Whichever way we look at it, over the last year we have seen a revolution in technology enhanced learning. No matter the context or content we had to switch to stop. Adapt or await. Await, that is, a return to normal, whatever that looks like. Globally and locally some contexts some managed this change, others did not.
One of my contexts is Laos (Lao PDR and for those who do not know it, the most delightful country wedged between its bigger neighbours – China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and Myanmar) from which I have been removed physically this past year, but not technically. I have consulted, zoomed, trouble-shooted and tried to understand how to help a country such as Laos, barely on the first (comparative) rung of access to technology make the leap that so many well-resourced settings have done. It is difficult. As Luckin et al stated…”There is nothing new about the suggestion that one should explore the educational context in which learning takes place in order to understand more about learning.’ But do we truly explore these contexts, different to our own? They have not been set up for success. But more on this in posts to come…
Closer to home, I am privileged to work in education across both University-based courses and post-graduate or workplace learning environments. Much switching to online has been an “urgency.” However, in the University context I am struck by the thought, incorporation of learning design or learning frameworks, consideration of synchronous vs asynchronous approaches which have gone into the planning or rethinking of what to do. How to educate? This, after all, is the role of academia – to inform, to provide evidence and under-pinning theory for our actions. But often in the medicine in the work place, the role of academia in education can be minimised. See one. Do one. Teach one?
I think it is time to pay attention.
I have been busy. We all have, reinventing ourselves. But in hospitals we are often grateful just to have kept education alive during the past year. Taking a tutorial, making it available by a video-conferencing tool and then available later for those who could not attend is a good start. But, perhaps it is time to help education thrive. So, the questions I ask myself:
Do the needs of doctors and training doctors actually lend themselves to asynchronous modes, a Community of Inquiry, with support and direction? A platform we can turn to when we have time? After all, scheduling education may not be achievable simply because the care of patients comes first. Yet, this what EBAs and other contextual structures demand.
If this is what is needed, how do we change a culture which is so entrenched? We in medicine are not always nimble. We are slow to move past apprentice models of ward rounds or teaching and learning. How do we suggest, or engage our community in a relatively novel idea which requires a rethink, even from our educators?
Would it ever succeed? In June 2020, as education clearly needed to turn online, our hospital education team discussed that the best way to teach junior doctors was not through lectures online (zoom-based doom) but via a flipped classroom approach via Teams which was new at the time – online material, followed by a forum for questions and an online Q&A . The response from trainees….none. Zoom tutorials with recordings became the norm….
So where to now?
I have began to reflect on our Ecology of Resources for a learner-centric view (http://learnergeneratedcontexts.pbworks.com/f/Ecology%2Bof%2BResources%2B08.pdf). What tools did our learner use then both for learning and for sharing? Did we push a technology tool which was unfamiliar? Perhaps we needed to spend more time acclimatizing our learners to both the tool and why we were taking that approach. What (if anything new) do our learners use now? We are thinking about using VandR mapping to understand this and integrate this knowledge in our own design or plan for learning. To be continued…
Hi Amy,
I look forward to your future posts on technology access and managing these differences in equity, particularly if you touch more on strategies used by nations like Laos where it is only just becoming a resource. There are no doubt students enrolled here that are disadvantaged due to varying socioeconomic factors, who have struggled with the switch to online learning, that would benefit from strategies put in place to improve access (I wonder how many we lost last year simply due to technology access issues that could have been mitigated?). The VIC government established a program for disadvantaged (primary and high) school students to access laptops and internet, so I wonder whether such a hardware program exists, or could exist, at the Uni? Or if IT recycled all their e-waste for such purposes! Technology is supposed to remove barriers, yet it also deepens the divide when even simple support structures aren’t in place.
The opportunity of being a learner in the age of online learning rather than a teacher is enlightening (email was a novelty when I started Uni – showing my age!). My small world problems in having tried to access the FOL subject on my phone while in the car waiting for my kids, and being frustrated in not being able to do certain things and interact with pages as I would have liked, brings access, and the lack of equity, somewhat abstractly into perspective.
As a teacher into Science subjects, I feel medicine, like science, is inherently grounded in a community of inquiry – both fields examine problematic situations. In fields where hands on experience/active learning is the key skill that graduates must walk away with, we too have struggled with a flipped classroom approach. We also miss conversations where thinking can be extended or corrected/redirected. And we have gotten little to no feedback from students. I have found very little literature that specifically addresses lab-based teaching, with or without digital tools, so in the absence of a solid research base, how does one decide which tools to use to support active learning not just a collaborative and research based CoI approach? Should everything we do be turned into a teaching experiment and publication? And what are the outputs we should measure to determine impact when we can not access practical skills f2f (only the theory)?
I also agree with your sentiments on pushing specific technology and feel that last year we jumped into the deep end (with no time to prepare) without considering two points. Firstly, in using a specific tool, are we accounting for different learner styles, i.e. have we selected the tool based on an understanding of our learner (style) demographics to know that it will be effective (though some question this: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01908/full), and secondly, are we actually imparting our own ideological presumptions by choosing one tool over another? BTW – I’m a visual learner!
Hi Alexandra – check out some of the literature that critiques the “Learning Style Myth”
Kirschner, P. A. (2017). Stop propagating the learning styles myth. Computers & Education, 106, 166-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.804395
Riener, C., & Willingham, D. (2010, 2010/08/30). The Myth of Learning Styles. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 42(5), 32-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2010.503139
Good problem identification Amy – hopefully #EDUC90970 stimulates some practical ways forward.
I think there is huge potential for health education through mobile learning – leveraging the accessibility of anywhere anytime learning and users own devices to bridge the digital divide. Here’s a few recent articles:
Naciri, A., Baba, M. A., Achbani, A., & Kharbach, A. (2020). Mobile learning in Higher education: Unavoidable alternative during COVID-19. Aquademia, 4(1), ep20016.
Kearney, M., Burden, K., & Schuck, S. (2020). Theorising and Implementing Mobile Learning. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8277-6
Kearney, M., Burden, K., & Schuck, S. (2020). Differentiating Mobile Learning Frameworks. In Theorising and Implementing Mobile Learning: Using the iPAC Framework to Inform Research and Teaching Practice (pp. 101-114). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8277-6_8
Cochrane, T. (2020). Designing authentic mobile learning. University of Melbourne. https://melbourne-cshe.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/3398201/designing-authentic-mobile-learning_final.pdf
Aguayo, C., Eames, C., & Cochrane, T. (2020, 03/09). A Framework for Mixed Reality Free-Choice, Self-Determined Learning [Journal]. Research in Learning Technology, 28(Mobile Mixed Reality – Themed Collection). https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2347
Stretton, T., Cochrane, T., & Narayan, V. (2018). Exploring Mobile Mixed Reality in Healthcare Higher Education: A Systematic Review [Journal]. Research in Learning Technology, 26, 2131. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v26.2131
Aguayo, C., Dañobeitia, C., Cochrane, T., Aiello, S., Cook, S., & Cuevas, A. (2018). Embodied reports in paramedicine mixed reality learning [Journal]. Research in Learning Technology, 26. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v26.2150
Pegrum, M. (2019). Teaching Lenses. In Mobile Lenses on Learning: Languages and Literacies on the Move (pp. 275-309). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1240-7_8
Thank you Amy – your comment below about Lao PDR has inspired me…
” from which I have been removed physically this past year, but not technically. I have consulted, zoomed, trouble-shooted and tried to understand how to help a country such as Laos, barely on the first (comparative) rung of access to technology make the leap that so many well-resourced settings have done”.
I too am removed physically from the location in which I have accepted a job as Associate Professor. I have offered to assist on line in any means possible, as I am unable to return whilst Covid is still a threat. I have suggested ways (through email) I can offer support, in writing curriculum, helping to instigate online learning platforms, supporting academic/teaching staff and providing online tutorials. But the only response that I get is that they do not yet have the infrastructure set up to enable this – so thanks, but no thanks. It is so disappointing! I have asked for unit content material to be sent to me, course structures etc so I can familiarise myself and offer advice. The lack of response is not about inadequate internet provision, I believe it is more to do with their unfamiliarity with how email and other communication platforms can be used to share information and clearly delegate responsibilities. I have often found that in these less developed contexts, unless you have set things up face to face, it is very difficult to set it up from a distance, which is not the case here in Australia. I began working for UniMelbourne mid 2020 and have never once met my colleagues or students face to face, let alone set foot on campus.
We still have a long way to go – but I’m interested to hear more about how you have managed to maintain your work with your colleagues in Laos.