Advertisement

Variation in Students’ Perceptions of Others for Learning

  • Maria Cutajar
Chapter
Part of the Research in Networked Learning book series (RINL)

Abstract

This chapter presents a description of variation in students’ perceptions of human others as contributors to their networked learning experiences. This description attends to the considerable boundary crossing tacitly implied in an invitation to networked learning for students who are used to classroom-based lectures. This description of variation is the result of phenomenographic research which sought to understand different students’ perceptions as distinct simultaneously related. Students’ perceptions are constituted in terms of an open and inclusive hierarchical structure comprised of three qualitatively distinct ways of perceiving human others as contributors to learning in a formal networked learning environment. Distinct perceptions of other students and of teachers are proposed as in pairwise alignment. Perceptions are emphasised as fluid and situationally bound in practice. No less there is the suggestion that in deepening awareness students and teachers gravitate towards becoming teachers and learners for each other. This description may serve agents and actors of networked learning to positively assess their views, to acknowledge and accommodate diversity and to constructively work towards increasingly sophisticated ways of understanding and approaching learning with and through human others using networked technologies.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research work disclosed in this publication was partially funded by the Malta Government Scholarship Scheme.

I also acknowledge Professor Paul Ashwin for his supervision during the development of this research work.

References

  1. Åkerlind, G. S. (2005). Phenomenographic methods: A case illustration. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing developmental phenomenography. Melbourne/Sydney: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Boon, S., & Sinclair, C. (2012). Life behind the screen: Taking the academic online. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  3. Cutajar, M. (2014a). Qualitative differences in post-compulsory pre-university Maltese students’ accounts of their networked learning experiences. Ph.D, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.Google Scholar
  4. Cutajar, M. (2014b). Phenomenography for researching aspects of networked learning: beyond the match of underlying values and beliefs. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Networked Learning 2014, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  5. Cutajar, M. (2017). The student experience of learning using networked technologies: An emergent progression of expanding awareness. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(4), 485–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, J. (2014). Dimensions of identity and the student experience of networked learning. Paper presented at the Ninth International Conference on Networked Learning Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
  7. De Laat, M., & Lally, V. (2004a). Complexity, theory and praxis: Researching collaborative learning and tutoring processes in a networked learning community. Instructional Science, 31(1–2), 7–39.Google Scholar
  8. De Laat, M., & Lally, V. (2004b). It's not so easy: Researching the complexity of emergent participant roles and awareness in asynchronous networked learning discussions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFarmer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodyear, P., & Carvalho, L. (2014). Networked learning and learning networks. In L. Calvalho & P. Goodyear (Eds.), The architecture of productive learning networks. New York and Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Goodyear, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2010). Expanding conceptions of study, context and educational design. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, S. De Freitas, & G. Conole (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Goodyear, P., Jones, C., Asensio, M., Hodgson, V., & Steeples, C. (2005). Networked learning in higher education: Students’ expectations and experiences. Higher Education, 50(3), 473–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodyear, P., Banks, S., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (Eds.). (2010). Advances in research on networked learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Jones, C. (2015). Networked learning. Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jones, C. (2016). Experience and networked learning. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Networked Learning, Lancaster, UK.Google Scholar
  17. Jones, C., & Bloxham, S. (2001). Networked legal learning: An evaluation of the student learning experience. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 15(3), 317–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones, C., & Steeples, C. (2002). Perspectives and issues in networked learning. In C. Steeples & C. Jones (Eds.), Networked learning: Perspectives and issues. London: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  19. Jones, C. R., Ferreday, D., & Hodgson, V. (2008). Networked learning a relational approach: Weak and strong ties. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 90–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Khan, S. H. (2015). Emerging conceptions of ICT-enhanced teaching: Australian TAFE context. Instructional Science, 43(6), 683–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koole, M. (2012). A Social Constructionist Approach to Phenomenographic Analysis of Identity Positioning in Networked Learning. Paper presented at the Networked Learning 2012, Maastricht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  22. Krüger, S. (2006). Students’ Experiences of e-learning: a Virtual Ethnography into Blended Online Learning. Paper presented at the Networked Learning Conference 2006, Lancaster.Google Scholar
  23. Lameras, P., Levy, P., Paraskakis, I., & Webber, S. (2012). Blended university teaching using virtual learning environments: Conceptions and approaches. Instructional Science, 40(1), 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mann, S. (2010). A personal inquiry into an experience of adult learning online. In P. Goodyear, S. Banks, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Advances in research on networked learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography - A research approach investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21(2), 28–49.Google Scholar
  26. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. McConnell, D. (2000). Implementing computer supported cooperative learning (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  28. McConnell, D. (2006). E-learning groups and communities. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  29. 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. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Moon, J. A. (1999). Reflection in learning & professional development: Theory and practice. oxon: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  31. Nicolajsen, H. W. (2014). Changing the rules of the game: Using blogs for online discussions in higher education. In V. Hodgson, M. De Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), The design, experience and practice of networked learning. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  32. Ozturk, H. T., & Simsek, O. (2012). Of Conflict in Virtual Learning Communities in the Context of a Democratic Pedagogy: A paradox or sophism? Paper presented at the 8th International Conference of Networked Learning, Maastricht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  33. Ryberg, T., & Sinclair, C. (2016). The relationships between policy, boundaries and research in networked learning. In T. Ryberg, C. Sinclair, S. Bayne, & M. de Laat (Eds.), Research, boundaries, and policy in networked learning. Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ryberg, T., Buus, L., & Georgsen, M. (2012). Differences in understandings of networked learning theory: Connectivity or collaboration? In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  35. Salmon, G. (2004). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online (2nd ed.). Oxon: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  36. Shah, U. (2014). Teacher's use of learning Technology in a South Asian Context. In V. Hodgson, M. De Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), The design, experience and practice of networked learning. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computing & IT (Junior College)University of MaltaMsidaMalta

Personalised recommendations