Abstract
In this last chapter, we reflect on the issues taken up in the nine chapters forming the body of the book and how they relate to the trends identified in the introductory chapter as well as how they combine to characterize the field of Networked Learning today and on from here. We start with a short presentation of each of the chapters. This leads us to identify broader themes which point out significant perspectives and challenges for future research and practice. Among these are social justice, criticality, mobility, new forms of openness and learning in the public arena (all leading themes at the next Networked Learning Conference in 2018), differences between participants and in participant experiences, learning analytics and different understandings of Networked Learning.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
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.
Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.
Arnold, K. E., & Sclater, N. (2017). Student perceptions of their privacy in leaning analytics applications. In Proceedings of the seventh international learning analytics & knowledge conference (pp. 66–69). ACM.
Bayne, S. (2016). Campus codespaces for networked learners. Keynote given at the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016.
Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2016). Manifesto Redux: Making a teaching philosophy from networked learning research. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 120–128). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Beetham, H. (2015, April). What is blended learning? Seminar presentation, Bristol UK. BIS. (2013). Literature Review of Massive Open Online Courses and Other Forms of Online Distance Learning.
Beetham, H. (2016). Employability and the digital future of work. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 47–55). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Beetham, H., Czerniewicz, L., Jones, C., Lally, V., Perrotta, C., & Sclater, M. (2016). Challenges to social justice and collective wellbeing in a globalised education system. Symposium at the International Conference on Networked Learning 2016.
Bell, F. (2016). (Dis)connective practice in heterotopic spaces for networked and connected learning. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 67–75). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Brett, C., Lee, K., & Öztok, M. (2016). Socialization and social capital in online doctoral programs. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 264–268). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Carvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (Eds.). (2014). The architecture of productive learning networks. New York: Routledge.
Carvalho, L., Goodyear, P., & De Laat, M. (Eds.). (2017). Place-based spaces for networked learning. New York: Routledge.
Czerniewicz, L., Glover, M., Deacon, A., & Walji, S. (2016). MOOCs, openness and changing educator practices: An activity theory case study. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 287–294). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Dalsgaard, C., & Thestrup, K. (2015). Dimensions of openness: Beyond the course as an open format in online education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6), 78–97. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2146
Davis, J. (2016). Networked learning: An opportunity to enhance the learning opportunities for students with high functioning autism or Asperger’s syndrome? In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 507–515). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
De Laat, M. (2012). Enabling professional development networks: How connected are you? Heerlen: LOOK, Open Universteit of the Netherlands.
Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (Eds.). (2012). Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning. New York: Springer.
Dohn, N. B. (2014). Implications for networked learning of the ‘practice’ side of social practice theories – A tacit-knowledge perspective. In V. Hodgson, M. de Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), The design, experience and practice of networked learning (pp. 29–49). Dordrecht: Springer.
Duin, A. H. (2016). Designs for networked learning: Using personal learning networks to build intercultural competence. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016. Lancaster: Lancaster University.
E-Quality Network (2002). E-quality in e-learning Manifesto. Paper presented at the Networked Learning Conference, Sheffield, UK. Retrieved from http://csalt.lancs.ac.uk/esrc/
Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-network theory in education. London: Routledge.
Ferguson, R., & Clow, D. (2017). Where is the evidence? A call to action for learning analytics. In Proceedings of the seventh international learning analytics & knowledge conference (pp. 56–65). ACM.
Fox, S. (2002). Studying networked learning: Some implications from socially situated learning theory and actor network theory. In C. Steeples & C. Jones (Eds.), Networked learning: Perspectives and issues (pp. 77–91). London: Springer.
Fox, S. (2005). An actor-network critique of community in higher education: Implications for networked learning. Studies in Higher Education, 30(1), 95–110.
Goodyear, P., Banks, S., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (Eds.). (2004). Advances in research on networked learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Goodyear, P., Carvalho, L., & Dohn, N. B. (2014). Design for networked learning: Framing relations between participants’ activities and the physical setting. In S. Bayne, C. Jones, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & C. Sinclair (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on networked learning 2014 (pp. 137–144). Edinburgh University.
Hanif, H., & Hammond, M. (2016). Why and how do members provide help for others within online communities? In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 385–389). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. Internet and Higher Education, 3(1), 41–61.
Haythornthwaite, C. (2016). New metaphors for networked learning. Keynote given at the 10th International Conference on Networked Learning 2016.
Haythornthwaite, C. (2017). An information policy perspective on learning analytics. In Proceedings of the seventh international learning analytics & knowledge conference (pp. 253–256). ACM.
Hodgson, V., & Reynolds, M. (2005). Consensus, difference and “multiple communities” in networked learning. Studies in Higher Education, 30(1), 11–24.
Hodgson, V., De Laat, M., McConnell, D., & Ryberg, T. (2014a). Researching design, experience and practice of networked learning: An overview. In V. Hodgson, M. de Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), The design, experience and practice of networked learning (pp. 1–26). New York: Springer.
Hodgson, V., De Laat, M., McConnell, D., & Ryberg, T. (Eds.). (2014b). The design, experience and practice of networked learning. New York: Springer.
Hoel, T., Griffiths, D., & Chen, W. (2017). The influence of data protection and privacy frameworks on the design of learning analytics systems. In Proceedings of the seventh international learning analytics & knowledge conference (pp. 243–252). ACM.
Hytten, K., & Bettez, S. C. (2011). Understanding education for social justice. Educational Foundations, 25(1–2), 7–24.
Ingold, T. (2011). Prologue: Anthropology comes to life. In Being alive: Essays on movement, knowledge and description (pp. 3–14). Abington: Routledge.
Jandric, P., & Boras, D. (Eds.). (2015). Critical learning in digital networks. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
Jansen, F. (2015). MOOCs for opening up education and the OpenupEd initiative. In C. J. Bonk, M. M. Lee, T. C. Reeves, & T. H. Reynolds (Eds.), MOOCs and open education around the world. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://eadtu.eu/documents/Publications/OEenM/OpenupEd_-_MOOCs_for_opening_up_education.pdf.
Jones, C. (2015). Networked learning – an educational paradigm for the age of digital networks. Cham: Springer.
Jones, C., Ryberg, T., & De Laat, M. (2015). Networked learning. In M. Peters (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory (pp. 1–6). Singapore: Springer.
Jordan, K. (2016). Academics’ online connections: Characterising the structure of personal networks on academic social networking sites and Twitter. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 414–421). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Konnerup, U., Castro, M. D., & Bygholm, A. (2016). Rehabilitation of people with a brain injury through the lens of networked learning. Identity formation in distributed virtual environments. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 532–539). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Koseoglu, S. (2016). Third spaces of learning in open courses: Findings from an interpretive case study. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 299–303). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Latour, B. (1997). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society (7. Print. ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, C. Jones, M. De Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th international conference on networked learning 2010 (pp. 266–274). Aalborg: Aalborg University.
McArthur, J. (2013). Rethinking knowledge within higher education: Adorno and social justice. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G., & Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC model for digital practice. Retrieved from https://oerknowledgecloud.org/sites/oerknowledgecloud.org/files/MOOC_Final.pdf
McConnell, D., Hodgson, V., & Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (2012). Networked learning: A brief history and new trends. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning (pp. 3–24). New York, NY: Springer.
Ozturk, T. H., & Hodgson, V. (2017). Developing a model of conflict in virtual learning communities in the context of a democratic pedagogy. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(1), 23–42.
Perotta, C. (2016). The social life of data clusters: The potential of sociomaterial analysis in the critical study of educational technology. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 32–37). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Pilkington, R. M., & Guldberg, K. (2009). Conditions for productive networked learning among professionals and carers: The WebAutism case study. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, C. Jones, & B. Lindström (Eds.), Analysing networked learning practices in higher education and continuing professional development (pp. 63–83). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2014). Networked. The new social operating system. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Paperback Ed.
Raistrick, C. (2016). Discursive psychology as a methodology to explore how multiculturalism affects use of learning technologies. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 499–506). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Rawls, J., & Kelly, E. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Reynolds, M, Sclater, M., & Tickner, S. (2004). A critique of participative discourses adopted in networked learning. Symposium at the International Conference on Networked Learning 2004. Retrieved from http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/past/nlc2004/proceedings/symposia/symposium10/reynolds_et_al.htm
Ryberg, T., Sinclair, C., Bayne, S., & De Laat, M. (2016). Research, boundaries, and policy in networked learning. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Ryberg, T., Davidsen, J., & Hodgson, V. (2016a). Problem and project based learning in hybrid spaces: Nomads and artisans. In S. Cranmer, N. Bonderup-Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 200–209). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Savin-Baden, M., & Tombs, G. (2016). The glow of unwork= issues of portrayal in networked learning research. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 449–455). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Sclater, M., & Lally, V. (2016). Critical TEL: The importance of theory and theorisation. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 56–64). Lancaster University.
Selwyn, N. (2014). Distrusting educational technology: Critical questions for changing times. New York/London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Shum, S. B., & Ferguson, R. (2012). Social learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 15(3), 3.
Söderback, J., Hrastinski, S., & Öberg, L. M. (2016). Using distributed scrum for supporting an online community - a qualitative descriptive study of students’ perceptions. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 397–404). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Tarek, S. A. (2016). Why ‘one size fits all’ concept and policies of inclusive education is insufficient to achieve ‘true’ inclusivity in a national context. Insight from a tablet based disaster preparedness training programme administered in Bangladesh. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 134–141). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Tsai, Y. S., & Gasevic, D. (2017). Learning analytics in higher education – challenges and policies: A review of eight learning analytics policies. In Proceedings of the seventh international learning analytics & knowledge conference (pp. 233–242). ACM.
Van den Beemt, A., & Vrieling, E. (2016). Dimensions of social learning in teacher education: An exemplary case study. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 376–384). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wright, S., & Parchoma, G. (2014). Mobile learning and immutable mobiles: Using iPhones to support informal learning in craft brewing. In V. Hodgson, M. de Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), The design, experience and practice of networked learning (pp. 241–261). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Zander, P., Choeda, C., Penjor, T., & Kinley, K. (2016). Gross national happiness in the context of networked learning. In S. Cranmer, N. B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, & J. A. Sime (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on networked learning 2016 (pp. 159–166). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dohn, N.B., Sime, JA., Cranmer, S., Ryberg, T., de Laat, M. (2018). Reflections and Challenges in Networked Learning. In: Bonderup Dohn, N., Cranmer, S., Sime, JA., de Laat, M., Ryberg, T. (eds) Networked Learning. Research in Networked Learning. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74857-3_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74857-3_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74856-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74857-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)