Improving Online Education with the Self-directed Learner
I cannot teach anybody anything; I can only make them think.
Socrates
When Stephanie Markham stepped into the classroom, the entire class recognized her presence immediately. Most students greeted her with a friendly salutation. She returned their courtesy, asking students about their families while she filled them in about the goings on in her small-town. Like Stephanie, most of her fellow students were in their junior year at a Northern California State University.
Although Stephanie carried on several unrelated conversations in her class, no one would consider her disruptive. Even the instructor asked Stephanie about her recent car problems, which she had reported earlier in the week.
Although experts would describe Stephanie as a typical student, most of the residents of her small-town would be surprised to discover Stephanie’s “other life”. Most know her as a 45-year-old office manager in a busy medical Center. Others would recognize her from her attendance at her son’s basketball games and her daughters swim meets. Normally shy, most would be surprised how gregarious she is in her classroom. Stephanie is in adult online student.
How the Learning Paradigm Has Changed
The students of 2005, especially adult learners online, differ from the traditional 18 -21-year-old first time learners. These students are not trying to punch their educational ticket before joining the workforce. In fact, it is most likely that the current crop of online students is already in the workforce. This brings an entirely new dimension to the classroom (Palloff, 2002).
The new online students are now the majority. In fact, approximately three-quarters of undergraduates currently attending are “nontraditional students “, meaning they do not fit the mold of first time learners. In a study on learning trends, researchers found that there was an increase in every age category of adult learners between 1991 and 1994. Additionally, there was a significant increase in the number of full-time students that were also working full-time. (Creighton et al,2002)This shift in the number of full-time employees/ full-time students coincides with a shift from a manufacturing economy to a service and information based economy(Castells,1993).
Although experts are divided on some of the characteristics of adult online learners, it is known that they have an entirely distinct set of motivational factors. Although there are dozens of factors, three are most prominent. First, these self-directed learners consider the process itself valuable. Where the K-12 students might be satisfied with the destination, the adult learner recognizes and engages in the “getting there” process. Second, the applicability of what is being learned must be immediately apparent. That is, “learning for learning sake” or “getting the grades will get me praise” is not quite as attractive as “how will this improve my current skills?”(Cave et al, 2004). Third, the adult self-paced learner is less responsive to an institution that simply delivers instruction. They need a program that allows students to recognize their own learning need and self-administer it. (Barr, 1995)
Adult learners demonstrate vested interest in their education by applying ”higher order” thinking to their educational goal. They are self-paced and constantly defining strategies in their learning. Like Stephanie, the amount of time spent learning is precious. Stephanie is metacognitive, meaning she not only considers the material at hand but also designs strategies on how she will approach that material. She practices “thinking about thinking” or metacognition. While cognition is thinking and understanding in concepts, metacognition is analyzing the route to a cognitive goal. For example, a student who perceives the need to understand a complicated biological theory might mentally design a way of learning, memorizing and thinking about each construct of the theory. This might include planning study sessions and tactics like mnemonics (Livingston, 1997).
Because metacognition is a method of structuring and storage of concepts and ideas, it coincides with the trend shift in teaching adults. Whereas the in the classroom learner is regarded as the synchronous recipient of preplanned curricula, the new adult learner is autonomous. This self-directed learner knows what he or she wants, knows where to get it and is willing to engage his or her environment to complete this goal.
In the past, the concept of teaching and learning could be visualized as the instructor standing at the spigot with the hand on the tap. The instructor opens the tap and information is delivered. Occasionally, a student will ask the instructor to turn the tap on. When Internet learning was new, the instructor was capable of opening several taps, increasing the volume and content of the message. The self-directed learner as bypassed the tap. This learner occasionally visits the source, often remotely opens and closes spigots and maintains one of his or her own. Additionally, this learner can swim in the reservoir, as needed.
The new adult student is self-directed. This means that the student controls the activities related to learning to suit his or her educational goals (Brockett et al, 1991). Learning autonomy has changed the way we do business in the education world. It is not merely web-based interaction, it is a creation of an environment where the self-directed student is constantly assessing, discerning and optimizing their personal learning program.
With the change from instructor-led to student-centered learning, the role of the instructor has also evolved. The instructor is no longer the single source of material in an online class. The instructor is now a facilitator. As a facilitator, an instructor fosters learning opportunities to meet the self-directed studentsÂ’ needs. Facilitators control an environment, not the classroom. The new student is perfect for learning environments. He or she enters the online classroom with personal experience, often from the discipline they are seeking a degree or certificate from. The facilitated learning environment is more powerful than the traditional classroom because it is authentic and enriched by the community it creates. All members, including the facilitators, are the participants (Hootstein, 2002).
The New Constructivism: Adding Social Value to Learning
The facilitated learning environment is ideal for they self-directed learner, who thrives on an advanced form of Constructivism. Constructivism is a learning phenomenon with its roots in cognitive psychology and behavior modification techniques. The learner combines what they are learning with what they already know to “construct” new knowledge. In this way, concepts and processes are built upon using the reinforcement of what has already been built (Huitt,2003).
The New Constructivism adds social process to the equation. Essentially, students tend to learn more from any source if a particular social value is assigned to the concept. Psychologist Albert Bandura first explored social (observational) learning. He theorized that children will modify their behavior based on what they observe from others(Huitt,2004). The premise of behavior modification using observation is this: If mind, behavior and environment play a role in learning then adding emotional value to learning improves it. These experiments supported the premise that learning is increased when combined with emotion.
In the facilitated learning environment, the social aspect is inevitable. It is most widely accepted as the ideal educational environment. With the students as the primary driving force for learning, combined with the feedback loop of learner, environment and instructor, everyone wins (Byers, 2002).
When the social learning environment is combined with the experienced adult learner, fellow students learn more. For example, not only do participants learn particular concepts, they receive concrete examples of the applications of these concepts. The wisdom and the culture, including the value system of the industry, can be transferred (Brown, 1989). For example, a psychologist instructor in a traditional classroom may be able to talk about her own experiences in a particular counseling process. In a discussion group of adult learners, several of them might be able to talk about a personal experience or relate a similar experience. They share anecdotes and discuss reading material. Because language and social intercourse is transferred, a certain amount of acculturation was delivered with the lesson. In social settings, meanings, value, symbolic exchanges and definitions are transferred (McClelland, 2000).
As instructors, we need to implement several strategies. First, we must recognize the value of culture and social interaction in the classroom. Not only does this provide a relaxed atmosphere, it increases the opportunity for learning. This social interaction creates a reflective environment. The reflective cycle: experience, planning, observing and reflecting encourages the self-motivated learner to retain what he or she has learned (McPartland, 2003). Second, allow students to teach the material. Allow students to become “experts” on a particular topic, and let them share with other students. This should be done in a collaborative small-group assignment. This is another means of creating a vested interest in the learning cycle. Additionally, this encourages the student led control of the subject matter of the class. Online students are free agents. Allowing them to assert their autonomy will only increase their participation level. Third, be responsive. Students expect their facilitator to resource information in the class. Timely, accurate and challenging responses are paramount.
Internet learning has changed the way educators do business. Although the learning facilitator cannot magically be expected to know how to deliver an online course effectively, the success rate with online facilitators is encouraging. It would be reasonable to say that we have not harnessed the full power of Internet education. It will be interesting to see what is around the corner.
References
Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). from teaching to learning — a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change Magazine, The Carnagie Foundadtion for the Advancemnt of Teaching, 27(6), 12-25.
BBC Learning, (n.d.). How we learn. Retrieved Oct. 27, 2005, from Tutors Guide to Teaching Adults Web site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/learning/returning/betterlearner/learningstyle/g_teaching_adults_01.shtml.
Brockett, R., & Hiemstra , R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning: perspectives on theory, research, and practice. 1st ed. New York: Routledge.
Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid P. (1989, January ). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 No. 1. Retrieved Oct 29, 2005, from http://www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/museumeducation/situated.html.
Byers, C. (2002, May ). Interactive assessment and course transformation using web-based tools. The Technology Source Archive, May/June. Retrieved Oct 29, 2005, from http://technologysource.org/article/interactive_assessment_and_course_transformation_using_webbased_tools/.
Castells, M. (1993). The informational economy and the new international division of labor. In M. Carnoy, M. Castells, S. S. Cohen, & F. H. Cardoso (Eds.), The new global economy in the information age: Reflections on our changing world (pp. 15-43). University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Cave, J., LaMaster , C.,White, S.(2004). Linc online. Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005, from Staff Development Adult Characteristics Web site: http://www-ed.fnal.gov/lincon/staff_adult.shtml.
Creighton, S., & Hudson, L. (2002). Participation trends and patterns in adult education: 1991 to 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Hootstein, E. (2002). Learning circuits. Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005, from E Learning 1.0 Web site: http://www.learningcircuits.org/astd/publications/learningcircuits/2002/oct2002/elearn.html.
Huitt, W. (2003). Constructivism. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved Oct. 28, 2005, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cogsys/construct.html
Huitt, W. (2004). Observational (social) learning: An overview. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved Oct. 28, 2005, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/soccog/soclrn..html.
Kerlin, B. (1992). Cognitive engagement style, self-regulated learning & cooperative learning. Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005, from Learning Technology Center Web site: http://www.ion.uillinois.edu/resources/tutorials/overview/elements.asp.
McClelland, K. (2000). symbolic interactionism. Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005, from Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology Web site: http://web.grinnell.edu/courses/soc/s00/soc111-01/IntroTheories/Symbolic.html.
McPartland, I. (2003). overview: what do you mean by reflective learning?. Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005, from Learning and Teaching Web Web site: http://cwis.livjm.ac.uk/lid/ltweb/ldu_14/annex1_02.htm.
Palloff, R. , and Pratt, K. (2002). Beyond the Looking Glass: What Faculty and Students Need to be Successful Online. In K. Rudestam, and Read, J. (Eds.), Handbook of Online Laerning (pp. 181-182). Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.
Riel , M. (1999). The future of technology and education: where are we heading?. Retrieved Oct. 27, 2005, from Pepperdine University Graduate School of Education and Psychology Web site: http://gsep.pepperdine.edu/~mriel/office/wt6/index.html.
University of Buffalo, (1997). Cognitive psychology homepage. Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005, from Metacognition: An Overview Web site: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/Metacog.htm.