Unraveling networked learning initiatives: an analytic framework

Networked learning happens naturally within the social systems of which we are all part. However, in certain circumstances individuals may want to actively take initiative to initiate interaction with others they are not yet regularly in exchange with. This may be the case when external influences and societal changes require innovation of existing practices. This paper proposes a framework with relevant dimensions providing insight into precipitated characteristics of designed as well as ‘fostered or grown’ networked learning initiatives. Networked learning initiatives are characterized as “goal-directed, interest-, or needs based activities of a group of (at least three) individuals that initiate interaction across the boundaries of their regular social systems”. The proposed framework is based on two existing research traditions, namely 'networked learning' and 'learning networks', comparing, integrating and building upon knowledge from both perspectives. We uncover some interesting differences between definitions, but also similarities in the way they describe what ‘networked’ means and how learning is conceptualized. We think it is productive to combine both research perspectives, since they both study the process of learning in networks extensively, albeit from different points of view, and their combination can provide valuable insights in networked learning initiatives. We uncover important features of networked learning initiatives, characterize actors and connections of which they are comprised and conditions which facilitate and support them. The resulting framework could be used both for analytic purposes and (partly) as a design framework. In this framework it is acknowledged that not all successful networks have the same characteristics: there is no standard ‘constellation’ of people, roles, rules, tools and artefacts, although there are indications that some network structures work better than others. Interactions of individuals can only be designed and fostered till a certain degree: the type of network and its ‘growth’ (e.g. in terms of the quantity of people involved, or the quality and relevance of co-created concepts, ideas, artefacts and solutions to its ‘inhabitants’) is in the hand of the people involved. Therefore, the framework consists of dimensions on a sliding scale. It introduces a structured and analytic way to look at the precipitation of networked learning initiatives: learning networks. Successive research on the application of this framework and feedback from the networked learning community is needed to further validate it’s usability and value to both research as well as practice.

Unraveling networked learning initiatives: an analytic framework

Networked learning happens naturally within the social systems of which we are all part. However, in certain circumstances individuals may want to actively take initiative to initiate interaction with others they are not yet regularly in exchange with. This may be the case when external influences and societal changes require innovation of existing practices. This paper proposes a framework with relevant dimensions providing insight into precipitated characteristics of designed as well as ‘fostered or grown’ networked learning initiatives. Networked learning initiatives are characterized as “goal-directed, interest-, or needs based activities of a group of (at least three) individuals that initiate interaction across the boundaries of their regular social systems”. The proposed framework is based on two existing research traditions, namely 'networked learning' and 'learning networks', comparing, integrating and building upon knowledge from both perspectives. We uncover some interesting differences between definitions, but also similarities in the way they describe what ‘networked’ means and how learning is conceptualized. We think it is productive to combine both research perspectives, since they both study the process of learning in networks extensively, albeit from different points of view, and their combination can provide valuable insights in networked learning initiatives. We uncover important features of networked learning initiatives, characterize actors and connections of which they are comprised and conditions which facilitate and support them. The resulting framework could be used both for analytic purposes and (partly) as a design framework. In this framework it is acknowledged that not all successful networks have the same characteristics: there is no standard ‘constellation’ of people, roles, rules, tools and artefacts, although there are indications that some network structures work better than others. Interactions of individuals can only be designed and fostered till a certain degree: the type of network and its ‘growth’ (e.g. in terms of the quantity of people involved, or the quality and relevance of co-created concepts, ideas, artefacts and solutions to its ‘inhabitants’) is in the hand of the people involved. Therefore, the framework consists of dimensions on a sliding scale. It introduces a structured and analytic way to look at the precipitation of networked learning initiatives: learning networks. Successive research on the application of this framework and feedback from the networked learning community is needed to further validate it’s usability and value to both research as well as practice.

Learning for self-regulation: Improving instructional benefits for pupils, teachers, parents, schools, and society at large

Compulsory education laws oblige primary and secondary schools to give each pupil positive encouragement in, for example, social, emotional, cognitive, creative, and ethical respects. This is a fairly smooth process for most pupils, but it is not as easy to achieve with others. A pattern of pupil, home or family, and school variables turns out to be responsible for a long-term process that may lead to a pupil’s dropping out of education. A systemic approach will do much to introduce more clarity into the diagnosis, potential reduction and possible prevention of some persistent educational problems that express themselves in related phenomena, for example low school motivation and achievement; forced underachievement of high ability pupils; concentration of bullying and violent behaviour in and around some types of classes and schools; and drop-out percentages that are relatively constant across time. Such problems have a negative effect on pupils, teachers, parents, schools, and society alike. In this address, I would therefore like to clarify some of the systemic causes and processes that we have identified between specific educational and pupil characteristics. Both theory and practice can assist in developing, implementing, and checking better learning methods and coaching procedures, particularly for pupils at risk. This development approach will take time and require co-ordination, but it will result in much better processes and outcomes than we are used to. First, I will diagnose some systemic aspects of education that do not seem to optimise the learning processes and school careers of some types of pupils in particular. Second, I will specify cognitive, social, motivational, and self-regulative aspects of learning tasks and relate corresponding learning processes to relevant instructional and wider educational contexts. I will elaborate these theoretical notions into an educational design with systemic instructional guidelines and multilevel procedures that may improve learning processes for different types of pupils. Internet-based Information and Communication Technology, or ICT, also plays a major role here. Third, I will report on concrete developments made in prototype research and trials. The development process concerns ICT-based differentiation of learning materials and procedures, and ICT-based strategies to improve pupil development and learning. Fourth, I will focus on the experience gained in primary and secondary educational practice with respect to implementation. We can learn much from such practical experience, in particular about the conditions for developing and implementing the necessary changes in and around schools. Finally, I will propose future research. As I hope to make clear, theory-based development and implementation research can join forces with systemic innovation and differentiated assessment in educational practice, to pave the way for optimal “learning for self-regulation” for pupils, teachers, parents, schools, and society at large.