Submitted by Pei-Wei, Leah Bug, and Arjana Blazic
Many people think of learning as nothing more than classroom settings, interactions between students, the instructor and a structured curriculum. Learning is limited to studying in schools and doing school-related activities such as assignments and going on field trips. However, based upon Wenger’s ideas on learning as social participation, learning happens not only in academic settings but also in everyday activities including conversations, work and play. The process of learning and of knowing requires engagement in the community, and includes acquiring information, skills and knowledge that individuals can use when needed. Learning includes both conscious and unconscious behaviors that cause changes in performance persistently. Therefore, learning happens anytime and anywhere and there is no end and no start point.
According to learning theorists, behaviorists assumed that learning is a stimulus and response activity while cognitivists believed that learning is a developmental cognitive process. Based on their experimental results, they posited that learning is an individual process. Social learning theory added another element to learning in which learning is a social activity involving socio-cultural, interpersonal and community process instead of the idea that knowledge is an isolated development. Generally speaking, it is believed that the purpose of learning is to prepare students for the job market. However, what schools have been doing contradicts to how the society functions in the real world. For example, testing students to answer questions taken out of context in a limited time without providing them with resources would seem meaningless in a real working environment where workers are expected to collaborate in order to solve problems and accomplish tasks. Wenger (1998) argues that traditional institutions do not provide students with practical knowledge to be used immediately in the workplace. What students gain is theoretical knowledge, which is not enough to tackle the problems of the real life. In The Vignette, Wenger (1998) provided an example of learning that greatly depends on human interactions. Through experiences, practices, making mistakes, talking to others and reflection people learn how to succeed.
According to Christensen (2011), traditional higher education is failing to educate the workers needed for the workforce. Maybe one reason is that the society has experienced changes slowly and gradually in the past centuries. People have been able to adapt to changes or learn from jobs easily and eventually. However, with the advent of the internet and affordable technologies in which to access information, this rapidly changing world requires the ability to adapt more quickly to disruptive technologies. The old way of doing things are not able to keep up with changes and make improvements as expected. Shirky highlights the issue that brick and mortar institutions are often unable to create a genuine intellectual community in large lecture halls. Could the MOOC’s and other online learning environments do a better job? Even though the demand for some type of post high-school education is highly recognized nowadays, the affordable quality education has become an issue. In order to provide education to large scale of people, different platforms and strategies are offered to compete for the market. Undoubtedly, those who believe in change, take action and have a passion in providing effective learning environments, will embrace the disruption.
Isaac Jason Bretz says
I am not buying into the theory that we are living in a period of rapid and revolutionary change. Just because more people are invested in developing new technology and disseminating more information does not mean that we are generating more knowledge and technology that really matters for improving societies and preserving the environment. The railroad, the telegraph, and the automobile “transformed” society in about the same amount of time as the internet. What is really needed for making the world a better place is a change in social consciousness, and with this the adoption of social theories that direct science towards the long-term wellbeing of humanity and the Earth. If MOOCs can help bring about this social change then more power to them.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/future_tense/features/2012/is_science_really_moving_faster_than_ever_/artemisinin_chairman_mao_and_the_societal_benefits_of_scientific_research_.html
Adam says
“The old way of doing things are not able to keep up with changes and make improvements as expected.”
I’m not defending Brick and Mortar or MOOCs in this comment but I wanted point out something. Many of our educational institutions are very old. Penn State was founded in 1855, my state school that Shirky looked down on as mediocre because it wasn’t “elite” was founded in 1832. Think about what institutions who are of the same founding era witnessed: American Civil War, new states joining the Union, the Transcontinental Railroad, the Guilded Age (the age of Edison, Tesla, Westinghouse), the electrification of the country, the invention of the telegraph, the invention of the phone, World War I, the boom of the 1920’s and the bust of the 1930’s, the New Deal, World War II, the GI bill, integration and Civil Rights, protests of the 1960’s, correspondences schools, the introduction of computers, the Internet, Web 2.0 tools, the list goes on and on. While higher education was able to insulate itself from some of these things to varying levels of success, this isn’t the first crisis or change that higher education has faced. Maybe this is the precipice of a new of post-secondary education or maybe this is another bump in the road. We’ll have to watch and move with assertive action and think through reflection.
Priscilla Taylor says
Wenger’s writings on learning being context-free extends what the education community has been lifelong learning. Instead of focusing primarily on when, it encompasses where and with whom. I know that there has been a lack of consensus about the purpose of postsecondary education but I feel as though its sole purpose can’t be career education. To me that fails to capture all that higher education has to offer.
Isaac , I think your comment brings up an excellent point that today’s digital technologies are not the first tools to be touted as the salvation of education and society. I do think that the rate at which new technologies are brought to the public is speeding up. Every few months there’s “something new” and education, that is repeatedly accused of being behind, feels the need to integrate it usually with little consideration of its affordances and limitations.
Katie Bateman says
Do we also consider here that even Penn State has morphed it’s purpose over time to meet the needs of the consumers who paid their tuition? At one point this was the PA Farmers’ College, and though it retains a presence on campus, other programs were added to meet the demands. We didn’t completely irradicate the agricultural programming, we added biology, education, nursing, etc. along the way. Can we do the same to accommodate the current needs?
Audrey Romano says
I think what really rung true to me in the readings was that you’re hiring an educational institution, be it resident, online, or another form like attending a conference, for a specific purpose. If your purpose is to get a job, to become more competent at your job, to climb the ladder of success in a particular career, to become an educator or researcher, that will play in your evaluation of which method and context of learning you choose. For years I’ve worked in a higher ed IT support unit as a web designer, entirely self-taught. While I possess a completely unrelated undergrad degree, plus five years of employment in that field of work, I don’t know how much that enabled me in getting a foothold in a technology career. Over the years, I’ve continued to gain competence in web skills, but also in leadership, communication, and in understanding the context of my work in support of education technology. I’ve gained this experience mostly through working alongside my peers, comprised of other multimedia specialists, programmers, instructional designers, senior leadership, and faculty fellows. I’ve attended industry-level, bleeding-edge technology conferences with keynotes like Elon Musk and Neil Degrasse Tyson, as well as conferences specially for web professionals working in higher ed. And I’ve taken single subject individual-based online courses. I’ve benefited from each of these methods of learning for different purposes, and yet together their true benefit pays off in the context of my work collaborations and communications. I’m basically living exactly the story of “learning via social participation” that Wenger illustrates. But it’s still really hard for me to flat out say that one particular type of learning is going to rule them all, because I’m looking at it from a purely practical nature. Learners are going to be the ones who dictate what works for whatever context they choose. I don’t know that all higher ed institutions will disappear like the 8-track or that be valued like a limited-edition, fine, aged wine. But if you look at higher ed as solely a teaching and learning provider, the disruption will likely effect most of them as the post-secondary education market forces education providers to specialize or die trying.
Michael Sean Banales says
Admittedly, this is a time of a lot of change, but I have to agree with previous comments that there have been a huge variety of changes since the founding of some traditional brick and mortar universities that did not cause them to fall. I genuinely don’t believe the advent of online education will in any way cripple or end current universities.
Like Katie mentioned though, it’s a question of whether or not these institutions can change and accommodate the needs of the current populace. I don’t expect all institutions to make these changes and don’t feel it’s even reasonable to ask. The specific tasks they are intended for have been done well (or have closed, as a number of schools over the years have). Online education shouldn’t be viewed as a threat to them, but instead educating a very specific population that for whatever reason is unable to attend the traditional schooling. Even MOOCs if used properly can do wonders to provide a more well-rounded education to individuals who desire simply to increase their own wealth of knowledge. The trouble there lies in the individual motivations of everyone in the populace, but I am troubled when trying to answer how we reach them. In short, why ask my burger joint to start serving chicken cacciatore? Just open up an Italian restaurant nearby.
Adam says
Issac, Koun and Adam were able to find these assumptions in this post:
1) “In order to provide education to large scale of people, different platforms and strategies are offered to compete for the market.”
2) That MOOC’s provide a better educational experience than a lecture hall
3) A market driven education is preferable to the traditional model.
4) A MOOC is an appropriate scheme for a large group of students.
5) Higher Education is failing.
6) Investing in Post-Secondary education will help people find jobs.
7) There is an assumption that Post-Secondary education needs to be expensive. It can be free.
Zach Lonsinger says
“Even though the demand for some type of post high-school education is highly recognized nowadays, the affordable quality education has become an issue.” This comment is so relevant to recent events – with Obama announcing his plan for free community college after high school. I agree with others commenters on this post that online education isn’t going to kill the traditional University, but it certainly is going to influence it. Who is to say that students won’t take advantage of this free “public school” community college for two years and then finish their degree online? That would certainly disrupt our current setup in society.