The pedagogical dimension

To realize the potential of TEL it is essential that we rethink our pedagogy. Education is about ideas not facts. Moreover, students in higher education are not receiving the educational experiences they need to develop the critical and self-directed high education skills required for lifelong learning. The current passive-information- transfer approaches to higher education are contrasted with the interactive and constructive potential of TEL. (Garrison and Anderson, 2003)

Social constructivism has brought to light the importance of interaction - among learners and between tutors and learners - in attaining specific learning goals. More generally, it has revealed the impact that these interactions can have on cognitive and metacognitive processes, on the motivation to learn, on self-esteem and on the development of social belonging.

Several research studies and experiences have shown that learning results obtained in collaborative situations are markedly better than those obtained in competitive and individual situations (Bruffee, 1999; Collazos et al., 2004; Kreijns and Kirschner, 2004; Trentin, 2004), and that efforts to collaborate are more likely to lead to the development and employment of high-level thinking skills. The same can be said of NCL, whose pedagogical dimension is based on social constructivism.

In this chapter we will seek to gain a clearer understanding of the pedagogical dimension, first by positioning NCL in relation to major theories of learning, and then by exploring its inherent characteristics; the motives leading educators to adopt it and the factors that can lead to successful implementation; and the added value that NCL can bring to learning/teaching processes, provided appropriate conditions of applicability are present.

Learning theories and learning models

The overview of major learning theories and models presented here is intended simply to help (non-expert) readers follow the later discussion of NCL's pedagogical dimension, where different learning theories are touched upon.

Major learning theories

The evolution of learning theories over the decades has been marked by distinct stages that have been given tags like behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism and connectivism. These terms encapsulate different ways of conceiving and describing learning processes, and also provide a strong basis for understanding how learning can be supported by ICT.

Behaviourism

According to Skinner (1968), learning is based on a sequential process of stimulus, response and feedback. In the context of TEL, this is generally regarded as a 'transmissive' approach: learning material (stimulus) is delivered to learners, their responses are gathered and feedback is provided to consolidate learning. While the behaviourist model has fallen out of favour over the years, many current TEL systems actually embody a behaviourist approach. Indeed, the computer continues to prove itself an excellent support for distributing contents, gathering responses and providing feedback, particularly in training settings.

Cognitivism

Cognitivism 'opposes' behaviourist theories (Neisser, 1976) in that it considers the learner as an active subject, one who operates in the world not merely in response to stimuli but by developing mental capacities. Cognitivism regards the mind as a complex system that organises information by operating on available data, activating cognitive processes that are considered partly innate and partly developed through experience. In a certain sense, cognitivism treats the mind as a processor of information derived from the surrounding environment, as a complex system of rules that is independent of biological factors (organic/chemical brain functions) and social or cultural factors.

Constructivism

Bruner (1966), one of the leading supporters of constructivism, interprets learning as an active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts on the basis of their existing knowledge and experience. To activate and nurture this process, tutors/trainers need to encourage and stimulate learners' discovery of knowledge, thereby transforming the learner from a passive recipient of information into a proactive builder of personal knowledge. This calls on educators to provide learners with tools and resources suitable to their needs.

A sub-branch of this model is so-called social constructivism, which focuses on the social dimension of learning processes. This model stresses the importance of the cultural, language and environmental/relational context in which learning takes place. This is closely linked with Vygotsky's (1978) concept of the 'zone of proximal development' (ZPD), a cognitive zone in which the individual - with the support of an adult or more capable peer - becomes able to perform a task that s/he would otherwise be unable to complete. So the language-based social interaction entailed in the task leads to the acquisition of new cognitive tools that can later serve for solving similar tasks autonomously.

Connectivism (or network learning)

George Siemens (2005) proposed the theory of connectivism in response to his belief that earlier learning theories were no longer adequate, having been developed in eras when the impact of ICT on society was minimal. His intention was therefore to bring learning theories into the digital age, stressing the importance of ICT and the potential it offers for networked connectivity.

These are the eight principles of connectivist theory cited by Siemens (ibid.).

 Learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions.

 Learning is a process of connecting specialised nodes or information sources.

 Learning may reside in non-human appliances.

 The capacity to know more is more critical than is currently believed.

 Nurturing and maintaining connections are needed to facilitate continual learning.

 The ability to see connections between fields, ideas and concepts is a core skill.

 Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities.

 Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what to learn and the meaning of incoming information are seen through the lens of a shifting reality. While there is a right answer now, it may be wrong tomorrow due to alterations in the information climate affecting the decision.

Connectivism addresses the challenges that many corporations face in knowledge management activities. Knowledge that resides in a database needs to be connected with the right people in the right context in order to be classified as learning. Behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism do not attempt to address the challenges of organisational knowledge and transference (ibid.).

Learning models and NCL

Let's now examine how some of these theories, particularly social constructivism and connectivism, underpin the models of learning that are often cited in relation to NCL.

Situated learning

Lave and Wenger (1991) maintain that the learning process does not simply entail the individual's acquisition of knowledge, but implies social participation in the process itself. Accordingly, the situation and/or environment in which the learning is embedded has an enormous impact on what, how and how much is learned.

Other authors (Brown et al., 1989) cover the same ground, introducing the concept of cognitive apprenticeship. Traditional apprenticeship is enacted via four key strategies designed to support expert competencies (Collins et al., 1987): modelling - the apprentice observes and imitates the master, who demonstrates how the task is done; coaching - the master steps in continuously to help as necessary; scaffolding (Bruner et al., 1976) - the master provides support and input, sets up the task, etc.; and fading - the master gradually withdraws support, allowing the apprentice to gain increasing responsibility and autonomy.

What differentiates cognitive apprenticeship from more tradition forms of apprenticeship is the greater attention to the metacognitive dimension, to control elements and to variations in the context of application. Moreover, a number of alternative strategies are enacted, such as description (verbalising learning experience), reflection (discussing problems with an expert) and exploration (alternative ways of viewing and tackling problems).

Collaborative learning

This is clearly the learning model most closely related to NCL. Kaye (1992) identifies seven key elements that combine to define collaborative learning:

 learning is an intrinsically individual - not collective - undertaking but is nonetheless influenced by a number of external factors, including interpersonal and group...