While reading Weller’s (2020) book on Ed Tech history, I found myself relating to my past experiences. I came across both validations and a surprise during my reflection.
During the late 1990s, I was a Bachelor of Education student pursuing my teaching degree in Business & Technology. The program was taught using a face-to-face delivery model. My technology courses focused on learning new software programs like Adobe, Corel, and Microsoft. Also, creating and maintaining a student-led Wikis seemed innovative at the time. As Weller (2020) identified, “Wikis encapsulated the promise of a dynamic, shared, and respectful space …” (p. 37). I was excited to take these technology courses and contribute to transforming the future of education.
Also, in the late 1990s, I enrolled in an out-of-province certificate program to Teach English as a Second Language (TESL). I received boxes containing the material for every TESL correspondence course by mail. In addition, the professor phoned me once a week to discuss the deliverables. Although the program was not online, I find it compelling that this method exhibited constructivism, where the professor acted as a “guide on the side” instead of a “sage on the stage” (King, 1993, as cited in Weller, 2020, p. 29). Moreover, I was surprised to learn from Weller (2020) that e-learning had already made headway by this timeframe (p. 43). I have struggled to express my shock upon discovering this news.
Initially, I was disappointed to reflect that I may have missed an e-learning opportunity for my TESL program. However, I am using the correspondence course experience to consider the lessons learned. For example, I now can personally attest to the importance of the “social role in learning” (Weller, 2020, p. 34). I look forward to learning more from Martin Weller. Stay tuned for further reflection in Part II.
Reference
Weller, M. (2020). 25 Years of Ed Tech. Athabasca University Press.
Jessica
Marni, thank you for not just reflecting on the readings but tying it back to your personal experiences. There were a few points in your blog that really got me thinking! I note in the first paragraph you pulled out the quote about wikis, which among other things identified them as a “respectful space”. While I share your excitement regarding the tool (it’s accessibility and many possible uses come to mind) I am not sure I agree with these spaces remaining respectful and that concern of respect and psychological safety has limited my use of wikis in the past. I wonder if you have any thoughts or perhaps best practices to share when it comes to wikis and the use of?
I am also very intrigued by your personal experience with education via correspondence as I have not had that opportunity myself. I love the ‘silver lining’ view you’re taking away – can I ask what you would change regarding a correspondence program if you could, or would you just avoid all together in the future? The way you described the program, constructivism theory was used – was this insufficient compared to blended learning opportunities? Do you think the ZPD was affected by less opportunities to interact with the instructor?
Sorry for all of the questions – you really piqued my interest 🙂
Marni
Hi Jessica,
Your questions are fantastic. I will start with the keyword ‘respectful.’ Interestingly, being respectful was not even raised with my classmates while working on our Wikis. I suppose we were naïve. There was an unspoken assumption that we would be respectful. Now that I have lived through tumultuous digital times, I roll my eyes. Flash forward twenty-five years, and many online learning books have guidelines. For example, Dabbagh et al. (2019) suggest protocols to “use proper etiquette including proper language and typing and be mindful and respectful” (p. 109). Creating course protocols and guidelines is still a best practice for contributions. I would be curious to know if anyone has other suggestions.
As for my correspondence program experience, my ZPD was unaffected by the limited interaction with the professor. I thrived academically in the program. In this case, the reason comes down to my intrinsic motivation to earn the TESL certification. I can relate to our learning on self-efficacy, where I empowered myself with the knowledge to overcome any challenges (Bandura, 1977). Constructivism was only applied regarding the professor being a facilitator, which was my first experience with this approach. My learning had always involved a teacher at center stage. For Part II, I will reflect on the additional essentials in constructivism that made the blended e-learning model a far more impactful educational experience for me years later in my academic journey.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Dabbagh, N., Marra, R. M., & Howland, J. L. (2019). Meaningful online learning: Integrating strategies, activities, and learning technologies for effective designs. NY: Routledge.