Suchergebnisse

AbstractThere is growing interest in the literature towards a more distributed, collaborative view of learning design that focuses on relationships and connection. In this paper, we propose a vision of learning design that is entangled and crosses boundaries, framed by an equity-oriented mindset that blurs and resists boundaries, and merges learning design with facilitation, external with internal communities, and academia with activism. Based on interviews with learning design practitioners across the world, and framed by theories of posthumanism and postdigital education, we share eight orientations that form a future and equity-oriented learning design pattern: awareness of context, matter matters, co-creating with humans and non-humans, relationality and connection, modelling vulnerability, the entanglement of the personal and political, and creating transformative spaces. We then use one of our responses to the advent of ChatGPT to show how these orientations have helped us in times of uncertainty and disruption, an agential cut that highlights the value of acknowledging the material-discursive relationships emerging in and through our work. As such, rather than focusing on conventional, static definitions and models, we are interested in knowledge-making processes that come into existence when we practise learning design and engage with each other and the world around us, and who we become in our relationships with others, both human and non-human, and the patterns that we form in this entanglement.

AbstractProduced from experiences at the outset of the intense times when Covid-19 lockdown restrictions began in March 2020, this collaborative paper offers the collective reflections and analysis of a group of teaching and learning and Higher Education (HE) scholars from a diverse 15 of the 26 South African public universities. In the form of a theorised narrative insistent on foregrounding personal voices, it presents a snapshot of the pandemic addressing the following question: what does the 'pivot online' to Emergency Remote Teaching and Learning (ERTL), forced into urgent existence by the Covid-19 pandemic, mean for equity considerations in teaching and learning in HE? Drawing on the work of Therborn (2009: 20–32; 2012: 579–589; 2013; 2020) the reflections consider the forms of inequality - vital, resource and existential - exposed in higher education. Drawing on the work of Tronto (1993; 2015; White and Tronto 2004) the paper shows the networks of care which were formed as a counter to the systemic failures of the sector at the onset of the pandemic.

By now, concerns about how equity and inequality are playing out in the 'pivot' to remote teaching and learning are common in the press and most mainstream political and policy discourses. But early on, questions about the risks to equity and the related responses to such risks within institutions of higher education were being raised. Of these, which concerns for the future post-pandemic persist? As teaching and learning professionals and academics from 15 diverse universities in South Africa, we deliberated through collective reflection what we were experiencing, observing, designing and trying to mitigate in Emergency Remote Teaching and Learning (ERTL). Collecting our reflections and raising critical concerns, we collated these in May 2020 during the first semester of the academic year in South Africa, as the country entered a sudden State of Disaster with severe lockdown restrictions. Nine themes emerged from our reflective narratives that provide insight, from the diverse and unequal positions we found ourselves in, into the current status of responses to Covid-19 with regard to teaching and learning through an equity lens.

Introduction (Networked Learning Editorial Collective): Since the turn of this century, much of the world has undergone a tectonic socio-technological change. Computers have left the isolated basements of research institutes and entered people's homes. Network connectivity has advanced from slow and unreliable modems to high-speed broadband. Devices have evolved: from stationary desktop computers to ever-present, always-connected smartphones. These developments have been accompanied by new digital practices, and changing expectations, not least in education, where enthusiasm for digital technologies has been kindled by quite contrasting sets of values. For example, some critical pedagogues working in the traditions of Freire and Illich have understood computers as novel tools for political and social emancipation, while opportunistic managers in cash-strapped universities have seen new opportunities for saving money and/or growing revenues. Irrespective of their ideological leanings, many of the early attempts at marrying technology and education had some features in common: instrumentalist understanding of human relationships with technologies, with a strong emphasis on practice and 'what works'. It is now clear that, in many countries, managerialist approaches have provided the framing, while local constraints and exigencies have shaped operational details, in fields such as e-learning, Technology Enhanced Learning, and others waving the 'Digital' banner. Too many emancipatory educational movements have ignored technology, burying their heads in the sand, or have wished it away, subscribing toa new form of Luddism, even as they sense themselves moving to the margins. But this situation is not set in stone. Our postdigital reality results from a complex interplay between centres and margins. Furthermore, the concepts of centres and margins 'have morphed into formations that we do not yet understand, and they have created (power) relationships which are still unsettled. The concepts … have not disappeared, but they have become somewhat marginal in their own right.' (Jandrić andHayes 2019) Social justice and emancipation are as important as ever, yet they require new theoretical reconfigurations and practices fit for our socio-technological moment. In the 1990s, networked learning (NL) emerged as a critical response to dominant discourses of the day. NL went against the grain in two main ways. First, it embarked on developing nuanced understandings of relationships between humans and technologies; understandings which reach beyond instrumentalism and various forms of determinism. Second, NL embraced the emancipatory agenda of the critical pedagogy movement and has, in various ways, politically committed to social justice (Beaty et al. 2002; Networked Learning Editorial Collective 2020). Gathered around the biennial Networked Learning Conference,1 the Research in NetworkedLearning book series,2 and a series of related projects and activities, the NL community has left a significant trace in educational transformations over the last few decades. Twenty years ago, founding members of the NL community offered a definition of NL which has strongly influenced the NL community's theoretical perspectives and research approaches (Goodyear et al. 2004).3 Since then, however, the world has radically changed. With this in mind, the Networked Learning Editorial Collective (NLEC) recently published a paper entitled 'Networked Learning: InvitingRedefinition' (2020). In line with NL's critical agenda, a core goal for the paper was to open up a broad discussion about the current meaning and understandings of NL and directions for its further development. The current collectively authored paper presents the responses to the NLEC's open call. With 40 contributors coming from six continents and working across many fields of education, the paper reflects the breadth and depth of current understandings of NL. The responses have been collated, classified into main themes, and lightly edited for clarity. One of the responders, Sarah Hayes, was asked to write aconclusion. The final draft paper has undergone double open review. The reviewers, Laura Czerniewicz and Jeremy Knox, are acknowledged as authors. Our intention, in taking this approach, has been to further stimulate democratic discussion about NL and to prompt some much-needed community-building. ; lict