Postmodernism and Synchronous e-learning

Accounts of postmodernism abound today in the literature of both general philosophy and educational theory. As a general cultural phenomenon, postmodernism has such features as the challenging of convention, the mixing of styles, tolerance of ambiguity, emphasis on diversity, acceptance (indeed celebration) of innovation and change, and stress on the constructedness of reality (Beck, 1993).

A postmodern pedagogy can be seen in a synchronous e-learning community. In postmodern thought, we (teacher and student) are involved in an interactive process of knowledge creation and are developing a ‘working understanding’ of reality and life. By drawing broader connections between phenomena (Vygotsky’s notion of interaction) and the exploration of their value implication, learning comes alive. These ideas are inherent in constructivism and a sociocultural theory of education and are inextricably linked with synchronous learning environments (refer to my last post for a more detailed discussion on constructivism). Through synchronous e-learning, students are able to interact with peers and teacher, challenge their pre-conceived notions of phenomena and seek immediate responses.

The interaction between the teacher and student (expert and non-expert) is often best seen as a ‘conversation’ in which there is mutual influence rather than simple transmission from one to the other. Clive Beck gives a summary of teacher-student interaction in a postmodern context when he writes:

We must think increasingly in terms of “teachers and students learning together,” rather than the one telling the other how to live in a “top-down” manner. This is necessary both so that the values and interests of students are taken into account, and so that the wealth of their everyday experience is made available to fellow students and to the teacher.

(Stephen made a very similar point in his last post, when he wrote that ‘engagement with the other [is] a vital aspect of the learning experience’).

There are direct links that can be made between postmodern education philosophy and computer and web-based technologies. Jean-Francois Lyotard has pointed out the extent to which students today can learn from computerised data banks, which he calls ‘the Encyclopaedia of tomorrow.’ Teachers must help students learn how to learn, using such technology. In a synchronous e-learning community, students construct knowledge in two ways: with the help of the ‘Encyclopaedia of today’ and through interaction with other members of the community. The collaborative nature of synchronous e-learning means that students are actively involved in determining what they learn and why, and thus are able to give expression to their distinctive interests and needs.

I realise that my last few posts have been heavy on theory without many practical examples. In my next post, I will use a couple of youtube clips which show the theories I have been discussing (constructivism and postmodernism) in practice.

Information about postmodernism and education has been adapted from: Clive Beck (1993), Postmodernism, Pedagogy, and Philosophy of Education.

Philosophy, Constructivism And Asynchronous E-Learning: Part II

While we are indeed individuals, we exist as part of a society and, thus, other people, it could be argued, are integral to our own “journeys” and sense of self.

  Philosophy of Self and Other

Philosopher Paul Ricoeur, ‘consistently asserts the relational and dialogical nature of human existence, he rejects the fantasy of individual self-sufficiency in an acknowledgement of the realities of human interdependence’ (O’Dwyer, 2009). For Ricoeur, this dialectic between self and the other is fundamental to individual identity (thus, one is not more important than the other). In fact, in the introduction to his book, Oneself as Another, Ricoeur (1994) states that otherness ‘is not (or not merely) the result of comparison...[but] can be constitutive of selfhood’. Thus, he presents a critique of the common construction of a dichotomous relationship between self and other, which can be seen in, for example, Hegel’s master-slave dialectic or Levinas’ assertion that self can ‘can only exist in a meaningful way when it “answers” to the call of the other’ (O’Dwyer, 2009).  Contrary to these polarised perspectives that require comparison and difference to be realised, Ricoeur (1994), believes that ‘selfhood of oneself implies otherness to such an intimate degree that one cannot be thought of without the other’ (emphasis mine).

Creating the social constructivist learning environment

If we are to accept Ricoeur’s conception of selfhood (which, indeed, we may not!), then we can begin to see why it is that not only is engagement with the other a vital aspect of the learning experience, but more importantly, willing encounter with the other. Thus, there is a “moral” aspect to the way in which we construct learning environments that can impact on the way our students conceive of themselves as individuals and/or as part of a community. Asynchronous e-learning provides greater opportunities for individualistic approaches to, and experiences of, learning. Yet, at this point, I need to make clear that I would not argue that asynchronous e-learning is individualistic in essence. I would merely put forward the view that there is not the constructivist philosophy built into its “DNA” as there may well be in the case of synchronous e-learning.  But the point is, then, that educators need to take greater care to consider this when setting guidelines in asynchronous e-learning to ensure a positive, constructivist environment.

Philosophy, Constructivism And Asynchronous E-Learning

Introduction

Micah makes the very interesting point that a ‘synchronous e-learning classroom is a constructivist classroom.’ Indeed, he suggests that synchronous learning does not merely employ the ideas and strategies of constructivism, but actually is, in essence, constructivist. This is, perhaps, the key point of difference between synchronous and asynchronous e-learning.

Firstly, we need to be clear that there are two related, but importantly different strands of constructivism: social and cognitive. While I would argue that asynchronous has no problems in adopting a cognitive constructivist approach, there may be more difficulty in creating a social constructivist environment. For the purpose of this post, I am interested in social constructivism and this is what is meant by the phrase “constructivism” from here on. Finally, I am assuming the acceptance of constructivism as a desired educational philosophy. The debate over whether it is in actual fact desirable will come later.

Individualism and Asynchronous e-Learning

 There is the possibility for asynchronous e-learning to follow constructivist ideas. For example, a blog allows students to create knowledge together. However there is, inherent to asynchronous e-learning, the option to ignore the ‘Other’. Whereas synchronous e-learning is fundamentally communitarian, asynchronous e-learning provides for – perhaps even supports – the primacy of the individual over the community. In a world where the message conveyed is so often “it’s all about me”, we as educators may need to be careful that we do not unnecessarily or, indeed, unwittingly contribute to this.

Marketing professor at Monash University, Michael Morrison, is quoted by Rebecca Martin as saying that ‘While there's something like 15 million iPods out there, not one of them are the same. The iPod carries “my music”, it is “my space”’. In an asynchronous world, this customisation becomes possible. And customisation, of course, gives extraordinary power to the creator/host. I can choose to block people from being able to comment on my blog, or I can moderate comments or I can make it a “closed” site altogether. If this kind of becomes normative, it severely diminishes one’s understanding of, and commitment to, community. While we are indeed individuals, we exist as part of a society and, thus, other people, it could be argued, are integral to our own “journeys” and sense of self.

I will post again tomorrow, focusing on the relationship between the self and the 'other' and creating a social constructivist learning environment.

Synchronous e-learning and Constructivism

The philosophical and educational benefits of synchronous e-learning can be justified by looking at a few experts and theories related to the aforementioned fields.

It is interesting to note that I am not the only person who has mentioned the connection between e-learning technologies and constructivism. Andrea/Martine have used Vygotsky's Social-Constructivist theory to underpin their proposal that a computer can be utlized as a useful tool to enhance student learning and social interactions. Likewise, synchronous e-learning has a focus on constructivism and its links with social interaction.

Constructivists believe that individuals must construct their own knowledge and that all knowledge is temporary (that is, each concept is considered true until further experiences allow the learner to refine it). Learners in a constructivist classroom use a ‘problem-centred’ approach and content is not studied as isolated facts but as broad concepts and interdisciplinary themes (see here for a brief introduction to constructivism). Furthermore, ‘constructivism emphasises that learning takes place in a sociocultural environment. We learn not as isolated individuals acquiring chunks of disassociated quasi-permanent truths, but as members of society’ (Kate Wilson, 2003).

The notion of constructivism and social interaction are at the heart of synchronous e-learning, where, with practice, learners become aware of themselves as members of a community. These ideas can be supported by the work of Russian psychologist, and educational theorist, Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934).

At the core of Vygotsky’s Social-Cultural Theory (an introduction to this theory can be found here), is the idea that child development is the result of the interactions between children and their social environment. These interactions include interactions between the learner and their parents, teachers, siblings and peers. There are also interactions that occur between the learner and significant objects such as books, toys and culturally significant places. Through these interactions, learners actively construct knowledge, skills, and attitudes that do not merely mirror the world around them. Though Vygotsky lived well before the development of e-learning technologies, it is clear that synchronous e-learning can be included in the list of ‘interactions’ or ‘tools’.

Stephen has suggested that asynchronous e-learning increases a person’s ability to process information which ‘may well actually contribute to the development of - both a sense and real manifestation - a learning community’. This may well be true, though it appears as though asynchronous e-learning lacks the interactive and collaborative elements that are foundational to constructivism and social interaction. The construction of knowledge in asynchronous e-learning does not occur immediately (in real-time) as it does in synchronous e-learning. Does this inhibit and slow learning?

A synchronous e-learning classroom is a constructivist classroom. Each student brings prior knowledge, developed through a complex web of interactions, with them into the learning environment. Within the synchronous community, students are able to ask questions and gather responses immediately in order to construct further knowledge. The synchronous e-learning context is one in which students play an active role in learning. Information is gathered in a collaborative manner, with the teacher working with the students to help facilitate meaning.