Facilitated networks of learning

26 Pages·2014·0.85 MB·English

SEPTEMBER 2014
237
Facilitated networks
of learning
Jean Annan, Brian Annan,
Mary Wootton and Rene Burton
Centre for Strategic Education
(CSE) is the business name for IARTV
ABN 33 004 055 556
Mercer House 82 Jolimont Street
East Melbourne Victoria 3002
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Email [email protected]
www.cse.edu.au
237
Facilitated networks
of learning
Jean Annan, Brian Annan,
Mary Wootton and Rene Burton
Introduction 3
An age of invention 4
Five concepts of interactive networking 6
The community of practice 17
Conclusion 19
© 2014 Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper No. 237, September 2014
ISSN 1838-8558
ISBN 978-1-921823-58-9
© 2014 Centre for Strategic Education, Victoria.
The Centre for Strategic Education* welcomes usage of this
publication within the restraints imposed by the Copyright Act.
Where the material is to be sold for profit then written authority
must be obtained first. Detailed requests for usage not specifically
permitted by the Copyright Act should be submitted in writing to:
The Centre for Strategic Education
Mercer House, 82 Jolimont Street,
East Melbourne VIC 3002.
(*The Centre for Strategic Education (CSE) is the business name
adopted in 2006 for the Incorporated Association of Registered
Teachers of Victoria (IARTV). Therefore, publications which were
previously published in the name of IARTV are now published
in the name of CSE.)
Produced in Australia by Centre for Strategic Education
Mercer House, 82 Jolimont Street, East Melbourne VIC 3002
Editorial Team: Tony Mackay, Keith Redman,
Murray Cropley, Andrew Miller
Facilitated networks of learning 3
Introduction
Leaders of education systems in many naturally, particularly for those who have
countries across the globe are responding to a multiple social connections and ready access to
transforming world, contemplating the nature the deluge of information flowing through the
of future-focused learning environments. This Internet. For others, these opportunities must
deliberation and movement is not generated be manufactured. The rate of change is rapid;
solely from the top end of education systems. those students cannot wait. The creation of
It operates within a growth dynamic in which innovative learning environments will require
some participants, often with no positional innovative facilitation if all children are to
authority, take a lead role in creating new visions become connected in the future world.
and opportunities. Other participants may
How can systems leaders work with this growth
work to preserve valued traditional practices,
dynamic to encourage the development of
perhaps tentatively playing with new ideas but
relevant and engaging practices? Although
hesitant to cut ties fully with established notions
it is possible that leaders’ perspectives will
of learning. Within these two extremes there is
themselves encompass a changing mix of
a large group of participants who choose to go
futurist, moderate and traditional views about
with the flow and make changes as and when
learning environments, it seems unlikely that
new practices emerge. Those taking a lead role
any nation can rely on top-end systems alone
might express frustration at what they view in
to effect the timely transformation required
others’ actions as reluctance to change, and
for students who are entering the schooling
those who are most invested in conserving
system now. The process of developing learning
traditional practices may be annoyed by
environments for current and future education
invitational or mandated calls for change. Each
must be shared broadly across all people who
of these actions represents a vital component
influence students’ learning and development
of the response to a call to align education and
and who hold views about what they should
the contemporary world.
learn and how they learn best, including
The ensuing dialogue among participants the students. In this article, we suggest that
creates a climate that supports growth, all facilitation of multiple networks of schools,
participants contributing to the creation of students, families and community can perform
new learning environments. For some students, this role.
the transformation of learning will emerge
4 Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper No. 237, September 2014
An age of invention the multiple variables and complexity that
most strongly influence learning and living.
Over the past century, notions of learning
These tools must be accompanied by practices
and teaching have moved substantially from
that invite individuals and communities to
traditional exposition of knowledge through
participate and prosper in current and future
to collaborative student inquiry and, now,
environments. As Dumont, Istance and
reciprocal, ubiquitous interaction. This
Benavides (2010) observed, we are ‘living in
progression is depicted here as a three-phase
an era of incredible invention and growth in
transition (CISCO, 2008). During the first
information and communication technologies’
phase, traditional teacher-directed education,
(p 8) that requires new sets of knowledge and
responding to an industrialised society, called
skill. This reskilling is no longer negotiable or,
for educators to disseminate knowledge
as Hannon (2010) has said, is not just ‘nice-
deemed suitable for students at that time.
to-have’.
Students were, in the main, passive in receiving
Images of phase three future-focused learning
knowledge through instruction. Relationships
environments portray students as no longer
between teachers and students were strictly
attempting to pursue a tightly prescribed
hierarchical and curricula were structured to
curriculum, but one to which they actively
avoid ambiguity and surprise.
contribute and that supports them to ‘learn how
The second phase began as society entered
to learn’, and to discover how and where to
the knowledge age. At this point, the roles of
access the particular information they require.
teachers and students moved so that students
Emphasis on teachers expounding specific
were supported to make interpretations of
information has lessened, the profession and
information and to construct meanings for
new players now taking an expanded role in the
collaborative inquiries and shared observations.
development of frames and tools that activate
Curricula were more flexible, allowing for a
agency in students to access further information.
degree of managed uncertainty. However, this
Students can now seek multiple sites in which
change was incremental, involving supplements
information is shared and grown through
to traditional education. The second phase saw
diverse social connections. Sites of learning
the introduction of a raft of generic programs,
extend from the local community through, for
implemented in response to mounting calls
example, clubs, street conversations, schools,
on governments for accountability. Education
homes, and shopping centres to the global
continued to be viewed primarily as the business
community, through television, the Internet
of the school and relationships among teachers
and travel. In this third phase, students access
and students, and groups of students, remained
information that is contextually relevant and
unidirectional. Increasing recognition and
educators welcome the pace, uncertainty and
valuing of diversity, technological advancement
excitement associated with major change. These
and a shifting global economy have sparked
images are not widespread realities in practice.
desires for new and innovative learning
Rather, they are being talked into existence
environments that align with the new world.
as questions and anxieties are replaced with
Those desires have pressed, or drawn, education
confidence in knowing how young people prefer
into a third phase that is characterised by
to learn in the modern-day world.
innovation and transformation.
In some places, the new world of omnipresent
The scale of change in the nature of employment,
learning opportunity is beginning to move
diversity of relationships, available resources
beyond rhetoric to become a reality, more so
and access to information has generated
around the instructional core than learning
urgency for new tools that help us understand
beyond the school gates. There are examples
Facilitated networks of learning 5
of students and educators enthusiastically independently. Similarly, education would not
engaging in new learning collaborations. Fullan be considered a matter of aimlessly ‘following
and Langworthy (2014) have observed that one’s passion’ but one of building on interest
some students and teachers are ‘unleashing and familiarity and surmounting the challenges
students’ and teachers’ energy and excitement that presented. As Newport (2012) suggested,
in new learning partnerships’ (p i). Those adults who are satisfied in their work and
observations and other research findings, such their learning tend to be those who engage in
as the Woolf Fisher Research Centre findings tasks that are interesting and challenging, who
from Manaiakalani (Jesson, McNaughton and apply considerable effort to become skilled and
Wilson, 2013), suggest that transformational who are then able to use these skills in future
work around the instructional core in schools endeavours.
is a critically important development for future-
In this paper we discuss the knowledge
focused learning environments.1
foundation of Interactive Networks, described
Networks can make powerful contributions as interactive because of the learner-active/
to the growth of future-focused learning environment-active perspective on learning
environments although their deliberate growth implied in this structure. We present and discuss
has been sporadic in schooling systems. Where a set of five linked ideas that underpin the
networks have been established, many have interactive network as a vehicle for creating
involved teachers exchanging knowledge future-focused learning environments:
(eg, Earl and Katz, 2007; Spillane and Kim,
■ innovation;
2012). Others, particularly on-line networks,
■ interactive participation;
have included students and parents (eg,
Manaiakalani) recognising the significant role ■ culture and identity;
that families and communities play in students’
■ appreciation; and
success. It is timely to build on the networking
■ lateral learning connections.
developments that have emerged and activate
broader, ecological learning environments These five ideas represent the fields in which
within which instruction is just one of several facilitators of interactive networks require
levers for learning. in-depth knowledge and implementation
skill. The design of interactive networks has
Ecological networks extend through the various
grown as the authors became immersed in
layers of students’ broad environments, locating
challenges and practices within the interaction
among participants at multiple levels. The Networks can make powerful contributions
establishment of ecological networks does to the growth of future-focused learning
not assume a full swing away from useful environments although their deliberate growth
elements of current school structures and
has been sporadic in schooling systems.
practices. Those that support future education
are woven into new practices. For example,
practice-based developments in education and
safety, wellbeing and achievement of young
psychology in Australia and New Zealand.
children must remain paramount. Recognition
These practice-based developments have
of broad, networked learning environments
involved active participation of students,
involves knowing where to stand in particular
teachers and families in their schools and
circumstances along a structure-to-freedom
communities, resulting in shifts of facilitation
continuum. That is, adults knowing when to
from that of ‘consultation with external support
instruct young people, co-construct knowledge
and challenge’ to ‘authentic, negotiated external-
or support them to learn interdependently and
6 Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper No. 237, September 2014
Figure 1. The ecology of an interactive learning environments. This framework utilises
learning environment participants’ familiar sense-making processes
and tailors change to students’ particular
social spheres. In the next section of this paper
Interactive Learning
Environment we elaborate on the five ideas underpinning
interactive networking.
n
o
ConnectionitapicitraP Innovation Finivteer caoctnicveep ntest owfo rking
Innovation
n
o
ati We consider that innovative future-focused
eci learning environments are those within which
r
pp graduates grow knowledge and skills for
A
life in current and future worlds. They are
Culture flexible, ubiquitous, interactive and constantly
and
Identity transforming, encouraging active participation,
curiosity and creativity. They recognise and
reflect students’ identities and the multiple
internal collaboration’.
cultural beliefs and values students bring
This situated activity has shed light on some
to the learning environment. Students in
pivotal understandings about student learning.
future-focused learning environments develop
These insights have emerged through a
interdependent relationships and have authentic
preparedness to innovate; that is, to take
audiences for organically generated work. They
calculated and theoretically supported journeys
use the latest technology of the time, connecting
into the unknown and to push current
with one another in borderless networks. These
boundaries. We find ourselves at a point
students seek opportunities to explore in new,
where we have observed the parameters of
unknown areas of knowledge and entertain a
these developments, have begun to understand
judicious degree of uncertainty.
about innovation for future-focused learning
As noted earlier, these learning environments
environments and have identified some specific
do not represent common practice. Rather,
aspects of learning systems for research.
they are what we have observed to feature
In brief, the facilitation of networks
in the visioning of future education. Idea
formed to create future-focused learning
improvement, viewed by Scardamalia and
environments involves activation of multiple
Bereiter (2010, p 12) as the ‘hallmark of a
group relationships within networks that
progressive society’, has moved from an elitist
collaboratively and systematically examine and
activity restricted to formal schooling to one
grow students’ broad learning environments.
in which everyone can engage. Innovations
Students are the primary participants and may
capable of transforming systems of education
be accompanied by groups of teachers, parents
must surpass the improvement, reinvention
and school, community and iwi (indigenous
and supplementary approaches that have
tribe) leaders.
dominated the past three decades of school
The activity of the networks may be guided reform and cannot rely on simply mirroring
by structures such as the Situational Analysis high-performing schools (see Hannon, 2014;
(Annan, J, 2005), an open framework that Innovation Unit for Global Education Leaders
allows collaborators to develop innovative Programme, 2013). Traditional, incremental
and contextualised understandings of students’ approaches to improve education systems have
Facilitated networks of learning 7
aided various reform agendas but are unlikely Within an interactive conceptualisation of
to produce the level of innovation required to learning, ongoing adjustments to school
keep pace with rapid societal change. Fullan programs and teaching are vital ingredients
(2013) has gone as far as to say that we are fast of innovative learning environments. Not
approaching the time when we can no longer surprisingly, discussions about innovation
‘squeeze a good education’ from traditional to transform education systems frequently
systems. focus solely on the role of the school rather
than the roles of all involved in the students’
Future-focused learning environments extend
learning. This is possibly because the school
through and beyond the instructional core of
is seen as the most likely vehicle to create
schooling and formal education, with students,
change. As it stands, governments continue
teachers and communities taking an active role.
to invest in schools as primary learning
Together, all participants share in orchestrating
hubs and parents generally trust schools as
applicable learning opportunities. Those
safe places for children to reside during the
students who are able to keep up with social
workday. Innovative schools, however, are
change and digital technology and who can
characterised by collaboration; they actively
appreciate diverse cultural understandings will
involve all stakeholders in the development of
prosper. Their familiarity with the artefacts and
curricula, target professional learning in the
practices of the new world will support them
light of student–parent–teacher interaction and
to connect and communicate with others, to
establish supportive and challenging learning
create new technical knowledge and approach
connections through linking with other schools.
learning as a life-long activity.
Innovative schools also involve well-considered
Many other educators are also contemplating
infrastructure, procedures and practices.
the development of relevant, constructive new
Hannon (2010), making reference to a school
learning environments. For example, Dumont,
network project from the Innovation Unit in the
Istance and Benavides, (2010) have suggested
UK, reminded us that changes in school systems
that innovative learning environments be
affect children’s life chances for better or worse
explored in ways that reflect the social nature of
learning and be shaped through home–school
partnerships, the use of up-to-date technology changes in school systems affect children’s life
in learning activities, formative assessment
chances for better or worse and, therefore, the
and inquiry-based approaches within which
school is not the place for ‘random or unfocused
students are at the centre. Similarly, Hampson,
experimentation’
Patton and Shanks (2012) have offered a set of
key ideas for those wishing to advance future
education. They encourage the extension of and, therefore, the school is not the place for
lessons in terms of time, place or structure. This ‘random or unfocused experimentation’ (p 26).
means thinking of social connection outside This comment did not imply that education be
the classroom, considering students’ individual locked in a time warp, repeating practices from
perspectives and experience and building on the other places and times. Effective changes would
digital expertise students bring to their learning. be those that were systematic and built on the
Students engage in real projects with authentic supportive structures and practices ‘in situ’.
audiences for their work. Teachers expect to Hannon notes that schools working with the
help students be teachers and teachers to be Innovation Unit (UK) network project pursued
students, and to measure what matters. The a considered sequence of reflection, analysis and
authors’ view is that educational relationships creative design keeping students at the centre
include families as active participants in the of the inquiry.
construction of learning pathways.
8 Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper No. 237, September 2014
Similarly, the Manaiakalani project that ■ connection – from assumptions of learning
transformed education in an Auckland suburb as an isolated learner activity to viewing
involved the creation of a strong structure and learning as a social process, involving
clear procedures to support its students to be ‘at connections among students, teachers,
home in a digital environment’. Aspects of the families and the wider community;
learning environment that were given particular
■ collaboration – from competitive or
consideration were
cooperative learning relationships to those
■ the infrastructure to support the digital characterised by collaboration;
medium;
■ interactive participation – from notions of
■ professional learning for teachers; learning and teaching that presume passive
students and active adults to those that
■ device procurement;
assume interactive groups of students and
■ cloud solution;
adults;
■ operational system (eg, administration,
■ appreciation – from deficit perceptions of
distribution of digital devices and
students’ achievement to appreciative views
administration); and
of students’ achievement.
■ establishing strong, authentic and long-
The conceptualisation of education as the
term community connections (see Annan,
domain of a wide population across multiple
J, 2013).
sites implies the valuing of social learning
The Manaiakalani learning environment was connections, of collaboration and culturally
constructed through a process of deliberate situated learning activity. Knowledge is
social negotiation among students, families, interactively constructed by those who seek it,
communities and schools, with varying and determined by its relevance for current and
emphases being placed on certain elements future worlds.
depending on the context.
Interactive participation
Perspectives and activity
Interactive learning environments call for fresh
Interactive learning environments call for
ways of thinking about sites of learning, tools
fresh ways of thinking about sites of learning,
for learning, social interactions and learning
tools for learning, social interactions and
trajectories.
learning trajectories. Over the last century
we have been offered a range of theories of
While there remain possibly more questions human development and learning, some giving
than answers about future-focused learning precedence to the role of the environment in
environments, some global trends have determining learning and others to the learner.
emerged in thinking about movement toward Contemporary views about learning favour an
future education. These comprise a series of interactionist view, that is, one that involves the
simultaneous shifts in the conceptualisation of active learner within an active environment (see
learning. Specifically, they relate to ecologies of Dumont, Istance and Benavides, 2010; Illeris,
learning, connections with others, collaboration, 2009; Lee, 2008; Scardamalia, 2008). Interactive
active participation and appreciation. These theories, including those advanced by Vygotsky,
shifts are described in terms of Engeström, Lave and Bronfenbrenner, have
placed the learner and environment alongside
■ ecologies – from notions of classrooms or
one another in the co-construction of new
schools as primary educational units to
knowledge in dynamic, cultural contexts.
appreciating dynamic, ecological structures
as students’ core learning environments;
Facilitated networks of learning 9
Understanding the perspectives that students, The active learner/active environment
teachers, families and communities take on perspective corresponds with the contemporary,
human development is critical to developing third phase of education and is represented
innovative learning environments in which in the ‘Interactive’ quadrant at the top right-
students can be, and choose to be, active hand corner of the matrix. In an interactive
in their learning. Theoretical perspective environment, both learner and environment
regulates what we see in events and how we are seen to play a part in creating the learning
interpret and respond to them. Bowler, Annan context and the knowledge within it. New
and Mentis (2007) noted that perspectives on solutions result from the dialogue among all
human development and learning determine active participants.
the location of problems and solutions,
The active environment/passive learner
placing them within the learner or within the
quadrant represents a view that has dominated
environment or within the interaction between
throughout much of the last century and
the learner and the environment. Bowler et al
continues to do so. In this quadrant fall the
illustrated the range of diverse perspectives on
behavioural theories. From an environmental
the relationship between the learner and the
active/learner passive perspective, a learner’s
environment in their Matrix of Perspectives
actions are interpreted as a response to her/his
(Figure 2). They presented a four-quadrant
environment and would be addressed through
matrix, formed by two intersecting continua
environmental modification. This quadrant
that spanned from passive to active. One
corresponds to students being passive recipients
continuum represents the learner, the other
of knowledge in the environments that teachers,
the environment. The matrix is populated with
leaders, researchers and evaluators construct
examples of theorists whose accounts of human
for them.
development fall in each of the quadrants.
The active learner/passive environment
The way in which we conceptualise a situation
quadrant occupies the top left hand corner
naturally influences the way in which we
of the matrix. From this perspective, learning
address it. Where we position problems and
is seen to emanate from active learners as
solutions determines the directions that we take
they journey along developmental pathways.
and the types of intervention we choose. This
Support for learning in this quadrant involves
relationship is discussed below.
Figure 2. The Matrix of Perspectives (from Bowler, Annan and Mentis, 2007)
Learner Active Interactive
e
v
Piaget cti Vygotsky
A
Köhler er Bronfenbrenner
Erikson arn Bandura
e
L
Environment Passive Environment Active
L
e
a Pavlov
Gessell rn
e Skinner
Galton r P
a Watson
s
Passive s
iv Environment Active
e