Control, influence and beyond:

the logics of learning networks

David Boud

University of Technology, Sydney

Aims

Part 1 Identify what I see as a widening divide

between technology-driven and other pedagogy

Part 2 Introduce some ways of thinking about

affordances as part of the bridge

Part 1

A problem

Three experiences leading to my position now

Experience 1. Teaching online for the first time

in a global program

Experience 2. Developing a framework for judging

technology-led activities from a

learning perspective

Experience 3. Reviewing changing conceptions of

learner-centredness over time

Experience 1

Intercontinental Masters in Adult Learning and Global Change

UBC,Vancouver

LiU, Linköping

UTS,Sydney

UWC,Cape Town

Key features

Students from different countries share the same classes. They learn about global change and adult learning through together examining their own practices

Teaching is equally distributed across four continents so students experience different cultures of teaching, learning and practice

Appropriate technology used

My on-line experience

Move from face-to-face peer learning to remote Total design and the temptations to control De-centering the teacher Forming meaningful relationships across

cultures and contexts Forming and meeting expectations

Experience 2

Appraising new technologies for learning

What are suitable frameworks for analysing learning designs using new technologies?

Appraising new technologies for learning

Learning designs

Learning outcomes

AUTC diagram Acknowledge context

Involve practice

HIGH QUALITYLEARNING

ACTIVITIES

Engage learners

Challenge learners

AUTC diagramAcknowledge

context

Involve practice

HIGH QUALITYLEARNING

ACTIVITIES

Engage learners

Challenge learners

Engages:• intents/expectations• prior experience• through promoting agency• will/desire/ emotion• socially

To:• discern variation• question assumptions• seek support of others• go beyond provisions• take responsibility

Context of:• problem• self• discipline• site of application

To:• demonstrate learning• gain feedback• develop awareness of what is learned• reflect/make sense• develop confidence

Issues in developing a framework

Two cultures, two traditions Compatibility and resistance Importance of context of actual use and the

specific experience of learners often ignored

Experience 3

Learner-centred practices

Programmed learning and self-paced learning Self-directed/negotiated learning Problem-based learning Work-based learning

Reviewing learner-centred discourses

Major shifts have occurred over past 30 years Use of the learner-centred label disguises

conceptual incompatibilities While we may all be learner-centred now, this

is almost meaningless What traditions are we drawing on? Can we

really pick and mix?

Reviewing the three sets of experience

Observations

Concern about the disconnectedness between developments on-line and face-to-face.

Two discourses are developing and two sets of structures within organisations: this is worrying when the future appears to be blended learning

Being learner-focused in itself is not enough

A problem?

Two different communities of practice Potentially divergent discourses Both embedded in a wider culture of control and

surveillance with a rhetoric of autonomy and development

Each community has much to learn from the other

Part 2

A contribution?

What is needed to address the problem?

Recognition that we share a common project: creating high quality learning events for students

Development of common language and sources Acceptance that we can learn from each other

My specific argument

An earlier tradition that emphasised control over learners exerts a powerful influence

The notion of affordances is useful as a way of viewing the facilitation of learning

However, we need to be careful in our use of this term

We should replace what has been a logic of control with a logic of affordances

The seduction of control

Feeds the belief: ‘If we can only control the environment for learning we will enable students to learn all that is required of them’

Many technology-based environments permit greater control of students behaviour than conventional teaching

Ironically, sometimes we need to exercise control to facilitate autonomy

What are affordances?

Example

What are affordances?

Characteristics Not just attributes of an environment Link objects and events with behaviour of

individuals Not causes but opportunities Need to be perceived Requires individuals with reciprocal effectivities

What are affordances?

Characteristics Not just attributes of an environment Link objects and events with behaviour of

individuals Not causes but opportunities Need to be perceived Requires individuals with reciprocal effectivities

Why affordances?

Note plural: affordances Focuses on importance of learning environment Connects learning environments with learners

and learning Relational idea—resonates with student

learning research in HE

Key features

An affordance is not a given. It can only be inferred from learners’ actions in a given context.

Learning environments can however be designed to enhance affordances

Consideration of needed learner effectivities (e-literacy)

Logic of control versus logic of affordances

Logic of

control

Logic of

affordancesV

Why logics?

The framework of thinking in which we operate influences all the micro-decisions that lead to what a learner can experience

It is the cumulation of these decisions that creates the learning environment

It is not the issue of control or affordances per se, but what is associated with them

ComparisonsLogic of control Activities determined Behaviour is all Outcomes always

determinable Emphasis on achievement What is permitted is

required Learner values may be

tolerated

Logic of affordances Activities facilitated Behaviour is important Outcomes may not be

determinable Emphasis on development What is permitted is not

required Learner values and priorities

respected

Logic of control not sustainable

Learner’s experience, inherently, cannot be controlled

We can set up the environment fully, but how learners respond depends on what they bring and what they desire

Logic of affordances links:

Design for

learning

Experience of

learning

Portraying affordances

The representation of affordances is the key to any description of pedagogy

It provides useful information to learners and teachers about what opportunities exist in any particular learning event

Any report of a learning activity, particularly when claims are to be made about outcomes needs to describe it in terms of affordances

Affordances and pedagogy: questions to ask

1.What pedagogy does an environment permit? (that is, what are the intrinsic limitations?)

2.What pedagogy is fostered? (that is, what features are foregrounded and promoted?)

3.What opportunities are perceived by learners? (and thus influence their potential action)

4.What is acted upon by learners?

Example tutorial affordances

Provide opportunities for students to raise questions of subject matter with tutors

Provides opportunities for discussion between students of subject matter

Opportunities are not always realised as tutors may not have the skills to establish a climate in which students feel comfortable nor manage interactions that occur

Example web-platform affordances

Provide opportunities for students to raise questions of subject matter with tutors

Provides opportunities for discussion between students of subject matter

Opportunities are not always realised as designers/tutors may not have the skills to establish a climate in which students feel comfortable nor manage interactions that occur

An illustration Blackboard

Has many features which can be used for more participative pedagogy

But there are still limits, eg. students forming their own groups, difficulties of following threaded discussion, etc.

Affordances of learning networks

Network seen to be relevant to intents of learner Threshold of participation within reach of learner Access available within normal life/work patterns Access to and familiarity with technology and

platform used Involvement scaffolded through progressive

participation

Benefits for practice

Being clear to students and colleagues Revealing actual pedagogy Making it available for critique

Conclusions

Focus on logics emphasises intents and framing of learning

Logic of affordances can provide a bridge between two discourses

Transparency of intents helps avoid false expectations

Maintain the search for common concepts

References

• Alexander, S. and Boud, D. (2001). Learners still learn from experience when online. In Stephenson, J. (Ed.) Teaching and Learning Online: Pedagogies for New Technologies. London: Kogan Page, 3-15.

• Boud, D and Prosser, M. (2002) Appraising new technologies for learning: a framework for development, Educational Media International, 39, 3,&4, 237-245.

• Boud, D. (submitted for publication). Aren’t we all learner-centred now? the bittersweet flavour of success. In Ashwin, P. (Ed.). Changing Higher Education: The Development of Learning and Teaching. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

• Gibson, J.J. (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

• Greeno, J. G. (1994). Gibson's affordances. Psychological Review, 101, 2, 336-342.

• Larsson, S., Dahlgren, M. A., Walters, S., Boud, D and Sork, T. (2002). Confronting globalization: the challenges of creating space for global learning. In Pettitt, J. M. (Ed.) Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Adult Education Research Conference. Raleigh, North Carolina: Adult and Community College Education, North Carolina State University, 201-206.

• Mynatt, E.D., O'Day, V. L., Adler, A., & Ito, M. (1998) Network communities: something old, something new, something borrowed... Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 7 (1-2), 123-156