Analysis of two DE journal articles
The purpose of this essay is to closely examine
two scholarly articles in the field of distance education, using
examples respectively of both theoretical inquiry and case study as
research methods. For the purposes of this paper, theoretical inquiry
is "a theoretical review of literature and conceptual study for
proposing new ideas in distance education" and case study is "aimed at
investigating a single individual, group, program or organization,
qualitatively" (Lee et al., 2007).
Theoretical inquiry
An example of theoretical inquiry can be found in Kopp & Hill's (2008) critical examination of the theory of "connectivism" originally proposed in 2004 by George Siemens and Stephen Downes, educational researchers at the University of Manitoba (ref?). Specifically, Kopp & Hill examine whether connectivism deserves consideration as a unique educational theory, or if it merely describes phenomena that can be explained by existing educational theory in the context of an increasingly technologically enabled world. Connectivism, as proposed by Siemens and Downes, describes a type of metacognition in which learners develop the ability to filter and make sense of networked information (including through online social networks, blogs and other Web sites). This ability is unique from the abilities embodied in other learning theories. Abilities highlighted in the behaviorism model of education, for example, might include memorization, behavior mimicking, and rote learning. Abilities highlighted in constructivism include social interactions, dialog, and critical thought. Connectivism, on the other hand, highlights information-seeking behavior and judgment. The relationships involved are not that of the student and instructor (or student and content), as in behaviorism, nor that of the student with other students, as in constructivism. Rather the relationship in connectivism is between the student and the connections and nodes that make up digital networks. Siemens and Downes concluded that there was no significant construct for describing this new way of learning, so they proposed connectivism as a new learning theory. Siemens and Downes go further in their description of connectivism by likening the information networks it describes to the neural networks in the brain.
Kopp & Hill do describe some researchers' critique of connectivism. More than one has declared that connectivism offers nothing new conceptually to the field of education, and feel that phenomena it describes can be grounded in other existing learning theories. However, this is often the case with "developmental theory", which the authors contrast with what scholars generally consider as established theory. Developmental theory has yet to be tested (and thus proven or disproven) by means of rigorous empirical research. The authors conclude by conceding connectivism's possibility as a new framework or construct for developing instruction and learning events, especially given its acknowledgement of the new environment for learning in a Web 2.0 enabled world, and of the learners in this world. However, connectivism has not, at least in the minds of the authors, yet proven itself as a viable learning theory per se.
Case study
Case studies tend to be much more grounded and easily applied
in real world situations, as opposed to the abstract concepts explored
in theoretical inquiry. An example case study can be found in the work
of Farren (2008), describing the use of social constructivist models in
a university e-learning program for education practitioners at Dublin
City University in Ireland. Through the use of online discussion
forums, a process similar to praxis which the author calls active
learning, and scaffolded learning events, the students are taught to
collaborate, construct knowledge, and reflect on their practice while
using what they learn to improve it. The author (who was also involved
in the development of the program) describes a guiding philosophy in
its development called the "web of betweenness". In this "web of
betweenness", the author suggests that "the communication-rich
characteristics of current technologies can recreate in new forms the
powerfully interactive traditional world" which was supposedly left
behind with the advent of the industrialized world and advanced
technologies. Technology has, according to the author, become so
advanced that this interactivity has returned.
The author here concludes that through the process of active learning (or praxis) and dialogue with their peers, students in the program have demonstrated the ability to "accept increasing responsibility to develop their own practice in collaboration with peers" and have developed a lifelong habit of doing, reflecting, learning, and doing again. She also urges instructors, learning designers, and academic program managers to consider including strong interaction and dialog in their programs and to move away from the more traditional content-rich, rote learning models.
References
Farren, M. (2008). e-Learning and Action Research as a Transformative Process. Innovate, 10(1). Retrieved February 2, 2009, from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=543.
Kopp, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning Theory of the Future or Vestige of the Past? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 1-13.
Lee, Y., Driscoll, M. P., & Nelson, D. W. (2007). Trends in Research: A Content Analysis of Major Journals. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of Distance Education (2nd ed., pp. 31-41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associat
Theoretical inquiry
An example of theoretical inquiry can be found in Kopp & Hill's (2008) critical examination of the theory of "connectivism" originally proposed in 2004 by George Siemens and Stephen Downes, educational researchers at the University of Manitoba (ref?). Specifically, Kopp & Hill examine whether connectivism deserves consideration as a unique educational theory, or if it merely describes phenomena that can be explained by existing educational theory in the context of an increasingly technologically enabled world. Connectivism, as proposed by Siemens and Downes, describes a type of metacognition in which learners develop the ability to filter and make sense of networked information (including through online social networks, blogs and other Web sites). This ability is unique from the abilities embodied in other learning theories. Abilities highlighted in the behaviorism model of education, for example, might include memorization, behavior mimicking, and rote learning. Abilities highlighted in constructivism include social interactions, dialog, and critical thought. Connectivism, on the other hand, highlights information-seeking behavior and judgment. The relationships involved are not that of the student and instructor (or student and content), as in behaviorism, nor that of the student with other students, as in constructivism. Rather the relationship in connectivism is between the student and the connections and nodes that make up digital networks. Siemens and Downes concluded that there was no significant construct for describing this new way of learning, so they proposed connectivism as a new learning theory. Siemens and Downes go further in their description of connectivism by likening the information networks it describes to the neural networks in the brain.
Kopp & Hill do describe some researchers' critique of connectivism. More than one has declared that connectivism offers nothing new conceptually to the field of education, and feel that phenomena it describes can be grounded in other existing learning theories. However, this is often the case with "developmental theory", which the authors contrast with what scholars generally consider as established theory. Developmental theory has yet to be tested (and thus proven or disproven) by means of rigorous empirical research. The authors conclude by conceding connectivism's possibility as a new framework or construct for developing instruction and learning events, especially given its acknowledgement of the new environment for learning in a Web 2.0 enabled world, and of the learners in this world. However, connectivism has not, at least in the minds of the authors, yet proven itself as a viable learning theory per se.
Case study
The author here concludes that through the process of active learning (or praxis) and dialogue with their peers, students in the program have demonstrated the ability to "accept increasing responsibility to develop their own practice in collaboration with peers" and have developed a lifelong habit of doing, reflecting, learning, and doing again. She also urges instructors, learning designers, and academic program managers to consider including strong interaction and dialog in their programs and to move away from the more traditional content-rich, rote learning models.
References
Farren, M. (2008). e-Learning and Action Research as a Transformative Process. Innovate, 10(1). Retrieved February 2, 2009, from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=543.
Kopp, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning Theory of the Future or Vestige of the Past? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 1-13.
Lee, Y., Driscoll, M. P., & Nelson, D. W. (2007). Trends in Research: A Content Analysis of Major Journals. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of Distance Education (2nd ed., pp. 31-41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associat
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: https://blogs.psu.edu/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/57830
Leave a comment