the old patterns or models give way to the new, a paradigm shift has ... The dominant paradigm for teaching and learning in the twentieth century was the.
Keynote Address Presented at the VIII International Conference on Distance Education December 1-4, 1999 University of Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico
Paradigm Shift to Networked Learning in the New Millennium Charlotte N. Gunawardena, Ph.D. Associate Professor University of New Mexico, U.S.A.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the concept of a paradigm and paradigm shift, discuss the necessity for a new educational paradigm for the third millennium, and explore the paradigm shift to networked learning and its implications for educational and training organizations.
Paradigms What is a paradigm? Kuhn (1970) in his landmark book on intellectual history, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, described a paradigm as Òan accepted model or pattern.Ó (p. 23). Barker (1990) notes that paradigms are sets of rules and regulations that establish boundaries (similar to what a pattern does) and tell us how to be successful by solving problems within these boundaries. In his book, Kuhn was exploring how scientists changed their paradigms in scientific fields such as biology, chemistry, or physics. Kuhn found that paradigms act as filters that screen information or data coming into a scientistÕs mind. The information that agrees with the paradigms that the scientist already has in his or her mind is easily recognized and accepted. However when the new information or data did not match the expectations created by the scientistÕs paradigm, the scientists had a very hard time interpreting the new information. In some cases the scientist simply ignored the unexpected data, in others distorted the data until it fitted with the existing paradigms rather than acknowledge it as an exception to the rules. In some extreme cases the scientist was incapable of perceiving the unexpected data. Paradigms affect the way we perceive the world and make judgments and decisions. ÒIt is our paradigms, our rules and regulations, that keep us from successfully anticipating the future. We try to discover the future by looking for it through our old paradigms.Ó (Barker 1990, i). Often, when we run into new information that is beyond the boundaries of our paradigms, we will have difficulty perceiving it or understanding it.
So, how does a paradigm shift happen? ÒA paradigm shift is a revolutionary new way of thinking about old problems - a dramatic, collective change in our perceptionÓ (Barker, 1990). For example, the shift that occurred when we realized that the earth was round rather than flat. A paradigm shift usually happens when the old paradigms or the well accepted established rules fail to provide effective solutions to our problems. A new insight, a different way of looking at a problem, a new discovery provides perspectives which revolutionize our understanding. When the old patterns or models give way to the new, a paradigm shift has occurred. Barker observes that the paradigm shifter or the change agent is generally an outsider- a person who doesnÕt practice your paradigm. As a result they solve problems by coming up with a different set of rules and regulations. Barker (1990) notes that when a paradigm shift occurs, everyone goes back to zero. Your past guarantees nothing in the future if the rules change. Barker provides an example. Switzerland dominated the world of watchmaking in 1968. Today, Japan who had no marketshare in 1968 dominates the world in watchmaking. The Swiss were put back to zero by a paradigm shift - the quartz movement watch. The irony of this paradigm shift is that the quartz watch was invented by the Swiss themselves. However, when the researchers presented this new idea to Swiss watch manufacturers in 1967, they rejected it because it did not fit with their successful paradigm of watchmaking. The Swiss researchers displayed the watch to the world at the annual watch congress, and Texas Instruments of America and Seiko of Japan took one look at this new invention, and the rest is history. This story is not just about the Swiss, but about any organization that assumes that past success will continue in the future. If you are not careful, your successful past will block your vision to the future. This is why organizations, especially educational organizations must develop an openness to new ideas and a willingness to explore different ways of doing things.
The Need for a New Educational Paradigm The dominant paradigm for teaching and learning in the twentieth century was the traditional classroom model where the teacher was the center of the learning experience. The teacher was perceived as the fountain of knowledge, the specialist, who would impart his or her knowledge expertise to students. Even when distance education became a viable form of education, the emphasis was on imitating the well established traditional classroom paradigm using the new communication technologies. In the past ten years we have seen the shortcomings of the traditional classroom paradigm to meet the demands for education and training, especially the type of education current society needs. Barr (1994) notes that it is not possible to increase productivity in traditional educational institutions without a corresponding threat to quality. If colleges increase productivity by either increasing average class size or increasing faculty workloads, for example, there are serious negative consequences for educational quality. Nor would building new institutional
structures or redefining the curriculum solve the problem. A new perspective in meeting the demand for education and training is needed. The information revolution has made it necessary for us to re-examine our perspectives on teaching and learning and how we conduct the business of education. Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, and Turoff (1995) observes that Òone of the basic requirements for education in the twenty-first century will be to prepare students for participation in a knowledge-based economy in which knowledge will be the most critical resource for social and economic developmentÓ (p. 271). They note that current educational models, structures, and approaches are inadequate. Students need new and different information resources, skills, roles, and relationships. The traditional educational model, based primarily on the concept of a classroom where the teacher is in control, an island cut away from the outside environment and the world, will not generate competence in a knowledge society. For example, knowledge management is becoming an increasingly important skill which can only be taught by the use of networked learning. Harasim et al. emphasize that the concept of education is changing from one based on individualism and competition, to one in which teamwork and networking are valued, reflecting changes in society and the work force. The new information technologies exemplified in the tremendous growth of the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW) enable educators to transcend geographical distance and link isolated learners for an extended period of time. Delors et al. (1996) in the UNESCO report on Learning: The Treasure Within, note that the use of new technologies for distance education, already firmly established in many places, appears to be an avenue full of promise for every country in the world. The new technologies offer an unprecedented opportunity to satisfy an increasingly widespread and diversified demand, while maintaining quality. Delors et al. observe that students who have been underachievers in the conventional system reveal their talents better and are more motivated when the new technologies are used in the teaching process. ÒTaking these various advantages into account, the commission is therefore of the opinion that the use of the new technologies in education is a matter of financial, societal and political choice that should be central to the concerns of governments and international organizationsÓ (Delors et al. p. 173). At the door to the new millennium, if we examine education and training in various organizations in the West, we see a new paradigm emerging - the paradigm of Ònetworked learningÓ (Haughey and Anderson, 1998). The networked learning paradigm is being embraced both by traditional education institutions to enhance on-campus education and provide distance learning, as well as distance education institutions that teach entirely at a distance.
The Networked Learning Paradigm
One of the significant technological trends in the United States today is the convergence of technologies; the merging of audio, video, data, text and graphics in one pipeline. This enables the merging of multimedia and telecommunications as exemplified in the World Wide Web and the use of standards such as ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network). Simon Phipps (1999) of IBM Laboratories in the United Kingdom observed that this convergence is exemplified in three technological developments: JAVA which provides platform independence, TCP/IP protocol which provides hardware independence, and XML which provides software independence. These technological developments are the standards which industry will promote for future use in the WWW. Harasim et al (1995) observe that Ònetworking, the convergence and maturation of computing and telecommunications, has become a force for a new form of education, creating a paradigm shift: a change to a new model and set of expectations and rules for how to function successfully within a new learning environmentÓ (p. 271). Networked learning occurs when instructors and learners use computers connected to a network to exchange information, access online resources, and facilitate the teaching-learning process. Networked learning is predominantly based on Internet and WWW-based technologies and resources which include the following characteristics: ¥ e-mail, which provides the opportunity for private dialogue between an instructor and student, and between a student and student. ¥ Group computer conferencing, where a group of students and instructors who are geographically dispersed can be connected to engage in collaborative learning. ¥ Databases and resources worldwide ¥ Access to experts worldwide ¥ Multimedia instruction and resources that integrate audio, video, text, and graphic information ¥ Hypertext and hypermedia navigation that affords more learner control in selecting information ¥ Synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous (time-delayed) conversation. (Synchronous communication is possible through chat features and desktop videoconferencing, and asynchronous communication through time-independent computer conferencing) ¥ Shared workspace, where virtual teams can work on the same document ¥ Sharing files, uploading and downloading files when submitting assignments
¥ Permanent transcript of group interaction, information sharing and knowledge building that can be reviewed. ¥ Record of learner progress Networked learning environments use a combination of these features, along with other media such as print, textbooks, audiocassettes and videocassettes. Networked learning provides flexibility in space and time. The asynchronous or time-independent nature of computer conferencing provides the learner with two unique advantages only possible through networked learning; the opportunity for each member of the group to participate actively and the opportunity to reflect and research before responding to questions. It is hoped that the new features of networked learning will improve learning and social interaction. As we approach this new paradigm, it is critically important that we do not attempt to replicate the traditional face-to-face classroom in this learning environment, but build new teaching and learning formats employing the unique strengths of the media. It is also important for us to be mindful of the inherent principles underlying this paradigm shift.
The Paradigm Shift to Networked Learning The paradigm shift to networked learning means a new way of thinking about teaching and learning, and the teacher-learner relationship. This reconceptualization of education brings about change in the entire educational organization, and necessitates the establishment of new practices, policies and structures. Advances in Internet and WWW-based technologies now enable educators to link geographically isolated learners for extended periods of time. These advances have given impetus to the development of collaborative learning environments which have been difficult to facilitate with two-way interactive television technologies that dominated the distance education enterprise in the latter part of the twentieth century. The underlying premise of the networked learning paradigm is learner interdependence or the focus on collaborative or team learning. ÒNetworks are group communication environments that augment social connectivityÓ (Harasim et al. 1995). Collaborative learning facilitates the sharing of multiple perspectives and provides opportunities for learners to work together to solve problems, share information, conduct research and build knowledge through the process of social negotiation. Another important feature of networked learning is its ability to foster social interaction. Networks are social spaces where communities develop and where individuals form lasting friendships. It is this collaborative learning feature of network learning that distinguishes it from other distance education models.
The paradigm shift to networked learning is exemplified as a gradual process of change in the following continuums: 1. From teacher-centered to learner-centered 2. From behaviorist learning orientations to cognitive constructivist learning principles 3. From the learner as a passive recipient to the learner as an active participant 4. From an emphasis on content acquisition to the process of learning 5. From knowledge transmission and reproduction to problem solving and critical thinking 6. From individualistic and competitive environments to teamwork and network learning 7. From teacher as the knowledge expert to teacher as facilitator and coach. 8. From linear navigation of information to hypertext and hypermedia navigation 9. From a single medium to multimedia 10. From learning for a profession to lifelong learning 11. From local and national perspectives to global perspectives 12. From diploma mills to developing learning communities 13. From a single institution delivering programs to consortia or inter-institutional arrangements In the networked learning paradigm represented in Figure 1, the learner is central to the learning process and is in control of the learning experience.
Figure 1: Networked Learning
The learner is connected to several resources such as other learners both on, and off-campus, the library, and databases available through the Internet and WWW, and the connection is interactive with the learner constantly interacting with the resources and receiving feedback. The teacher is only one type of resource that the learner can access and the teacher's role would be that of a facilitator linking learners to other resources and providing adequate support to empower the learner to exercise control over the learning experience. In such a learner-centered instructional system, it is important to provide adequate human and non-human support systems to empower the learner to exercise control over the learning experience. Constructivist and social constructivist philosophy is the foundation for the design of learner-centered collaborative learning experiences. Learner - centered learning environments based on constructivist principles where the focus is on learner initiated inquiry and exploration are far more suitable for adult learners than the transmission model of learning which is based on the notion that learners are
empty vessels to be filled up with the teacherÕs knowledge. Constructivist learning environments focus on knowledge construction rather than reproduction, provide multiple perspectives and real world examples, encourage reflection, and support collaborative construction of knowledge through social negotiation (Jonassen, 1994). The individual learner is expected to take away his or her own meaning from the learning experience, and the instructor serves as a guide or facilitator in the learning process. Garrison (1993) observes that ÒTeaching is not the transmission of prescribed information --it is a process of facilitating the exploration and creation of meaning through collaboration.Ó Grant Wiggins (cited in Haughey and Anderson, 1998) identifies four characteristics of an active learning environment that can be facilitated by networked learning: ¥ a focus on problems or questions where learners must construct knowledge to achieve success ¥ the inclusion of tasks that are similar to real-world activities ¥ access to resources such as those used by professionals in the field ¥ the use of problems or issues that require a range of knowledge, judgment about the appropriate application of knowledge and skills in prioritizing, problem classification and developing solutions. Designing interaction, and moderating online active learning experiences require skills that a traditional teacher will have to develop. Gunawardena (1999) discusses the design of interaction in web-based courses, and Gunawardena (1998) provides guidelines for the roles of an online moderator which include: humanizing the online environment and creating a sense of community, promoting learning, and achieving group goals. Rather than replicating traditional education, networked learning must be designed capitalizing on the unique features of the learning environment. It is important to consider the capabilities of a multimedia environment and the shift in information processing from linear to hypertext and hypermedia navigation. Haughey and Anderson (1998) discuss five learning approaches that capitalize on the distributed nature of network-based learning: (1) resource-based learning utilizing navigational, search and retrieval skills, (2) intercultural activities exposing students to multiple perspectives, (3) wide-area data collection and research, (4) worldwide mentoring, and (5) multimedia computer-assisted learning. If the Internet and the WWW are to be used as versatile media for learning, then, careful attention must be paid to the design of interaction that can foster the negotiation of meaning, the validation of knowledge, and the construction of knowledge through social negotiation.
Collaboration online does not happen unless it is carefully designed and facilitated. Haughey and Anderson (1998) cite David Johnson and Roger Johnson who recommend including five essential elements when designing group activities. These are: (1) hold individuals accountable, (2) reward the groups, (3) encourage
group interdependence, (4) require group interaction, and (5) evaluate group functioning. A challenge, however, is the selection of appropriate methodologies for the evaluation of collaborative learning that occurs in online networks. A critical question we need to examine in our evaluation effort is: Was knowledge constructed through the process of social negotiation? Techniques for evaluating online collaborative learning are discussed in Gunawardena (1999), and Gunawardena, Lowe and Anderson, (1997). Instructional design models based on behaviorist principles that are used to design and develop instruction for traditional classes do not offer much guidance for the design of instructional strategies for networked learning environments. Instructional designs must address the complex interrelationships between the learning task, media attributes and the learner's cognitive processes. The design of interaction that facilitates adult learning and the evaluation of the learning experience that occurred as a result of that interaction has been a challenge to many networked learning designers. If distance learning is to promote a learnercentered approach, then, instructors and students need to be trained to develop such an approach in their classrooms. This would mean a move away from traditional instructor-directed, lecture-style classrooms to a collaborative style of learning "characterized less by instruction than by facilitation, less by teacher talk than by student talk" (Burge & Howard, 1990, p. 3).
Issues To Consider When Changing to a New Paradigm Changing to a new teaching learning paradigm means a change in institutional and organizational structures that support the current paradigm. This change will not be easy. There are entrenched systemic forces that support the current paradigm of traditional face-to-face classroom instruction as the only viable way of providing education. Institutional and professional cultures which support the traditional paradigm will not easily admit a new paradigm. In the U.S.A. funding formulas are based on student attendance and credit hour production. This is a powerful force that will constrain the development of new learning environments. Therefore, institutional policies will have to change in order to accommodate the new paradigm. This will be a long and slow process. Another critical issue that needs to be addressed by educational institutions as we move to networked learning is Intellectual Property Rights. If instructors and the university invest their efforts and resources in developing web-based networked learning courses, who owns them? The faculty member or the university? A policy that favors the university having sole rights to such courses, will discourage the faculty from developing networked learning. A related problem is copyright permission for the materials and resources that are used online. If an institution wishes to adopt the networked learning paradigm then it must consider carefully the faculty reward system, faculty retention, tenure and promotion. Designing and developing quality networked learning courses require a
tremendous time and resource investment on the part of the faculty member. This investment must be given proper recognition in the reward structure. It is equally important to provide faculty development programs to assist faculty in making the paradigm shift. Faculty who teach in traditional higher education institutions are not used to working in teams, using new technologies, or managing mediated learning at a distance. Institutions that plan to adopt networked learning must have a faculty development program in place and resources to assist faculty in making the paradigm shift. Harasim et al. (1995) note that network learning requires that cultural and organizational structures be developed to support collaboration and that faculty be taught how to design and implement network learning approaches. Quality control is another important issue that must be given due attention. Networked learning means the exposure of courses to a wide clientele. If an institution wants to maintain standards, and its reputation, then, quality must be ensured. Who will be responsible for assuring that quality? This question needs to be considered carefully. Networked learning as a new learning culture that is emerging in the 21st century. The adoption of a new paradigm means organizational change. As Barker (1990) reminded us, when a paradigm shift occurs, everyone goes back to zero. Past success does not guarantee success in the future if the rules change. Therefore, careful attention must be given to the ability of an organization to adopt and support a new paradigm.
References: Barker, J. A. (1990). Discovering the future: The business of paradigms. [Video & TrainerÕs Manual]. Burnsville, MN: Charthouse International Learning Corporation. Barr, R. B. (1994). A learning paradigm for colleges. CAIR 1994 Proceedings. Available WWW: . Burge, E. J. & Howard, J. L. (1990). Audio-conferencing in graduate education: A case study. The American Journal of Distance Education, 4(2), 3-13. Delors, et. al. (1996). Learning: The treasure within [Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century]. Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing. Garrison, D. R. (1993). A cognitive constructivist view of distance education: An analysis of teaching-learning assumptions. Distance Education, 14(2), 199-211. Gunawardena, C. N. (1998). Designing collaborative learning environments mediated by computer conferencing: Issues and challenges in the Asian sociocultural context. Indian Journal of Open Learning, 7(1), 105-124.
Gunawardena, C. N. (1999). The challenge of designing and evaluating ÒinteractionÓ in web-based distance education. Proceedings of the Webnet World Conference on the WWW and Internet, Honolulu, Hawaii, October 24-30, 1999. Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 395-429. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning Networks: A Field Guide to Teaching and Learning Online. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Haughey, M., & Anderson, T. (1998). Networked learning: The pedagogy of the Internet. Montreal, Canada: Cheneliere/McGraw-Hill. Jonassen, D. H. (April, 1994). Thinking technology: Toward a Constructivist design model. Educational Technology, pp. 34-37. Kuhn, T. S. ( 1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd. ed.). [International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, volume II, Number 2.] Chicago: University of Chicago press. Phipps, S. (1999). Escaping Entropy Death: Why the Web Works for Business. Keynote speech delivered at Webnet World Conference on the WWW and Internet, Honolulu, Hawaii, October 24-30, 1999.
