Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
The Potential of Distributed Learning Environments
in the Development of Civil Society
Susan Crichton and Gail Kopp
University of Calgary
1
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
2
Abstract
How can we make effective use of global resources to pave the path to stable democracy
and development of a civil society ? This paper proposes an educational model as a sustainable,
distributed learning solution, suggesting that it is through the access to information that
individuals can build personal knowledge and empower themselves to make change and support
innovative paradigm shifts at the personal, family, community, national, and global levels.
Grounded in theories of sustainability and activity, the model describes a portable learning lab
that can be implemented in low or high technology environments and includes considerations for
implementation and preparation of materials.
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
3
The Potential of Distributed Learning Environments
in the Development of Civil Society
What is the path to stable democracy and the development of a civil society and how can
we make effective use of global resources to accomplish this task? By way of an answer, we
propose a portable learning lab as a sustainable solution, suggesting that through access to
relevant learning opportunities, individuals can build personal knowledge and become
empowered to make change and support innovative paradigm shifts. This paper: (a) presents a
prototype of an affordable, portable learning lab that can take learning opportunities to the
people; (b) suggests the use of a computer-managed learning (CML) environment; (c) offers both
theoretical and practical approaches to use of the learning lab; and (d) suggests protocols for the
development / modification of existing course content; and
Grounded in the theories of sustainability and activity (Schumacher, 1973; Vygotsky,
1994), the mobile distributed learning lab could ultimately increase access to opportunity,
empowerment, and meaningful employment. It is based on Schumacher’s notion of technology
with a human face, suggesting that opportunity must be afforded to people where they are,
emigrating the learning opportunities to the people rather than requiring them to immigrate to
large centers where it is typically available. This model is also built on the principles of activity
theory (Vygotsky, 1994), suggesting that activities must be appropriate to learners’ needs and
goals. At the same time, it recognizes the importance of social context in learning thereby
allowing facilitators to develop site-specific content.
The lab we propose is based on appropriate and scalable technology that will allow
equitable access to information and learning experiences for a range of learners, including those
at risk (e.g. the elderly, disabled, and indigenous). This portable lab is a technology supported,
hybrid-learning environment that does not rely solely on the Internet, so bandwidth and other
issues typically associated with the digital divide are less of a problem. It does, however, rest on
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
4
a proven computer managed learning environment, such as Nautikos (Odyssey Learning
Systems), that distributes and manages content specific to individual learner needs.
Content can be collected from a range of sources (e.g. learning objects, regional
curriculum, training modules, site specific lessons, etc.) and points to activities (e.g. worksheets,
model construction, hands-on training, workshops, etc.) that allow facilitators to assist
participants in building new skills while honoring their prior knowledge and experiences.
Learners can be engaged in training (e.g. construction of small hydro systems), formal course
work (e.g. high school completion, college preparation), or general interest lifelong learning
pursuits (e.g. woodworking, crochet).
The lab, contained in a small case (84 cm x 40 cm x 33 cm), supports a classroom of
approximately 20 simultaneous learners, and an unlimited number of enrolled learners. It
supports traditional learning resources and does not require the constant use of the computers –
an essential design consideration for our model in terms of cost, mobility, and scalability.
The philosophy behind the development of lab is consistent with the World Summit’s
Program of Action (2002) which calls for lifelong learning and adult education opportunities that
(1) use technology to enable access to new and existing technological knowledge, (2) help to
develop local technologies that are most suitable to local needs, and (3) support indigenous /
cultural knowledge systems.
The re-use of older hardware is also consistent with the current recognition that e-waste
(Cullen, 2003) is a critical environmental concern.
The mobile learning lab we are proposing is comprised of four laptop computers
(Pentium 100 MHz) that currently are sold in Canada for $300 CDN per unit. In many other
contexts these computers would be considered useless but for this application they are
appropriate, adequate and in ample supply. In addition, a simple laser printer (approximately
$200) and miscellaneous office items (spiral binder and supplies, a printer cable or USB
connector, and labels) complete the inventory.
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
5
The learning environment afforded by this model is flexible and open ended. Learners and
facilitators working in this environment function as co-constructors of the learning experience.
Learners, in consultation with the facilitator, can choose from a range of course offerings that
meet their goals. The facilitator, working within the philosophy of activity theory (Vygotsky,
1994) matches the learner’s goals with the specific needs by providing relevant and timely
activities. In actual practice, this interaction involves a learner coming to a center, such as a
community hall, library, public meeting place, in which the lab is placed (permanently or
temporarily), looking at a list of available courses, talking with the facilitator about the potential
offerings, and negotiating a meaningful learning plan (Crichton & Kinsel, 2003) that supports the
learner’s goals.
Learners are enrolled in specific course or courses, within the computer managed learning
(Nautikos) environment, depending on their learning plan. The learner is given a discrete ID and
password that allows her/him to sign into Nautikos and print out an activity and relevant
resources. The learner then logs out of the system and begins to complete the activity either in
the center or at home, freeing the computer for another user. The modular structure of the
content within the computer-managed learning (CML) environment ensures a consistency in
delivery and minimizes the bottleneck caused by limited computer access and resources.
Materials that are printed, and are not consumable, can be spiral bound and labeled for
subsequent use by later learners.
Implementation Considerations
The decision to use the proposed mobile learning lab is contingent on a number of critical
factors: philosophy, training pedagogy, content, technology, and logistics. Administrators
considering adopting a mobile learning lab as part of their program need to address each of the
factors to determine the lab’s applicability to a specific set of circumstances and learner needs.
Figure 1 illustrates the five factors in detail.
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
6
Figure 1. Considerations for Distributed Learning Implementation
The notion of negotiated mastery learning, supported by individualized, self-paced
instruction, informs the philosophical basis for the lab. The role of the instructor shifts from the
deliverer of content as the subject matter expert to the facilitator of the learning experience with
a generalist’s understanding of the scope of the program. Nautikos supports this philosophy by
managing the content, resources, and the learner’s progress, allowing the facilitator to create an
individualized program specific to the learner’s needs. The facilitator draws courses from the
database of available offerings, customizing the learning experience for each learner.
The training pedagogy requires facilitators to know more than just how the hardware and
software work. Implicit in this model is the need for instructors to understand facilitation and
how it differs from traditional, direct instruction. Nautikos has three distinct roles: student,
instructor/facilitator, and course developer, recognizing that the course developer may or may
not be onsite or aware of specific learners. Administrators utilizing this model must recognize
that content supported in this learning environment must be developed using good instructional
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
7
design strategies coupled with a clear understanding of learning theory and the differences that
distributed learning environments create. Not all facilitators may want to develop content, but
Nautikos allows access of a range of resources and the option to customize previously developed
content for specific circumstances.
Content is an essential element in the model as Nautikos, a relational database, has the to
potential to hold hundreds of courses, on a range of topics, complete with the necessary activities
and resources. The depth of the database is dependent on access to a selection of courses that are
loaded on the lab computers and is limited only by the size of the hardware and the availability
of suitable content. Therefore, the lab, which is less than one square meter, has the potential to
contain course offerings from schools, jurisdictions, and institutions around the world. Learners
coming to a center such as we propose could take Canadian Math 10 to complete an International
Baccalaureate degree or learn specific small hydroelectric construction skills to power their
farms, for example.
As stated earlier, the technology requirements of this lab are minimal. However, some
training will be associated with maintaining the lab and training others to use it.
Other logistics to be considered include developing procedures for use of the lab and protocols
for securing the equipment. While Nautikos provides the environment for organizing
courseware resources and learner information, each site will have to address logistical issues
specific to its needs (e.g. personnel, hours of operation, lending policies, etc.).
Once these factors have been considered and the decision has been made to adopt the
distributed learning lab model, the next step is to populate the portable lab with learning
materials appropriate for the target audience at the proposed site. Figure 2 provides a decision
map designed to aid in the preparation of the actual course materials.
Preparation of Materials
The elegance of the model we are proposing is that materials can be developed or modified
onsite, distributed from a central repository via Internet or CD-Rom, or loaded directly on the
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
8
computers in the mobile lab prior to distribution. Figure 2 suggests a protocol for the
development / modification of course content.
Figure 2. Decision Map for Preparation of Materials
There are two essential decisions that affect the preparation of materials: the mode of
delivery and the content to be included. Options for delivery are constrained by access to the
Internet and the bandwidth available. While Nautikos is used in our model, other computermanaged learning (CML) software could be selected. Full Internet access will support
asynchronous software such as Blackboard, WebCT, synchronous software such as Elluminate’s
vClass, and distributed site based CML software such as Nautikos. Limited Internet reduces
access to web based resources and many CML software options, but it does allows the transfer
and the upgrade of content across distance. No Internet access means that the upgrading and
distribution of the databases that hold the content must be done locally, and that Nautikos is the
most reasonable CML solution. With no Internet access, resources must be self-contained within
the portable lab.
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
9
The other essential decision surrounds the preparation of content. Within the community
of CML users, there is a range of courses available for sale or trade. If additional content needs
to be developed, an onsite facilitator and/or a centralized curriculum developer can create
specific courses relevant to the needs of the learners in a particular area. Content for new
courses can be sourced from subject matter experts (e.g. an engineer for the development of
lessons for solar panel construction), training and operations manuals (e.g. guidebook for
obtaining First Aid license), and reference materials (e.g. Appropriate Technology Sourcebook).
These courses could then be sold, shared, or traded with other centers. The development of
courses has the potential to create jobs, and the completed courses become a program asset, as
they are a marketable commodity.
By allowing principles of instructional design and learning theory to guide the
development of content, rather than the constraints imposed by the technology, facilitators and
course developers are free to prepare materials in the ways they feel are most appropriate to
learner needs and goals. For example, a single course can include worksheets, discussion,
readings, model construction, video, web links, etc., recognizing that the flexibility afforded by
digital content supports multimedia options for a range of learning styles (Gardner, 1983).
Courses can be developed from raw content using a development process that organizes the
content into discrete learning objectives with activities that engage the learners in constructive
tasks and relevant assessment options that match either standards or acceptable tolerances.
Design Process
In order to move from the theoretical model proposed here to actual development of
usable content, course developers need to work from the common theoretical frame suggested in
Figures 1 and 2 and begin to create content outside a specific delivery software system.
Inherent in this design is the notion that one might use a spreadsheet to list the learning
outcomes that are essential to the completion of a course. By using the spreadsheet, relationships
and structures within the course become evident and the materials can be broken into logical
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
10
modules or units of study. In this context a course is a unit of study that could be academic,
vocational, or recreational in nature. The learning outcomes afford a degree of standardization in
terms of assessment and certification when necessary. For example, if one needs to cover certain
objectives to receive provincial certification (e.g. an Air Brakes Ticket in order to operate a large
truck) then everyone concerned must be assured that all the content area has been carried and all
standards have been met.
The actual activities used to met the learning outcomes are fleshed out in a word
processor so appropriate graphics can be embedded with all the formatting and editing tools
available. Resources are collected (books, URLS, maps) and, when appropriate, some are
digitized in common file formats (jpeg, PDF, etc.). These resources are catalogued in a separate
spreadsheet file and labeled appropriately for easy access later by learners and facilitators. This
list also functions as an inventory of items necessary to support the delivery of that specific
course.
Assessment items are developed in accordance with the learning outcomes and reflective
of learning styles and needs. A range of assessment items can be developed to allow learners to
demonstrate their mastery of the learning outcomes in a range of types and styles. These
assessments can be project based or test based. Figure 3 illustrates an actual spreadsheet that
was used to develop a course on hydropower design.
The spreadsheet and word-processed files are compiled and constitute the basic version
of a course. They can be printed and used in the original format, or they can be imported into a
CML environment such as Nautikos where they can be managed or distributed.
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
11
Figure 3. Spreadsheet for Hydropower course
Conclusion
The model proposed here allows for the distribution of information in a manageable and
customizable format. It utilizes inexpensive hardware and supports the emigration of learning to
those distanced from rich and varied learning options. Inherent in this design is the potential for
changed roles in teaching and learning, job creation, and increased access to learning
opportunities.
Core to this model is the basic premise that everyone, everywhere has the right to pursue
learning in a manner that supports their specific learning needs and honors their individual needs
and goals.
It is our belief that the development of a civil society starts with the empowerment of one
person at a time, encouraging engagement in the kind of public work that allows them to rewrite
their personal histories for a positive, sustainable future.
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
12
References
Crichton, S., & Kinsel, E. (2003). Learning Plans As Support for the Development of Learner
Identity: A Case Study in Rural Western Canada. Journal of Adult and Continuing
Education, 8(2), 213-226.
Cullen, W. (2003, May 8). Battling e-waste: Outdated Electronics a Growing Problem. FFWD, p.
9.
Darrow, K., & Saxenian, M. (1986). Appropriate Technology Sourcebook: A Guide to Practical
Books for Village and Small Community Technology. Stanford, CA: A Volunteers in Asia
Publication.
Gardner, H. (Ed.). (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligence. New York:
Basic Books.
Odyssey Learning Systems, Inc. (n.d.) Nautikos. Vancouver, B.C.
Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered. New York:
Harper Collins.
Schumacher Society (n.d.). Retrieved December 20. 2002, from
http://www.schumachersociety.org/frameset_publication.html
Vygotsky, L. (1994). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
World Summit on Sustainable Development. (n.d.). Civil Society Declaration. Retrieved
December 21, 2002, from http://www.worldsummit.org.za
World Summit on Sustainable Development. (n.d.). Program of Action. Retrieved December 21,
2002, from http://www.wordlsummit.org.za
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
13
Author Notes
Susan Crichton is an assistant professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of
Calgary. Her expertise and current research interests include distributed learning, communities of
learning, social justice and equity of access. Email: crichtos@ucalgary.ca
Gail D. Kopp is an assistant professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Calgary.
She has worked in the field of instructional design for business, industry and aerospace for over
fifteen years. Email: gkopp@ucalgary.ca
Civil
Society and Distributed Learning
14
Figure Captions
Figure 1. Five Considerations for Distributed Learning Implementation
Figure 2. Decision map for preparation of instructional materials for the portable learning lab.
Figure 3. Spreadsheet for Hydropower course show organization and inter-relationships between
computer-managed learning elements.