Exemplary teaching combines skilful use of pedagogy with content expertise and innovative uses of technology, embedding key elements into course design. Wilson (2003)
As educational technologies continue their rapid evolution and the effectiveness of traditional educational techniques are brought into question (Bligh, 2000), it would be easy to become overly enamoured and forget that the technology is fundamentally dependent on the underlying pedagogy and learning principles employed to deliver the educational programs themselves; indeed “pedagogies before technologies” is a commonly touted phrase (Watson, 2001; Ascough, 2002; Mayes and De Freitas, 2004).
Beetham and Sharpe (2007) suggest that far from trying to create pedagogy anew, we should be in the business of locating new technologies within proven practices and models of teaching, where the focus is on educational issues or problems that might possibly be solved, at least partially, by the provision of learning arrangements that make a deliberate and effective use of technology. Unfortunately, there is no one simple approach to using technology to support learning that will succeed. Instead the starting point is not the technology per se, but the educational process itself.
Pedagogical Perspectives
Pedagogy is a term that generally refers to strategies of instruction or a style of instruction (Stephenson, 2002). A number are often quoted in e-Learning literature and can be mapped into broad theoretical educational perspectives that govern the good practice of teaching (JISC 2004). These perspectives are not mutually exclusive, but within each, it is possible to identify a key set of assumptions, that have in turn generated a large number of pedagogical approaches and models that can be used to encourage specific aspects of learning (Insert Table 1).
Table 1: Defining approaches to learning from the Effective Practice with e-learning Guide
e-Learning Pedagogy
Although a number of reviews of learning theories and their relevance to e-Learning have been carried out (Conole et al., 2003; Mayes and De Freitas, 2004; Beetham and Sharpe, 2007; Dyke et al., 2001) it would appear that there is currently little evidence of how these models or theories are applied consistently to effective pedagogically driven e-Learning. Research indicates that most implementations of e-learning include blended elements that emphasise all three pedagogical perspectives: learning as behaviour, learning as the construction of knowledge and meaning, and learning as social practice. However, the literature also suggests that the emerging pedagogical consensus centres around constructivism – collaborative learning, authentic tasks, reflection and dialogue and to do so in a way that addresses both identity and community (Bangert, 2004; Mayes, 2004; Windschitl, 2002). Weller (2003) also cites constructivism as the dominant teaching pedagogy applicable to the Internet, but while advocating that there are opportunities for new pedagogies he also admits that they should be used “in conjunction with more traditional approaches”.
e-Learning also places additional emphasis on several key features including the ‘individualisation’ of learning, with each student making their own learning pathways at a speed that is appropriate to them, and ‘just-in-time’ learning where students have timely access to relevant and useful knowledge. Moreover the steady growth in mobile device ownership enables mobile learning (m-learning) where students are able to learn at ‘any time and in any place’. These features demonstrate students increasing reliance on an eclectic mix of personal and institutionally-based technologies and illustrate that much of this e-learning is not developing as conventional pedagogy – but as ‘informal learning’. This is facilitating the bottom-up development of learning communities by combining one-to-one (email and instant messaging), one-to-many (discussion tools, blogs and podcasts), and many-to-many (wikis) communication modes.
Technologies Identified
The tools used to support and deliver learning cover a wide range of different applications including:
- Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) – Many institutions have now adopted VLEs which incorporate collaboration and communication tools such as wikis, blogs, forums and chat. However, research suggests that while VLEs may have enhanced learner access to online resources, the associated communication tools have been little used JISC (2003).
- Reusable Learning Objects (RLOs)
- Self-paced Computer Aided Instruction (CAI)
- Web 2.0 Tools – Technology can provide a medium for conversing and collaborating within the learning environment (Jonassen et al. 1999; McConnell, 2006). The growing interest in social dimensions of learning and the availability of more open-source web-based social networking tools have been adopted in learning and teaching (Dron, 2007). Web 2.0 social technologies include: social network services, social bookmarking, folksonomies, social search engines, file sharing and tagging, mashups, instant messaging an online multi-player games. More popular in education appear to be wikis, blogs and podcasts (Boulos et al., 2007). Wikis – enact knowledge building, where the focus is on the community itself rather than on the individual learner (Holmes et al, 2004). Wikis are based upon a principle of non-exclusive authority, anyone and everyone gets to decide what will be said (content), how it will be said (organization), and whether it will be said (dissemination). Blogs – are useful teaching and learning tools because they provide a space for students to reflect and publish their thoughts and understandings. As blogs allow comments, they also provide opportunities for feedback and potential scaffolding of new ideas. Podcasts – can be released episodically to ‘push’ content to students that want to listen when they want, where they want and how they want.
- Multimedia – In its most straightforward role, multimedia can be used to present the subject matter. There are many different ways of integrating graphics into tutorials, ranging from simple stick figures to sophisticated simulations using virtual reality applications. However, at no time should a desire for sophistication and look outweigh the pedagogical value of the item itself, especially not when functionality might be compromised. Video – is by far one of the most powerful and expressive non-textual media that can capture and present information. A number of e-Learning systems present integrated and synchronized instructional materials in different media such as video, presentation slides, and lecture notes to users.
- e-Portfolios
- Formative Assessments
An instructor is therefore faced with choosing from a plethora of tools and learning theories in order to create specific learning activities which can be confusing. JISC (2004) suggest that these technologies reflect the pedagogical perspectives listed below (Table 2).
Table 2: Pedagogical Perspectives and Technology
Summary
The use and understanding of technology in teaching is often viewed as a separate issue to that of teaching in itself. If the primary focus of teaching is on pedagogy, and technology is merely viewed as another mode of delivery, then technology and pedagogy can be seen as existing separately, with one having minimal impact on the other. However, if elements of technology and pedagogy can be seen as mutually supportive and interdependent, then it should be possible to construct new meaning about teaching online that is integrative and serves to bring about a bridging of the gap between pedagogy and technology (Maor, 2004 and Wilson 2003).
Alexander and Boud (2001) argue that much of the potential for online learning is being lost because too much of the pedagogy of online learning has been transferred unreflectively from didactic traditional teaching where the computer substitutes for the teacher and textbook as a conveyer of information. It has been argued that many of the digital learning objects created to-date simply translate existing lectures into a digital format, with no change in the pedagogy used (
Donald Clarke – Don’t lecture me).
Recommendations in the literature point towards technologies specifically designed to provide interactivity that guide students towards online collaborations (Crook, 1994). This in turn promotes, among other things, skills such as articulation, justification and negotiation (Crook, 1994), shared responsibilities (Laurillard, 1997; Goodyear, 2001), scaffolding (Salmon, 2000), setting hypotheses (Valdez
et al., 2000), reflection (Schon, 1992; Laurillard, 1997; Goodyear, 2002), knowledge activation and knowledge application (Gagne, 1965; Bruner, 1997; Goodyear, 2001) and individualized learning and motivation (Goodyear 2002). Advice and guidance is available to institutions as there is no blueprint for implementation of technologies, and each is currently deciding its own path (JISC, 2003)
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.
Ascough, R.S. (2002) Designing for Online Distance Education: Putting Pedagogy before Technology. Teaching Theology and Religion: 1; p.p. 17-29.
Bangert, A. W. (2004) The Seven Principles of Good Practice: a framework for evaluating online teaching. The Internet and Higher Education. 7 (3), 217-232.
Beetham, H. and Sharpe, R. (2007) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age – Designing and Delivering e-Learning. Routledge, London.
Beetham, H. (2004) Initial Positioning Report. JISC programme on pedagogies for e-learning.
Bligh, D.A. (2000) What’s the Use of Lectures? Exeter: Intellect.
Boulos, M.K. and Wheelert, S. (2007) The emerging Web 2.0 Social Software: an enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and healthcare education.
Bruner, J. (1997) The culture of education (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press).
Conole, G. Dyke, M. Oliver, M. and Seale, J. (2004) Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning, Computers and Education, 43, 17–33.
Crook, C. (2009) Web 2.0 technologies for learning: the current landscape – opportunities, challenges and tensions. Becta, 2008
Dron, J. (2007). Designing the Undesignable: Social Software and Control. Educational Technology and Society, 10 (3), 60-71.
Dyke, M. (2001) Reflective learning and reflexive modernity as theory practice and research in post-compulsory education
Gagne, R. M. (1965) The conditions of learning (New York, Holt, Rinehart & Winston Inc.).
Goodyear, P. (2001). ‘Effective networked learning in higher education: notes and guidelines.’ Centre for Studies in Advanced Learning Technology, Lancaster University. Networked Learning in Higher Education Project, Deliverable 9, Volume 3 of final report to JCALT.
Goodyear, P. (2002) Psychological foundations for networked learning. In: Steeples, C. and Jones,C. (eds.), Networked Learning: Perspectives and Issues. London: Springer, 49–75.
Holmes, B. and Gardner, J. (2006) E-learning :concepts and practice. Sage : London.
Jarvis, P. (1987). Adult learning in a social context. London: Croom Helm.
JISC (2003) Effective Practice with e-learning Guide (Managed Learning Environment Activity in Further and Higher Education in the UK.
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing Constructivist Learning Environments. In Reigeluth, C.M. (ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. Volume II (pp. 115-140). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching-a conversational framework for the effective use of educational technology. London, Routledge Farmer.
Laurillard, D. (1999) Learning formal representations through multimedia, in: N. Entwistle (Ed.)The experience of learning (London, Academic Press).
Maor, D. (2004). Pushing beyond the comfort zone: Bridging the gap between technology and pedagogy. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 572-576). Perth, 5-8 December.
Mayes, T. and de Freitas, S. (2004) Review of e-Learning Theories, Frameworks and Models
Mayes, T. (2004) Learner-centred pedagogy: individual differences between learners, report for JISC Elearning
Models Desk Study,
McConnell, D. (2006) E-Learning Groups and Communities. Maidenhead, SRHE/OU Press.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. Sussex, The Harvester Press Limited.
Piaget, J. (1971) Biology and Knowledge: An essay on the relations between organic regulationsand cognitive processes. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Salmon (2000) E-Moderating: the key to teaching and learning online (London, Kogan Page).
Schon, D. (1992) Educating the reflective practitioner: towards a new design for teaching and learning in the professions (London, Jossey-Bass).
Stephenson, J. (2002) Teaching and Learning Online: Pedagogies for New Technologies, Kogan Page Ltd. London.
Valdez, G. McNabb, M. Foertsch, M. Anderson, M. Hawkes, M. Raack, L. (2000) Computer based technology and learning: evolving uses and expectations.
Vess, D. L. (2006). History to go: Why iTeach with iPods. History Teacher,39(4), 479-492.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Watson, D. (2001) Pedagogy before technology: Re-thinking the relationship between ICT and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6 (4), 251-266.
Weller, M. (2003) Delivering Learning on the Net, Routledge Falmer
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, W. (2003) Faculty Perceptions and Instructional Uses of Technology. Educause Quarterly (2003)
Windschitl, M. (2002) Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: an analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research 72 (2): 131–175.
