Global Citizenship Vol 2 Issue 2 V4 FA - Centennial College

Articles and Paper ContributionsAndragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in theGlobal Classroom: Heutagogy and ParagogyBy: Dr. Marilyn Herie PhD RSWChair, Community Services, Centennial CollegeAssistant Professor (Status Only)Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social WorkUniversity of TorontoDr. Marilyn Herie is the Chair of Community Services in the School ofCommunity and Health Studies at Centennial College, and Assistant Professor(Status Only), University of Toronto Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, whereshe has taught an online, graduate course on addictions treatment for over 10years. She joined Centennial College in February 2013 after working at the Centrefor Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) in a variety of clinical and educationleadership roles. Dr. Herie’s areas of interest include e-learning and classroomteaching, curriculum and program development, motivational interviewing andhealth behaviour change, education research and evaluation, social media andinterprofessional education. She has a PhD in Social Work from the UniversityWhether implicit or explicit, everyone hasa theory of teaching and learning. This getsexpressed and enacted by how we engagewith others, whether as instructor orstudent. Traditional theoretical frameworkscan be broadly grouped into four domains:instructivism, critical theory, constructivistapproaches and andragogy (or adultlearning). However Web 2.0, characterizedby many-to-many, decentred and nonlinear networking and communication,has given rise to corresponding advancesin conceptualizing teaching and learningin the global classroom. This articlebriefly outlines mainstream theories andthen presents emerging frameworks –heutagogy (learning as self-determinedand non-linear) and paragogy (peer-to-peerand decentred learning) – with implicationsfor practice in the 21st Century classroom.Instructivist ApproachesInstructivism as a standard approachto teaching emerged from positivist andpost-positivist paradigms. Characterizedby the traditional “chalk and talk” style,instructivist pedagogy is premised on atransmission model of learning. In thisview, knowledge is installed as opposed toevoked. Learning outcomes and curriculaare pre-determined and delivered in aprimarily didactic fashion. Further, the8of Toronto, and blogs about education and teaching related topics at www.educateria.com.same information is provided to all learnersregardless of their pre-existing knowledgeand skills.Despitenumerouscritiquesofinstructivism, this approach has beenremarkably enduring in higher education(Herie, 2005). “Modern” classrooms havenot much altered over the last century withthe exception of technological innovations.Consider the seating arrangements in arestaurant or other social space: the contextis designed to maximize social engagementand communication. Now contrast this withthe design of the majority of secondaryand post-secondary classrooms: we enterand are immediately oriented towards the“front of the room”. This is recognizableby a podium or lectern, whiteboard orblackboard, and a projection screen.Seating is typically in parallel rows withthe collective gaze focused on the teacher.Although newer classrooms have tablesand chairs that can easily be reconfigured,the “default” arrangement is generallylecture style.In addition, the introduction of slidewarehas done much to reinforce instructivistpedagogy. The almost ubiquitous use ofPowerPoint has, in some ways, servedto rigidify knowledge communication.Edward Tufte, a Yale University ProfessorEmeritus and visionary in informationdesign and data visualization, wrote aninfluential essay, posted online, pointing tothe use of PowerPoint slide decks in NASAengineering briefings as a contributingfactor in the 2003 Columbia space shuttledisaster (Tufte, 2003). In their report, theColumbia Accident Investigation Boardconcluded that “the distinct cognitive styleof PowerPoint reinforced the hierarchicalfiltering and biases of the NASAbureaucracy during the crucial period whenthe Columbia was injured but still alive”(Tufte, 2003, p.10). Templates that structureinformation into bullet points can obscurenuance and interrelationships within andbetween knowledge domains.Finally, regardless of what contentis taught and how essential it may be,learning is 100% volitional. It is only thelearner who determines for him or herselfwhat gets integrated into individualepistemologies (ways of knowing). Thetitle of a book published over 40 years ago,

Nobody can teach anyone anything (Wees,1971) captures the foundational critiqueof an instructivist ideology: we can controlwhat is taught, but not what is learned.Therefore, alternative teaching andlearning frameworks marking a departurefrom instructivism have begun to reshapeteaching practices.Constructivist ParadigmConstructivism describes a range ofteaching/learning approaches which haveat their centre two main principles:1. Learning is a process rather than anevent, in which learners construct (versusacquire) new knowledge and skills;2. Teaching involves supporting thatconstruction, as opposed to didactic,lecture-based imparting of informationor knowledge (Herie, 2005).Constructivism marks a shift from teachercentred to student-centred learning,deemphasizing informing (memorizingfacts) in favour of transforming: locating,critiquing and synthesizing knowledgein a culture of collaboration and sharing.Curriculum development is based on studentquery, which acknowledges that studentslearn more by formulating questions thanby answering them. In this model, studentsare asked to critically engage with coursematerial by posing questions that furthergroup reflection and debate.The constructivist paradigm regardsknowledge as socially constructed viaauthentic learner experiences designed tostimulate discovery and mastery. Considerthe complex challenge of learning to ridea bicycle: a front-of-the-room discourseon the biodynamics of the humanvehicle system, no matter how eloquentlydelivered, has little impact on learningoutcomes. It is only through application –getting on the bike, repeatedly falling, andfinally riding – that mastery occurs.Constructiviststrategiesincludereciprocal teaching and case-basedlearning, where the instructor’s role is oneof coach or guide and learners activelyco-construct knowledge. For example,in health care education, case-basedsimulations stimulate applied learning viapeer-to-peer collaborative interaction.The focus is on authenticity, relevanceand collaboration, leading to scaffoldedmastery of context-relevant knowledge andskills. In recent years, medical education hasseen a radical re-conceptualization in linewith constructivist theory, casting learningas a transformative process as opposed to astatic outcome (Frenk et al., 2010).It should be noted that constructivistteaching, though widely supported, is notalways successfully implemented in practice.In their review of five representative,published articles describing constructivistteaching methodologies, Baviskar andcolleagues (2009) examined alignmentalong four key indicators for constructivism:1. Evoking prior knowledge/assumptions;2. Facilitating cognitive dissonance inlearners;3. Supporting application of newknowledge with feedback; and4. Eliciting reflection on learning.The authors found that constructivistapproaches were not uniformly applied, andthis has been supported in other researchas well (Gordon, 2009). This suggests thatat least some of what is presented asconstructivist teaching may be, at best,“constructivist-informed”, hybridized withtraditional instructivist approaches.Critical PedagogyCritical pedagogy articulates howoppressive power structures operatingin the wider society are replicated ineducational institutions and classrooms.Based largely on the work of Paulo Freire([1970] 2006), and drawing from Marxisttheory, anarchism, feminism, and radicaldemocracy, learning is contextualizedwithin a broader interrogation of powerdynamics in the classroom. Criticalpedagogy can be framed as an explicitlypost-modern approach, acknowledging thecultural embeddedness of learning (hooks,1994). All learning is understood as contextdependent, and different ways of knowingare acknowledged and valued. Thesemight include story-telling and teachingsby indigenous Elders and from indigenousand non-indigenous learners (Connollyet al., 2011), leading to conscientization,or critical awareness and decolonization(Freire, 2006). This is not easy to put intopractice when disciplinary and professionalknowledge domains privilege certain waysof knowing over others (for example,deductive versus inferential reasoningbased on the scientific method) ches can be challenging toimplement in institutions that are, bydefinition, hierarchical. Faculty have theauthority and the obligation to assignstudent grades, and in many cases aremandated to deliver curricula alignedto pre-determined learning outcomes.Students too can face challenges whencritical approaches are integrated intoclassrooms. Laura Béres (2008) reflects onthe discomfort experienced by students ina social work class when they are asked toassume equal responsibility for curricularcontent and knowledge generation:Although my interactions with studentsin the classroom were motivated by awish to engage with them from a positionof “not-knowing,” which honored theirknowledge, I believe that th

Volume 2, Issue 2 — Global Citizen Digest Introduction The Global Citizen Digest is a site for the college community to share and explore aspects of being a global citizen. We invite articles that will inform and broaden our understanding of the following themes: Global knowledge Understanding the interconnectedness of our world