Perspectives on Learning in a changing educational environment:
some challenging issues
Liam Bannon
Oct 1995
(A Note prepared as an input document for the Learning Environment Working Group of the University of Limerick’s VISION 2020 Exercise.)
The following very rough notes are intended to stimulate discussion and reflection in the context of the work of the Vision 2020 Group on the Learning Environment, which has been meeting over the past year. While it would be presumptuous to imagine that we can predict in any detail what the learning environment might be like in the year 2020, we can at least take stock of certain issues that appear to create problems for attaining a satisfactory learning environment today and are liable to increase in severity in the future.
Whilst it is a truism that almost every generation believes that it is witnessing profound change and that the future will not be like what has gone before, I believe that what we term the "learning environment" in 2020 will be radically different from that of today. The reasons for the change are multifarious, including significant economic, political, social and technological changes. In these notes, no attempt is made to tackle all of these issues, but rather, I want to address a few issues that I believe are of importance in any envisioning of the evolving learning environment.
Thus in Section 1 I argue for a shift in perspective towards a different model of learning than the one that I believe is still prevalent in many educational settings, especially the University. The educational environment in Ireland in 1995 is still built upon and to a large extent runs according to an ethos of education that was developed at the turn of the century, if not earlier. Our school system still too often assumes a view of education that sees schooling at all levels as the transfer of abstract skills and knowledge from the teacher into the head of the students. The consequences of this approach for subsequent education are I believe profound.
In Section 2 I address the role of the computer in education, a topic which I believe has been the subject of an extraordinary amount of hype. I argue that while certainly information technology - both computers and telecommunications - can and will affect the educational process, they are not the panacea that some people hope for. I also argue for a particular approach to the use of computers in education, one that exploits them as a new medium, rather than simply as drill and practice machines on the one hand or overly elaborate intelligent tutoring systems on the other.
Finally, in Section 3, I touch on a more concrete issue, namely the relation between the university and its environment: I make some comments on the importance of breaking down the barriers - intellectual, economic, social - between the University and other communities, with particular emphasis on including those sections of society that are currently marginalised.
1. Shifting Perspectives on Learning & Education
What follows is a brief listing of some of the common assumptions that I believe are still prevalent re. learning and education in many circles:
* the concepts of schooling and education are almost synonymous
* education is primarily concerned with teaching and the transfer of knowledge
* education is fundamentally text based and school based
* people should learn abstract principles that later will be applied appropriately
* education concerns itself with individuals
* education should be competitive
* examinations are the most suitable form of certification
* the major part of a person’s education is finished by the early twenties
* education is about getting credentials
* education today involves "computer literacy"
* educational policy is necessarily elitist
It is my view that each and every one of these statements is deeply problematic and seriously flawed. As an alternative model of what education, or rather a learning model should be about, here are a competing set of assumptions:
• schools (& Universities ?) are not the only or even the most important centres for learning today
• education is about student’s learning and the development of understanding
• learning can and does occur in many settings and through a variety of means
• the apprenticeship model of learning is a very effective model for many purposes
• learning is fundamentally a cooperative or collaborative endeavour with others
• project based work is often more appropriate than examinations
• learning is something that should go on throughout life
• there are many kinds of intelligence, skills and knowing, and all should be appreciated by society
• people need to understand the potential of technology in terms of access to resources & use of applications, not simply "computer literacy" ( whatever that is supposed to mean!)
• educational policy should be inclusive, not exclusive
The latter set of statements reflect an emerging perspective on education that:
- Emphasizes the importance of the everyday social practices of people at work and play that afford opportunities for learning (Lave, 1988)
- is part of a broader critique of our understanding of how learning occurs that:
- discredits older instructional paradigms (e.g. Gagne, 1968)
- argues for the social "situatedness" of human learning and action (Suchman, 1987, Winograd and Flores, 1986)
- Questions the separation of "formal" and informal" education
- Argues for the importance of "apprenticeship" in learning (Lave, 1977)
- Includes "outside-class" activities as an integral part of the social context in which learning occurs
(Cole & Griffin, 1987)
As a summary of a number of important points concerning this changed view of learning, I quote a recent manifesto of issues by the Institute for Research in Learning entitled "A New Learning Agenda", which reflects the viewpoint I am arguing for here in what I believe to be a pithy and provocative fashion:
===========
(Extract: A New Learning Agenda)
"We cannot make real progress until we recognize that cognitive and social processes are neither separate nor separable - that learning is inherently social.
Learning is fundamentally social
The choice between learning and social fulfilment should never arise.
Knowledge is integrated in the life of communities
Knowledge, activity and social relations are closely intertwined, whether in families, scientific communities, design teams.....these informal aggregations are called "communities of practice" as they are defined by shared ways of doing things.
Learning is an act of membership
Learning is not just the activity of a sole individual, but the primary vehicle for engagement with others.
Knowing is engagement in practice
Only in the classroom is knowledge presented in the abstract, and only in the classroom are people expected to demonstrate knowledge through abstract performances.
Engagement is inseparable from empowerment
Individuals perceive their identities in terms of their ability to contribute - and in terms of their contributions- to a community.
"Failure" to learn is the normal result of exclusion from participation
Learning requires access and opportunity.
We already have a society of lifelong learners
People are learning all the time, but what they are learning is not necessarily in their best interests or in the best interests of society.
The learning potential of information systems lies as much in the connections that they open among people, and in the collaboration that they support, as in the information that they deliver. "
There is an important difference between assessment that is built into practice and whose function is to support learning; and assessment that is extracted out of practice, made portable, and shipped to locations to support classification and sorting."
=======
Entering into a detailed discussion here of the arguments in favour of this approach would take us too far afield in this short note, but I would point the interested reader to the following sources for argumentation supporting the position advocated here.
Bannon, L. (1994) Issues in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. In C. O'Malley (ed.) Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. Proceedings of NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Aquafredda di Maratea, Italy, Sept. 24-28, 1989. NATO ASI Series, SERS F Vol.128. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-57740-8.
Cole, M. & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1987) Contextual factors in education. Madison, Wisc.: Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, Univ. of Wisconsin, USA.
Institute for Research on Learning (1993). A New Learning Agenda: "Putting People First" ( Palo Alto, CA)
Lave, J. (1977) Cognitive consequences of traditional apprenticeship training in West Africa. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 8, 3, 177-180.
Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in Practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. (New York: Cambridge University Press).
Newman, D., Griffin, P. & Cole, M. (1989) The Construction Zone: Working for cognitive change in school. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. (M.Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman, Eds.) Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Winograd, T., & Flores C. F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Much of the referenced work is informed by the work of the Russian psychologist and pedagogist, Lev Vygotsky, who has argued for the fundamentally social nature of mind (Cf. Vygotsky, 1978). A key concept in this work is Vygotsky's idea of the "zone of proximal development" (ZPD) as the site where learning occurs. The zone is formally defined as: "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers." (Vygotsky, 1978, pg 86). This concept has been at the heart of the educational research of several groups that is very relevant in the current context, as they all stress the importance of studying learning as a collaborative process, and they have also used the computer as a medium in which to provide new contexts in which this collaborative learning might take place (e.g. Newman, Griffin & Cole, 1989).
2. The role of the computer in Education
As someone that is intimately involved in the development and use of IT, I am not unaware of the potential of new technology to augment the learning process. That said, many of the current discussions on technology and learning develop simplistic scenarios of education in the future that are technology-led, and omit the importance of a suitable learning environment created by other students, tutors and teachers. To my mind, the issue is how to integrate the technology in appropriate ways into the learning process. Since the advent of information technology, we have had soothsayers claiming that they will revolutionise education ( for a critique of some early prophecies, Cf.Anthony Oettinger’s Run, Computer, Run - The mythology of educational innovation (1969)). At the same time, I am not disputing the fact that the widespread availability of multimedia PC’s and access to the Internet via such user friendly interfaces as the World Wide Web cannot open up a wealth of interesting educational possibilities, both in terms of access to resources and to worldwide communities - indeed, I have been exploring just these developments for a number of years. I believe that one important result of these developments is that given better access to resources, to knowledge and information, we can free up time within the curriculum for teachers to be able to spend more time in helping students understand the material, using mentoring and Socratic tutoring methods that have been impossible recently, due to the requirement that teachers use lectures to "transfer knowledge" to large groups of students.
Let us briefly look at some of the ways that the computer could be integrated into the educational process....
Looking at cognitive change and learning processes, Kurland & Kurland (1987) refer to Collins (1984) in discussing ways the computer can be used to support learning. It can allow one to simulate situations that would be impossible in the real world; it can maintain traces of student actions that can be used in improving problem-solving strategies; it can reify the process of thinking, not just the product; it can make the invisible visible; it can help create functional learning environments where the student can acquire goals and knowledge while pursuing goals that are meaningful to them, etc. At the most basic level, the computer can be used simply as a data-gathering tool that can support the investigation of collaborative learning processes between people, allowing for presentation of a task, and perhaps recording of responses, and later analysis of these responses. In this case, the computer makes the task of the researcher easier but does not really affect the collaborative learning process per se. The computer is playing a rather passive role that could be replaced, though more awkwardly, with other possible tools such as pencil and paper. More innovative work provides a rich microworld on the computer which students can interact with individually and collaboratively. Micro-worlds provide powerful settings for both individual and collaborative learning, especially allowing students to explore a world and develop their understanding, as witnessed in some of the work in this volume.
The computer can also be seen as a "tutor" with whom the pupil interacts, or even collaborates. One can discern two kinds of research activity in this direction. One, focusing on more traditional Computer-Aided Instruction (CAI) or Learning (CAL), in the form of "drill-and-practice" type exercises, is no longer regarded as having a major role to play in the classroom, and certainly not in the context of "collaborative learning". However, there are niche areas where variants of such systems can still play a useful function, e.g. at certain stages of language learning. The other, Intelligent CAI, received a lot of attention in the previous decade, especially with the concept of the computer as tutor or coach that could help the student in understanding a problem domain by pointing out flaws in the students conceptual model evidenced by their responses to problems (e.g., Sleeman & Brown, 1982). While such a perspective does have more of a flavour of "collaboration" about it, between the student and the computer, the difficulties of building in an adequate set of strategies concerning how human tutors support students, and of understanding the students conceptual model of the domain have resulted in a major retrenchment of this work, and aspirations have become more mundane. The implicit assumption that the computer could in some sense replace the teacher is also now seen as flawed.
Yet a third viewpoint, and one I support, stresses the use of the computer as a medium or resource for collaborative learning. The computer can help students to communicate and collaborate on joint activities, providing assistance in the coordination process. This mediational role of the technology emphasizes the possibilities of using the computer not simply as an individual tool but as a medium through which individuals and groups can collaborate with others. In such studies the computer acts as a support and resource for the collaborating students. The work of Mike Cole and his colleagues over a number of years at UCSD is exemplary in this regard. Recently I have been working with some teachers here in developing such collaborative learning environments (Cf. Pat O’Neill’s M. Ed. thesis: The development of a computer supported collaborative learning environment to enhance children’s reading performance, 1995).
3. The University as a Place or Site for Activities
a) Breaking down barriers - building new networks of collaboration
The common perception of the Universities in Ireland as ivory towers is in my view quite justified. Even here at UL, which prides itself on responding to society’s needs, there is a large gap between that aspiration and the reality on the ground. Even the linkages between the University and the local business community could be strengthened. Perhaps more importantly, the University should be more pro-active in helping to support the general social and economic well-being of the local community. The number of outreach programmes between the University and more marginalised sections of the local community should be strengthened. We should be much more active in the area of educational opportunities for the disadvantaged, and in increasing the accessibility to the University’s resources for all sectors of the community, including the young, the elderly, disabled, economically deprived etc. The possibility of having many more student projects focus on issues of real concern to the local community should be investigated. There should be more representation on the structures of the University from all sectors of the local community.
.......
b) The continuing need for a physical campus
Despite the possibilities for distance education and for the development of virtual communities networked via the Internet, I believe that there will still be a need in the future for a physical place where students can come to interact and learn and play for periods. The idea of the University as a place that one enters at 18 and leaves a few years later, rarely to return, will however undoubtedly change. The question we must then consider is why people might like to come to UL versus other places? It should be because the University provides both a physical space that is attractive and populated with people who have an interest in things and the time to help people learn. We have a beautiful campus, where we need to work now is in the development of the human resources on the site.
c) the development of interdisciplinary activities
The University has taken the lead in attempting to cross-fertilise disciplines, in order to develop concepts and ideas that are more appropriate to the complexity of the problems we face in the world today. We need to expend further effort in developing strong interdisciplinary programmes that are constructed on a sound basis, and not simply throw together a mish-mash of courses that appear to have some overlap. In the future the need for people with an understanding of more than one narrow speciality will increase. Without ditching the expertise that comes from specialisation, there is still room to innovate and develop coherent thematic interdisciplinary programmes that are attractive to students. This need for interdisciplinarity also applies at the research level, and currently the campus has a number of such nascent research centres that should be supported.
The University has prided itself on breaking new ground in a number of its innovations over the years. It would appear that, as we look forward to the next 25 years, the University must continually re-invent itself and its mission, and continue to innovate, hopefully taking into account some of the issues raised above.
Additional Readings
Recently, there has been a serious questioning of University education by members of Universities themselves. To my mind, a particularly interesting contribution has been made by Peter Denning, a leading computer scientist, in a paper entitled "Educating a New Engineer". What I find particularly inspiring in this contribution is the acknowledgement of the need to make University education more responsive to the world we live in, not in terms of simply giving businesses what they ask for, but rather of developing a more integrated and involved framework for education that links what is done "inside" the University to what happens "outside", and in developing a serious approach to ethics and professionalism in disciplines.
Denning, P. (1992) Educating A New Engineer. Communications of the ACM, December, 1992, 83-97.
A readable critique of the whole accreditation business is
J. Fallows (1985). The Case against Credentialism. The Atlantic Monthly, December, 1985, 49-67.
My own views on the nature of learning and development have been very shaped by Mike Cole and his colleagues at UCSD, who publish
The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition
This Newsletter provides accounts of experiences in using Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory to educational and other issues, with a strong commitment to supporting the needs of minorities and disadvantaged groups.