "mixed" mean, in what ways/how?
>> Have you ever asked yourself if there is any "unblended" learning?
>>
>> For a research study we are looking for European perspectives on
>> "blended learning". Is there anything like that? We also want to
>> create a list with blended learning authors in order to make diverse approaches visible.
>>
>> 1. What is "blend" in "blended learning" for you? (e.g.,
>> components, type of blend, or just your definition) (1)
>> 2. Could you possibly recommend a favorite paper on "blended
>> learning", or an author, conference or other favorite resource? (2)
>> 3. Do you have any feeling or hypothesis about differences between
>> European and North American research on "blended learning"? (3)
>>
>> We would we very happy if you could help us by answering the three
>> questions, as a reply to this email, why not right away? :-) It
>> would be great when you could reply not later than June/14, 2012. We
>> will create a list of all answers and send it back to all people who replied.
>>
>> Thanks a lot,
>> Isa Jahnke & Anders Norberg
>>
>> Email
>> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Professor Dr. Isa Jahnke
>> ICT, media and learning
>> Umeå University
>> Dep of Applied Educational Science
>> Interactive Media and Learning (IML)
>> SE-90187 Umeå
>> Sweden
>> Phone +46(0)90 / 786-9798
>> Mobile +46(0)70 / 227 887 0
>> email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Web: http://www.isa-jahnke.de
>> http://www.facebook.com/isajahnke
>
>
>
>
> --
> __________________________________
> Professor Phil Race
> BSc PhD PGCE FCIPD SFHEA NTF
> Visiting Professor: University of Plymouth, and University Campus,
> Suffolk Emeritus Professor: Leeds Metropolitan University Adjunct
> Professor: James Cook University, Northern Queensland Adjunct
> Professsor: University of Central Queensland
>
> (home address is in Newcastle-upon-Tyne - please email me for this if
> you need to send anything by post). Normally best contact me by email
> - I'm rarely at my phone! Please note that I've now changed my mobile
> phone number
> - email me if you need the new one.
>
> Website: www.phil-race.co.uk
> ______________________________________________
>
--
--------------------------------------
Nicholas Bowskill,
Faculty of Education,
University of Glasgow
Shared Thinking - a Collectivist Pedagogy
Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info
The Glasgow School of Art is a charity registered in Scotland, charity number SC012490.
|