Recently, while working on a paper dealing with learners and technology, I was wrestling with the suggested notion that a sound understanding of the benefits and limitations of the technology along with a clear understanding of design would lead to more effective technology-enhanced instruction. The more I wrestled, the weaker my opponent got. The specific factor under consideration was teacher and student choice. What kinds of choices can and do teachers make when designing learning scenarios? What kind of choices can and do students make when dealing with those scenarios? It struck me that an very important aspect of the scenarios was missing.
Though I'm not the biggest teleologist going, much of what we as humans do is meaningful and purposeful activity (or at least I hope it is). Learning, at least in formal learning situations, should be purposeful. It should get us somewhere or should at least help us to get somewhere where we think we need to go. A long time ago, these goals of learning were simply called objectives, and these described behavioral changes that teachers wanted to effect in their students by the time the unit of learning was over. Over the years, such simplistic goals were deemed inadequate and competences became all the rage, so we have now broadened our horizons and speak primarily of learning outcomes. But how do we know what should come out of learning?
It occurred to me that students are one thing, learners are another. They are two different roles that an individual can take when engaging in the formal learning process. On the other side (of the desk) we have teachers, but given the increase in attention to and implementation of technology to support learning, those that design the learning may or may not be the teachers. In other words, although there are two corresponding roles the teacher can take: teacher or designer, these can actually be different individuals, not just roles.
There was still something missing. Learners are supposed learn particular things in specified situations (and sometimes they do, but sometimes they don't or sometimes they learn things other than those that were planned). Designers are supposed to construct specified situations so that learners have the opportunity to learn those particular things. Ah, ha! It came to be: the interaction of the roles is dependent on the context. That is, the situation itself, the scenario in which learning is supposed to take place also affects the choices that the players in that scenario can make.
The materials I was working with started at the activity level: teachers task learners to do things and they do them as they see fit. But, this task/activity doesn't occur in a vacuum. It's part of something larger, like a lesson. A lesson in turn is part of a block or a unit, which is part of a course, which part of a program, and suddenly I found myself in the center of a matryoshka doll of my own making. These contexts were embedded in one context after another, and as far as formal learning is concerned, up to the educational system (usually of a country) itself. Each layer, if you will places constraints and restrictions on every layer inside itself. To help myself make sense of this, I came up with the following diagram, that I like to call my Model of Eduational Action:
Let me explain a bit about what it all means.
Teachers have a certain amount of freedom regarding which institutions they would like to work at and which programs they would like to participate in. Naturally these are limited by a number of factors, but these choices have little direct impact on learners. Similarly, students can also -- at least to a certain extent -- choose which institutions they want to study at and what programs of study they would like to pursue. In most places these days, they also have a fairly wide range of choices when it comes to individual courses as well. Whole curricula are not generally prescribed from above. To a certain extent, then, students have a bit more freedom here than teachers.
In the other roles, however, things look just a bit different. Teachers can be asked (or assigned) to course teams, that is, those who are responsible for designing and developing the course itself. As noted above, this may or may not be the teacher, rather it could be a designer or educational technologist who gathers input from the teacher and gives it form and structure. (That's the reason the roles on the bottom are in different shades of blue.) Once involved in this part of the context, though, the designer has a lot to say about what is done and how, or at least about what is supposed to be done and generally how the learner may go about doing it. All of these choices precede those made by the learners, of course, and as such place another layer of constraint on the context. The learner shows up only after a lot of decisions have been made about just what s/he should be doing with him- or herself.
The role of the learner and the choices s/he can make are pretty well restricted by the overall context of the learning scenario and the choices that have been made prior to his/her arrival. Depending on their own learning styles, interests, motivations, inclinations, goals, aspirations, and so on, they can decide how to deal with the three innermost layers of our context model: the unit, lesson, and activity. The unit level will most likely be influenced by the learner's strategic goals (what do I want out of this course as part of my obtaining, say, a qualification). The range of choice at the lesson level is affected by the strategy and the learner's own operational requirements. In the end, then, the learner may be able to make certain tactical choices about how they deal with any given activity.
What this little exercise has done for me is make me rethink the notion of learner-centered instruction. I'm beginning to wonder just how feasible the concept is and what role the concept should be playing in the general educational context. All the preceding decisions and layers of context ultimately limit the learner's choice. Given the right set of circumstances, even this last opportunity to choose could be taken away as well, for while all choices may be educationally relevant, they may not all be learning relevant.
This certainly needs more thought, but here in the quiet darkness inside the dolls, one has little else to do, but think.
