Rites of Passage: Learning that counts!
The Struggle Between the Medium and the Message
Elaine Correa
Medaille College
USA
ecorrea@medaille.edu
Abstract
As more colleges offer greater on-line learning opportunities for generating student
enrollment, the opportunity for creating innovative courses on-line presents a major
concern for many on-line instructors. With the increased demand for on-line courses,
faculty now more than ever before, are prepared to construct courses that cover required
content, and ensure that the multi-task learner will be engaged significantly in the
learning process. However, concerns arise when course development is accompanied
with expectations that focus primarily on courses as entertaining to capture the attention
of students, bordering on ‘edutainment’ rather than content driven. The fear of many
faculty members teaching online relates to learning that is driven and perceived to be
‘easy’, ‘entertaining’ and ‘visually stimulating’ rather than developed and embedded in
educational content and quality. The pressures for institutions of higher learning to
remain competitive have accompanied the paradigm shift for ensuring ‘a consumer
approach’ to learning. The struggle between the medium and the message raises
numerous interrelated concerns for faculty and students as on-line learning becomes an
integral feature of learning in higher education.
Is there a place for ‘edutainment’ in the design and development of on-line courses?
Furthermore, when instructing prospective teacher education preparation candidates, should
concerns for ‘easy’, ‘enjoyable’ teaching instruction with on-line courses reflect theory in
practice? As more colleges offer greater on-line learning opportunities for generating student
enrollment, the opportunity for creating innovative courses on-line presents a major concern for
many on-line instructors. Should institutions of higher learning offer on-line courses that appear
to pander to the demands of a technically-oriented learner culture, without regard to educational
practice or content quality? Should educational content be the defining feature of on-line course
designs? Although the responses to these questions may appear obvious, the underlying
feedback from students from satisfaction and perception surveys may illuminate less structured
learning engagement formats and more learner-driven exploration with on-line course offerings.
With the increased demand for on-line courses, faculty now more than ever before may need to
construct courses that cover required course content in a manner that ensures the multi-task
learner will be engaged significantly in the learning process beyond the usual teaching strategies
(chat, blogs, discussion board, wikis). As course development concerns reflect marketplace
demands, the expectation that on-line courses offer an entertaining feature to capture the
attention of students, bordering on ‘edutainment’, faculty may need to reconsider how to deliver
essential content in a more innovative manner. The fear of many faculty members devising
courses and teaching online may relate to the expectation of learning as ‘easy’, ‘entertaining’ and
‘visually stimulating’ rather than course designs based on educational content and quality.
The pressures for institutions of higher learning to remain competitive have accompanied the
paradigm shift for ensuring ‘a consumer approach’ to learning. The struggle between the medium
and the message therefore raises numerous interrelated concerns for faculty and students as online learning becomes an integral feature of learning in the politics of higher education.
The “D.I.S. Factor”- Detachment, Isolation, Socially Disconnected
In a room filled with young people, should one be surprised that exchanges and discussions are
navigated or mediated through hand held devises rather than face-to -face interaction? Equally
anticipated should the ease of exchange in cyber-space be expected to transcend into the realm of
face-to-face interactions without any awkwardness and social uneasiness between individuals?
How has the emergence of technology contribute to the social dis-function of human relations?
To what extent can advancements and subsequently exchanges in cyber space be considered
harmful to the moral and ethical development of human beings? In the course of ageing and
development, are there rites of passage that must be anticipated in which individuals must
experience a sense of detachment, isolation and being socially disconnected in order to learn?
Must students disconnect from the world of 'wireless connectedness' in order to full engage and
embrace learning?
With the emergence of technology and socially constructed cyber-spaces, a shift in attitudes,
expectations and learning appears to be a natural consequence of different forms of interactions
and exchanges mediated through a connected space. No longer are the rustic vestiges of formal
courtesy's or manners required as the recognition of an individual’s presence. Today, the teacher
is replaced by a community of speakers whose audience may vacillate according to interest (tag
line) and momentary attention span (speed of content delivery). The actual presence or
acknowledgement of any person is negligible in such exchanges. In cases where the person is
identified, the individual transforms from actual name to a colloquial expression or common
greeting (hey,/ dude) or remains nameless as a part of a group of selected people or open list
serve. Within such ‘connected spaces’ are we all ‘disconnected’ but engaged?
In the case of learning in higher education, a further paradigm shift appears to occur
unquestionably. The temporary nature of knowledge transfer rests less on the actual content
and/or information that is garnered, and more on the sensational hype that accompanies the
desire 'to learn' on a 'need to know' basis with quick one word posts (amazing!, how cool was
that?). Information becomes important because other people are invested in these specific 'hot
topics'. Outside the realm of learning, knowledge which is important rises to the top of the
media news releases and streams into the hands of learners logged into their virtual worlds. This
urgency for information or ‘need to know’, is framed in a collage of visual images, streamed
through utube video pieces, or interconnected in virtual games, further advancing the hype
component of learning to a level where the content becomes valuable only in so far as it is
accompanied by all these addictive enhancements. The intrinsic value or merit associated with
learning for knowledge acquisition or improvement is secondary, if at all a consideration. In such
cases, what learning really counts?
Undeniably, today, as advancements in technology provide greater opportunities for mobility as
well as access to places, people and knowledge without extensive hours of travel time, waiting,
or interference, many individuals may actually prefer this comfortable learning environment that
feeds into all our basic needs unquestionably. With the acknowledgement of busy schedules and
commitments that impose on our precious time, these adjustments, in some cases, or major
metamorphosis in others, transform not only how students learn, but what types of learning can
occur. Skype, for example, is used in numerous facets of life from business conferencing to
exchanges in personal relationships. The opportunity to actually enjoy human contact like never
before has reached unimaginable levels of advancement. Unlike the past when distances
prevented people from physically meeting and connecting, today it is imaginable that people opt
to meet in cyber space and share a short interaction rather than take the time to visit face to face
over coffee or lunch. These types of exchanges provide for the communicating of ideas without
leaving the comfort of the familiar. The needs of the learner are best addressed by the
perspective of what the learner wants and how the learner prefers to learn. On the surface, these
alternative learning arrangements enhanced by technology and supported by on-going
technological advancements should not raise any concern since the benefits are obvious, with
growing access and improvements to the instruments and tools that are used to fuel these diverse
learning opportunities. Yet, problems do arise as diverse learning communities struggle between
the medium and the message. Should educational content be delivered to learners in the format
they feel most prepared to engage with and exchange? Should students be expected to move
beyond their technical comfort zones towards less familiar traditional practices of learning?
The current paradigm shift in teaching, aligned with rapid technological advancements based
upon increasing access to both the construction and dissemination of knowledge, has contributed
significantly to the unsettled terrain in which learning is expected to occur. Furthermore, the
impact of a competitive marketplace entrenched in economic instability lends effectively to the
mechanisms of ‘academic survival’ that have emerged within learning. This paradigm shift has
influenced not only how students think about learning, but the attitudes, values and beliefs that
students hold. Students today expect that education should be “fast, cheap and easy” which
translates to “multiple delivery formats”, (fast), with, high economic educational value (cheap)
and the expectation of student grade entitlement (easy). This shift in values and learning has
become a critical component in contemporary North American educational discourse and culture.
In an attempt to address the shift in values, given the context of changing educational priorities
and the support and encouragement towards multiple delivery formats, an exercise of ‘reflective
practice in action’ was identified by faculty in concert with students to address diverse
competitive and often conflicting needs. As part of the reflective practice process, challenges
and contradictions were identified and inverted into the ‘hotspots’ of teaching and learning in
education. In an experimental teacher-learner format, student groups were asked to address a
specific concern using a visual media format to raise awareness of the contradictions whilst
challenging peers in the learning process. “Learning with and from each other” by working
together to challenge and confront the contradictions that are apparent in learning invoked a
number of interesting questions amongst students relating to power and authority, representation
and identity, as well as what counts and is valued as learning.
For faculty, these same issues were evident when discussions of revising on-line content and
delivery were raised by students in evaluation of program offerings. The need to exercise
‘control’ and authority over courses related to the traditional paradigm of teacher as ‘expert’ and
challenged the current system of who establishes what is valuable to learn and know.
Additionally, as faculty addressed the types of changes that would advance and promote
learning, the loss of control over the ‘classroom space’ within the context of the on-line
classroom forced faculty to reconsider how theory reflects practice. The adage of ‘practice what
you preach’ or ‘do what I say, not what I do’ became apparent mirrors for reflecting on the fear
and awkwardness experienced by faculty when required to engage in technology training outside
their discipline content area where they were ‘experts’. The struggle between the medium and
the message were apparent for both faculty and students as opportunities to reflect on current
teaching and e-learning practices forced recognition that ‘old habits’ take time to break.
As the ‘rites of passage’ were initially seen as the fundamental steps for students to assume in
their learning, these same ‘rites of passage’ became apparent for faculty when reflecting on
balancing the revisions to their on-line courses and undergoing appropriate training to improve
their course delivery for current technology-based learners. The struggle with validating the
different ‘mediums’ of instruction or modes of learning continues to remain a controversial
position in higher education, particularly given the ‘consumer approach’ adopted by
administrators in defining the direction of colleges. However, the underlying message of learning
and the importance of teaching courses embedded in educational content should continue to be
the basis of instruction, regardless of the delivery format. The rites of passage as to what
learning counts will continue to be challenged as new advances and technologies are devised.
The difference, hopefully, will be in how teachers and learners embrace different forms of
learning to ensure that effective learning occurs.
References
Correa, E. & Centrie, C. (2006). ‘The Shift from Teaching to Entitlement Learning’. Comparative and International
Education Society Paper Presentation. (March 19-23) Hawaii: U.S.A.
Duffy,T, & Kirkley, J. (2004). Designing Environments for Distributed Learning: Theory and Practice. Mahwah:
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to Transgress. New York: Sister Vision.
Friere, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seaview.
Mirochnik, E. and Sherman, D. (Eds.) (2002). Passion and Pedagogy. New York: Lesley
University Series in Arts and Education.
McLuhan, M. (1998). The Method is the Message. Montreal: Black Rose Books.
Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical Teaching for Social Change. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.