There is plenty of choice to be made in digital learning design. Educational technology can enable experimentation, learner autonomy, open networks, and resources. In tandem, institutional mechanisms can establish a framework of standards, a container for specific content, accreditation, and the labour required to create learning materials (Weller, 2020). Both openness and structure offer something of value in creating the conditions for learning to occur. One shifts greater agency toward the learner, while the other establishes structures for guiding and measuring learning. As a consultant, this is where I start. My role is to locate the productive boundary between openness and structure.

The more open, self-directed approaches associated with connectivism and rhizomatic learning align with my personal values of interdisciplinarity. These approaches embrace distributed knowledge, learner autonomy, and less predetermined structure, but Weller (2020) identifieD the uncertainty and participatory demands they can place on learners as challenges. Drawing on Kop (2011, as cited in Weller, 2020), Weller noted that connectivist learning requires learners to be “autonomous and confident” enough to learn independently without formal support structures. Learner autonomy cannot simply be assumed; learners must have, or develop, the skills needed to manage their own learning within a distributed environment.

This raises a consideration for learning design: the capacity to engage with the learning environment may itself be a prerequisite for learning. And learner responsibility may therefore need to be designed for. A learner cannot necessarily be expected to arrive with an understanding of how to manage their learning effectively, how to manage their attention, or which strategies support retention and application. The popularity of Coursera’s Learning How to Learn, which was ranked its most popular course of 2015 based on average daily enrollments, illustrates the demand for learning about learning itself (Coursera, 2015). Rather than simply placing responsibility on the learner, learning design can help learners develop the knowledge and strategies needed to take greater responsibility for their own learning.

I encounter these challenges in my current work where I might not know the capabilities of the learner. I can design opportunities for engagement, practice, recall, and application, but I cannot control whether those behaviours actually occur once the materials leave my hands. Too little structure may leave learners with insufficient guidance or evidence of learning, while too much structure may reduce autonomy and experimentation, the ingredients of meaning-making that digital environments can facilitate. My discernment can set the stage for development, but I cannot guarantee that learning will occur.

I see openness and structure as a balancing act, with learner identity holding them together. If learners develop a sense of themselves as learners and an awareness of how they learn, they may be better positioned to determine how much structure they need and what aspects of the learning journey are their responsibility, the trainer’s responsibility, and the responsibility of the learning context.

References

Coursera. (2015, December 23). The most popular courses of 2015. https://blog.coursera.org/the-most-popular-courses-of-2015/

Weller, M. (2020). 25 years of ed tech. Athabasca University Press. https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781771993050.01