Knowledge is happening

In a world with an ever increasing amount of learners' access to information through various forms of technology it has become prudent to ascertain the potential of technology-mediated self-directed/distance learning. Can one attribute a standard to this type of learning? How exactly can one learn in such an environment? Has it been done and to what extent was it a success? To find clarity of these questions I shall draw from Hamilton (2014) and the Independent Project (2011)

Various organisations such as the International Society for Technology in Education, maintain that ICT must have specific standards in order to function. Hamilton sees these standards as “designed to systematically oppress students required to adhere to them”. This makes sense as once anything becomes standardised it creates a limit for itself, it kills creativity and exploration in new directions.

We as pedagogues strive for the very qualities oppressed through standardisation. The idea of making a tool rigid robs it of many, perhaps, undiscovered qualities. This is why there is need for an environment which is both constructive and open to redefinition.

The Independent Project created such a space. It is a space where the learners are able, through group and self-directed learning, to explore the world and find new ways to make learning engaging. The learners are able to do become the creators of knowledge rather than the ‘empty vessels’ which knowledge is dumped into. This flipped sense of teaching destroys the oppressive standards of learning once thought to be the only way. The Independent Project is thus an example of how technology-mediated self-directed/distance learning can be possible. 

At the heart of ICT literacy is the issue of communication. In order for something like the Independent Project (IP) to be successful is the learners’ ability to communicate through various forms of technology. Effective communication creates a positive learning environment. In the IP the learners had access to the baseline technologies they needed for their communication and learning. The idea of access is, however, much more complex than it would appear. It is not simply a ‘yes’ ‘no’ issue. Adam Banks speaks of the material access to technology but also considers functional access, experiential access, and critical access. These four types of access are important in considering the potential of technology-mediated self-directed/distance learning. Will it be possible for learners from different levels of access be able to communicate in a manner conducive to learning?

Bali and Sharma say that we should not try and create a utopic environment of education; rather we must strive to create the best possible environment for communication and learning. Bernado Trejos sees the gap of communication as a “fertile ground from which teaching can grow”. Knowledge can thus be said to be the product of making meaning with rather than making knowledge through. In other words knowledge is not something that can be standardised. It needs to be lived, knowledge is happening. It is active not passive.

By giving learners the chance to live their knowledge they become active rather than passive. The potential of technology-mediated self-directed/distance learning is thus almost endless. It is an environment where creativity takes place, a place of engagement. Like the IP, the learners become active learners who are able to manipulate and share the way knowledge is lived, causing an ever expanding world of knowledge.