Networked Learning in, for, and with the World

  • Rikke Toft NørgårdEmail author
  • Yishay Mor
  • Søren S. E. Bengtsen
Part of the Research in Networked Learning book series (RINL)


This chapter proposes a framework for networked learning in, for, and with the world at mode 3 universities. First, a theoretical overview of the configuration and development of the mode 1 university (the ivory tower), mode 2 university (the factory), and the mode 3 university (the network) is provided. Second, the framework for the networking mode 3 university is developed through presenting and integrating organisational guidelines, pedagogical formats, and learning principles. Then, two categories of educational patterns for learning in and with the world at the networking university are introduced and described: (1) bringing education into the public (learning in the world) and (2) bringing the public into education (learning with the world). Examples of concrete educational design patterns are also given. Finally, three dimensions for students’ learning for the world through hybrid networks at the mode 3 university are developed: networked learning for the world as citizenship, networked learning for the world as trust, and networked learning for the world as ecology. The main contribution of the chapter is to develop the notion of the networking university along with its implicated teaching and learning practices.


Design patterns Higher education Hybridity Mode 3 education Networked learning Networking university 


  1. Aaen, J. H., & Nørgård, R. T. (2015). Participatory academic communities: A transdisciplinary perspective on participation in education beyond the institution. Conjunctions. Transdisciplinary Journal of Cultural Participation, 2(2), 67–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Schlomo, A. (1977). A pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Arvanitakis, J., & Hornsby, D. (Eds.). (2016). Universities, the citizen scholar, and the future of higher education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M. (1935/1981). The dialogic imagination. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  5. Barnett, R. (2004). Learning for an unknown future. Higher Education Research & Development, 23(3), 247–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnett, R. (2011). Being a university. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Barnett, R. (2017). Foreword: Energising an institution. In D. Fung (Ed.), A connected curriculum for higher education (pp. v–vii). London: UCL Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barnett, R. (2018). The ecological university. A feasible utopia. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Barnett, R., & Bengtsen, S. (2017). Universities and epistemology: From a dissolution of knowledge to the emergence of a new thinking. Education Sciences, 7(38), 1–12.Google Scholar
  10. Cooperative identity, values and principles. (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2018, from:
  11. Dall’Alba, G. (2012). Re-imagining the university: Developing a capacity to care. In R. Barnett (Ed.), The future university. Ideas and possibilities (pp. 112–122). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Ferguson, R., Barzilai, S., Ben-Zvi, D., Chinn, C. A., Herodotou, C., Hod, Y., et al. (2017). Innovating pedagogy 2017. Open university innovation report 6. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University UK.Google Scholar
  13. Feyerabend, P. (1999). Conquest of abundance. A tale of abstraction versus the richness of being. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Fung, D. (2017). A connected curriculum for higher education. London: UCL Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gibbs, P. (2004). Trusting in the university. In The contribution of temporality and trust to a praxis of higher learning. Cambridge, UK: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Gibbs, P. (Ed.). (2017). The pedagogy of compassion at the heart of higher education. Cambridge, UK: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning. Patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(1), 82–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Köppe, C., Nørgård, R. T., & Pedersen, A. Y. (2017). Towards a pattern language for hybrid education. Paper presented at the VikingPLoP 2017 conference on pattern languages of program, Grube, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.Google Scholar
  19. Macfarlane, B. (2007). The academic citizen. The virtue of service in university life. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Mor, Y. (2013). SNaP! Re-using, sharing and communicating designs and design knowledge using scenarios, narratives and patterns. In R. Luckin, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, S. Puntambekar, N. Winters, & J. Underwood (Eds.), Handbook of design in educational technology (pp. 189–200). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Mor, Y., & Warburton, S. (2014). Assessing the value of design narratives, patterns and scenarios in scaffolding co-design processes in the domain of technology enhanced learning. In S. Bayne, C. Jones, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & C. Sinclair (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on networked learning 2014. ISBN: 978-1-86220-304-4Google Scholar
  22. Mor, Y., & Winters, N. (2007). Design approaches in technology enhanced learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 15, 61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nixon, J. (2008). Towards the virtuous university. The moral bases of academic practice. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nørgård, R. T., & Bengtsen, S. (2016). Academic citizenship beyond the campus: A call for the placeful university. Higher Education Research and Development, 35(1), 4–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nørgård, R. T., & Bengtsen, S. (2018). The worldhood university: Design signatures and guild thinking. In S. E. Bengtsen & R. Barnett (Eds.), The thinking university: A philosophical examination of thought and higher education (pp. 167–183). Cambridge, UK: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nørgård, R. T., & Mathiesen, K. H. (2018). Undervisningsbaserede forskningskollektiver: Fra studenterundervisning til akademiske partnerskaber. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 13(24), 82–103.Google Scholar
  27. Ossa-Richardson, A. (2014). The idea of a university and its concrete form. In P. Temple (Ed.), The physical university: Contours of space and place in higher education (pp. 131–158). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Rorabough, P., & Stommel, J. (2012). Hybridity, pt. 3. What does hybrid pedagogy do? Hybrid Pedagogy, Retrieved from:
  29. Sharples, M., de Roock, R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Koh, E., et al. (2016). Innovating pedagogy 2016. Open university innovation report 5. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.Google Scholar
  30. Shumar, W. (1997). College for sale: A critique of the commodification of higher education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Shumar, W., & Robinson, S. (2018). Universities as societal drivers: Entrepreneurial interventions for a better future. In S. E. Bengtsen & R. Barnett (Eds.), The thinking university: A philosophical examination of thought and higher education (pp. 31–46). Cambridge, UK: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. The Rochdale Principles. (n.d.). Retrieved October 5, 2018, from:
  33. Wright, S. (2016). Universities in a knowledge economy or ecology? Policy, contestation and abjection. Critical Policy Studies, 10(1), 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zeuli, K. A., & Cropp, R. (2004). Cooperatives. Principles and practices in the 21st century. Retrieved October 5, 2018, from

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rikke Toft Nørgård
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yishay Mor
    • 2
  • Søren S. E. Bengtsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Teaching Development and Digital MediaAarhus UniversityAarhusDenmark
  2. 2.Centre for Innovation and Excellence in TeachingLevinsky College of EducationTel Aviv-YafoIsrael

Personalised recommendations