Advertisement

Articulating Personal Pedagogies Through Learning Ecologies

  • Marcelo F. Maina
  • Iolanda García González
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Educational Technology book series (LNET)

Abstract

The digital revolution enabled by social and ubiquitous technologies is constantly transforming macro- and microlevels of society including industry, organizations, and government as well as ways in which we communicate, we work, and we carry on our daily lives. Education is therefore also being challenged to respond to evolving societal demands by supporting the development of competent and engaged citizens. In this context, individuals’ capability to get involved and exploit the affordances of networked environments for learning and development may condition their opportunities to cope with societal and labor demands. In this chapter, the metaphor of learning ecologies is proposed to provide a framework from which to analyze interactions between individuals and their environment, and the way their experiences across different contexts throughout life promote and shape learning processes. Learning ecologies allow us to explore frontier pedagogies connecting formal, non-formal, and informal educational contexts, acting as personal strategies that may orchestrate lifelong, life-wide, and life-deep learning. We start by defining and framing learning ecologies, providing the theoretical roots, and reviewing some recent studies in the field. Next, we propose constructs and models but also strategies and tools that may be of help to enhance and support personal ecologies for learning. Finally, the concept of personal pedagogies is proposed to refer to a set of autonomy and agency skills and attitudes that can be dynamically integrated by individuals to support an ecology for self-development and personal learning. We articulate from this perspective several trends in the area of self-directed learning located in the technological and pedagogical intersection: MOOCs, current awareness, e-portfolios, and social networks.

Keywords

Learning ecologies Personal pedagogies Networked learning Social networks Personal learning environments Life-long learning 

References

  1. Andrade, M. S., & Bunker, E. L. (2009). A model for self-regulated distance language learning. Distance Education, 30(1), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Attwell, G. (2007). Personal learning environments. The future of e-learning? eLearning Papers, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/Personal-Learning-Environments—the-future-of-eLearning%3F?paper=57211.
  3. Barab, S. A., & Roth, W. M. (2006). Curriculum-based ecosystems: Supporting knowing from an ecological perspective. Educational Researcher, 35(5), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barron, B. (2004). Learning ecologies for technological fluency in a technology-rich community. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49(4), 193–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bates, T. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning for a digital age. BC, Canada: Contact North. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/
  7. Bell, F. (2010). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 98–118.Google Scholar
  8. Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the lifecourse: Towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39(2), 132–149.Google Scholar
  9. Bonzo, J. (2012). A social media networked learning ecology perspective. In V. Hodgson, C. Jones, M. de Laat et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 474–481). Maastricht School of Management Maastricht, The Netherlands. Retrieved from http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/abstracts/pdf/bonzo.pdf
  10. Brown, J. S. (2000). Growing up digital: How the web changes work, education, and the ways people learn. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 32(2), 11–20. Retrieved from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/Growing_up_digital.pdf
  11. Bruce, P. A., & Zheng, R. Z. (2011). An inquiry into the policies and practices for online education at one U.S. Doctoral/Research-Extensive University: A case study. In S. Huffman, S. Albritton, B. Wilmes, & W. Rickman (Eds.), Cases on building quality distance delivery programs: Strategies and experiences (pp. 27–43). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi: 10.4018/978-1-60960-111-9.ch003
  12. CEDEFOP. (2009). European guidelines for validating non-formal and informal learning. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  13. Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic Education: Community as curriculum. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4(5). Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=innovate.
  14. Downes, S. (2007). Learning networks in practice. Emerging Technologies for Learning, 2, 19–27. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/files/Learning_Networks_In_Practice.pdf
  15. Downes, S. (2012). Connectivism and connective knowledge: Essays on meaning and learning networks. Moncton, New Brunswick: National Research Council of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/post/58207
  16. Downs, E., Jenkins, S., & Repman, J. (2013). Evidence-based learning: Threading e-portfolio development throughout an online graduate program. In T. Bastiaens & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2013 (pp. 323–325). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/114855
  17. Dron, T., & Anderson, T. (2014). A typology of social forms for learning. In J. Dron & T. Anderson (Eds.), Teaching crowds (pp. 71–91). Edmonton, AB: AU Press.Google Scholar
  18. Duggan, M., Ellison, B., Cliff Lampe, A., Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2015). Social Media Update 2014. Washington DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/09/social-media-update-2014/
  19. Engestrom, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Esposito, A., Sangrà, A., & Maina, M. (2015). Emerging learning ecologies as a new challenge and essence for e-learning. The case of doctoral e-researchers. In M. Ally & B. Khan (Eds.), Handbook of e-learning (vol. 1, pp. 331–342). NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. European Commission, Cedefop, & ICF International. (2014). European inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning 2014. Final synthesis report. Retrieved from http://libserver.cedefop.europa.eu/vetelib/2014/87244.pdf
  22. Faulkner, M., Mahfuzul Aziz, S., Waye, V., & Smith, E. (2013). Exploring ways that ePortfolios can support the progressive development of graduate qualities and professional competencies. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(6), 871–887. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2013.806437
  23. Fischer, G. (2001). Communities of interest: Learning through the interaction of multiple knowledge systems. In S. Bjornestad, R. Moe, A. Morch & A. Opdahl (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th IRIS Conference (pp. 1–14). August 2001, Ulvik, Bergen, Norway: Department of Information Science. Retrieved from http://l3d.cs.colorado.edu/~gerhard/papers/iris24.pdf
  24. Fischer, G. (2011). Understanding, fostering, and supporting cultures of participation. Interactions, 18(3), 42–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frielick, S. (2004). Beyond constructivism: An ecological approach to e-learning. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds.), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 328–332). Perth. Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/frielick.html
  26. Garcia, I. (2014). Analyzing University students’ participation in the co-design of learning scenarios. In J. L. Polman, E. A. Kyza, D. K. O’Neill, I. Tabak, W. R. Penuel, A. S. Jurow, et al. (Eds.), Learning and becoming in practice: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2014 (Vol. 3, pp. 1072–1076). Boulder, CO: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved from https://isls.org/icls/2014/downloads/ICLS%202014%20Volume%203%20%28PDF%29-wCover.pdf
  27. Goodyear, P. (1998). New technology in higher education: Understanding the innovation process. In A. Eurelings, et al. (Eds.), Integrating information and communication technology in higher education (pp. 107–136). Deventer: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  28. Guàrdia, L., Maina, M., & Sangrà, A. (2013). MOOC design principles. A pedagogical approach from the learner’s perspective. E Learning Papers, 33. Retrieved from http://openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/MOOC-Design-Principles.-A-Pedagogical-Approach-from-the-Learner%E2%80%99s-Perspective?paper=124335.
  29. Gütl, C., Rizzardini, R. H., Chang, V., & Morales, M. (2014). Attrition in MOOC: Lessons learned from drop-out students. In Learning Technology for Education in Cloud. MOOC and Big Data (Vol. 446, pp. 37–48). Communications in Computer and Information Science. Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  30. Haythornthwaite, C., & Andrews, R. (2011). E-learning theory and practice. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heimlich, J. E., & Horr, E. E. T. (2010). Adult learning in free-choice, environmental settings: What makes it different? New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 127, 57–66. doi: 10.1002/ace CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Henri, F., & Pudelko, B. (2003). Understanding and analysing activity and learning in virtual communities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(4), 474–487. doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00051.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Holec, H. (1979/1981). Autonomie et apprentissage des langues étrangères. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. (English translation published in 1981 as Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon). Retrieved from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan007791.pdf
  34. Jackson, N. J. (2013). The concept of learning ecologies. In N. Jackson & G. B. Cooper (Eds.), Lifewide learning, education and personal development e-book (pp. 1–21). Retrieved from http://www.lifewideebook.co.uk/uploads/1/0/8/4/10842717/chapter_a5.pdf
  35. JISC (2012). E-portfolio implementations toolkit. Retrieved from https://epip.pbworks.com/w/page/28670505/The%20e-portfolio%20implementation%20toolkit
  36. Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-Learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed., pp. 91–118). Canada: Athabasca University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Hardy, I., & Edwards-Groves, C. (2009, November). Leading and learning: Developing ecologies of educational practice. In Annual Meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
  38. Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lemke, J. L. (2000). Across the scales of time: Artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 7(4), 273–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Parslow, P., & Williams, S. (2014). Dropout: MOOC participants’ perspective. In U. Cress & C. Delgado Kloss (Eds.), EMOOCs 2014, the Second MOOC European Stakeholders Summit (pp. 95–100). Barcelona, Spain: p.a.u. Education.Google Scholar
  41. Looi, C. K. (2001). Enhancing learning ecology on the internet. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(1), 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Luckin, R. (2008). The learner centric ecology of resources: A framework for using technology to scaffold learning. Computers & Education, 50(2), 449–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Luckin, R. (2010). Re-designing learning contexts. Technology-rich, learner-centred ecologies. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Luckin, R., Clark, W., Garnett, F., Whitworth, A., Akass, J., Cook, J., et al. (2010). Learner-generated contexts: A framework to support the effective use of technology for learning. In M. Lee & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 70–84). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi: 10.4018/978-1-60566-294-7.ch004
  45. McKenna, G. F., & Stansfield, M. H. (2013). Identification of key issues in adopting a Web 2.0 E-portfolio strategy. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE), 4(1), 49–64. doi: 10.4018/jvple.2013010104
  46. Nardi, B., & O’Day, V. (1999). Information ecologies: Using technology with heart: Chapter two: Framing conversations about technology. First Monday, 4(5). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v4i5.671.
  47. Nixon, S. (2013). Personal development planning; An evaluation of student perceptions. Practice and Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 8(3), 203–216.Google Scholar
  48. Pérez-Mateo, M., Maina, M. F., Guitert, M., & Romero, M. (2011). Learner generated content: Quality criteria in online collaborative learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning—EURODL. Special Themed Issue on Creativity and Open Educational Resources (OER). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/special/2011/Perez-Mateo_et_al.pdf
  49. Redding, S. (2013). Getting personal: The promise of personalized learning. In M. Murphy, S. Redding, & J. Twyman (Eds.), Handbook on innovations in learning (pp. 113–130). USA, PA: Center on Innovations in Learning.Google Scholar
  50. Richardson, A. (2002). An ecology of learning and the role of elearning in the learning environment. Global Summit Education AU Limited Global Summit. Retrieved from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan007791.pdf
  51. Rodriguez, C. O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like courses: Two successful and distinct course formats for massive open online courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Special Issue. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/?p=Special&sp=init2&article=516
  52. Rongbutsri, N., Ryberg, T., & Zander, P.-O. (2012). Personalized learning ecologies in problem and project based learning environments. In R. Ørngreen (Ed.), Designs for Learning 2012, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference Exploring Learning Environments (pp. 164–165). Copenhagen, Denmark: København.Google Scholar
  53. Saadatmand, M., & Kumpulainen, K. (2012). Emerging technologies and new learning ecologies: learners’ perceptions of learning in open and networked environments. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 266–275).Google Scholar
  54. Scharle, Á., & Szabó, A. (2000). Learner autonomy: A guide to developing learner responsibility. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Shah, D. (2014, December 26). MOOCs in 2014: Breaking down the numbers. EdSurge Newsletter. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/n/2014-12-26-moocs-in-2014-breaking-down-the-numbers
  56. Siemens, G. (2003, October 17). Learning ecology, communities, and networks: Extending the classroom [Blog post]. E learnspace. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/learning_communities.htm
  57. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
  58. Siemens, G. (2007). Connectivism: Creating a learning ecology in distributed environments. In T. Hug (Ed.), Didactics of microlearning: Concepts, discourses, and examples (pp. 53–68). Munster, Germany: Waxmann Verlag.Google Scholar
  59. Siemens, G. (2008). New Structures and spaces of learning: The systemic impact of connective knowledge, connectivism and networked learning. Encontro sobre Web 2.0 Universidade do Minho. Braga, Portugal. Retrieved from http://elearnspace.org/Articles/systemic_impact.htm
  60. Siemens, G. (2012, July 25). MOOCs are really a platform. eLearnspace. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/07/25/moocs-are-really-a-platform/
  61. Smith, R. (2003). Pedagogy for autonomy as (becoming-) appropriate methodology. In D. Palfreyman & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures: Language Education perspectives (pp. 129–146). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  62. Souto-Otero, M., Murphy, I., Duchemin, C., Howley, J., Alvarez Bermúdez, N., & Coles, M. (2014). European Inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning 2014. Final synthesis report. European Commission. Retrieved from http://opus.bath.ac.uk/42564/1/European_inventory_final_synthesis_report.pdf
  63. Strivens, J. (2007). A survey of e-pdp and e-portfolio practice in UK Higher Education. Heslington, York, UK: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://aces.shu.ac.uk/support/staff/employability/resources/survey_of_epdp_and_eportfolio_practice_in_uk_higher_education.pdf
  64. Tabuenca, B., Ternier, S. & Specht, M. (2012). Everyday patterns in lifelong learners to build personal learning ecologies. In M. Specht, M. Sharples, & J. Multisilta (Eds.), Proceedings from the 11th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning 2012 (pp. 86–93). Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
  65. Tabuenca, B., Ternier, S., & Specht, M. (2013). Supporting lifelong learners to build personal learning ecologies in daily physical spaces. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 7(3), 177–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Thomas, H. (2010). Learning spaces, learning environments and the dis ‘placement’ of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 502–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wassef, M. E., Riza, L., Maciag, T., Worden, C., & Delaney, A. (2012). Implementing a competency-based electronic portfolio in a graduate nursing program. Computers Informatics Nursing, 30(5), 242–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Weller, Martin. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance. Spanish Journal of Pedagogy, 249, 223–236.Google Scholar
  69. Wenden, A. (1998). Learner Strategies for learner autonomy. Great Britain: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  70. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. US: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  72. Werquin, P. (2010). Recognising non-formal and informal learning: Outcomes, policies and practices. OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/44600408.pdf
  73. Williams, R., Karousou, R., & Mackness, J. (2011). Emergent learning and learning ecologies in Web 2.0. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 39–59.Google Scholar
  74. Wolters, C. (2010). Self-regulated learning and the 21st century competencies. Paper prepared for the NRC Planning Meeting on 21st Century Competencies. Retrieved from http://www.hewlett.org/uploads/Self_Regulated_Learning__21st_Century_Competencies.pdf
  75. Zheng, S., Rosson, M. B., Shih, P. C., & Carroll, J. M. (2015). Understanding student motivation, behaviors, and perceptions in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 1882–1895). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi: 10.1145/2675133.2675217
  76. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329
  77. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Burlington, MA, USA: Elsevier Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationTéléunivesitéMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Department of Psychology and EducationUniversitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations