CL is a broad concept that takes many forms and uses a range of technologies. Proponents describe it as an “approach,” a “model” or an “environment” united by common principles, which are implemented in slightly different ways, depending on whether the context is K-12 or higher education, and whether it is on a big or small scale. At its heart, CL has these attributes:
Personalised (interest powered)
CL centres on the learner and what is relevant to them, their world, interests, needs and goals. It is about using the unprecedented opportunity afforded by today’s technology to make connections that help open up opportunities and build interest-driven knowledge and experience. The disruptive notion within personalisation is that the learning pathway centres on the student and their experiences, rather than on progressions set up by an institution or school district.
Collaborative (Peer Supported)
Technology facilitates collaboration in ways not possible ten years ago, providing communication platforms for peers and mentors that breaks down geographic and economic barriers. While technology does assist, students ultimately need to develop the 21st century skills of creating and navigating their own social and professional collaborative networks so they can mobilise mentors, problem-solve, and rally support.
Academically-oriented
Importantly, CL must centre around meaningful subjects that require deep thinking, such as traditional academic or vocational subjects, civic engagement, or social responsibility. A subject such as Katy Perry fandom, although enthusiasts may be very connected via digital technology, does not qualify because it doesn’t ultimately advance economic or political outcomes.
Authentic
CL relies on learners working with each other, instructors, family, community, workplaces and mentors to make meaningful connections and solve authentic, real world problems. Relevant content and hands-on activities, which often involve engaging or creating with digital media, create a participatory, engaged learning environment.
Interconnected
CL involves exploiting the connections between a learner’s formal and informal learning experiences and their long-term goals in order to expose opportunities and tailor future learning experiences. CL requires a holistic, long-term view of a learner’s skills, experience and aspirations in order to plan for the future.
Equitable
CL is available to anyone, regardless of economics, educational, demographic or cultural background. Technology facilitates access to people and knowledge, while different ways of acquiring knowledge are recognised–both in terms of formal and informal learning experiences, and in learning styles. An emphasis on participation and active learning creates an environment in which more learners, not just those who are traditionally academically-inclined, can succeed. Badge systems are one way of recognising competency development that occurs in less-formal settings or in incremental stages.
Technology in CL
Connected learning uses technology to ensure equitable distribution of opportunity and to facilitate learning by sharing knowledge and building communities. Technology in CL may manifest as a central system that connects a learner’s prior education (both formal and informal) with their current learning and future goals. It may bring together educators from across the country to talk about how to deal with a timely current event, or perhaps it supports learners to make local connections in their area of interest and mobilise mentors. CL can happen in many environments, on a small or large scale, using just as many different products and technologies: from MOOCs to social media, from blogs to intelligent and adaptive learning management systems like Desire2Learn’s Degree Compass, and from school reform examples like NYC’s Quest to Learn to educational video games.
As I alluded to early on in this course ‘Plug and Play’ or ‘Off the Shelf’ access to ‘Just in Time’ learning-content fit my paradigm of the future in meeting the need for learning . It is a subset of CL that empowers the individual to chart their own course and subscribe to their own content. Networked CL can add value by opening new perspectives, but people need to have courage in their own convictions and be prepared to defend those without being intimidated by group or cultural norms.
I agree that authenticity and personalization are essential in true learning, but wonder about the need for collaboration or the need for academic focus. Collaboration is of course essential various circumstances, but should not be considered essential to CL.
I would argue that academic focus and authenticity can be incompatible. It is often the case that new graduates educated at university, when first on the job, can make some very impractical decisions based on theory not practise. The notion that academic reasoning makes for practical solutions is a stretch. Authenticity is much more dependable, in my opinion. So I vote yes for authenticity, and no for academically oriented.
CL for the purpose of educational certification on the other hand will probably require content prescription, academic orientation, interconnected participation and perhaps prescribed answers, but may lack authenticity.
I sense that the number of traditional teachers must still be very high across many, if not most, educational environments and institutions if so much of what we are presenting seems new and improved. Isn’t it obvious that CL and other educational innovations make sense? As teachers, do we not practice some or much of CL in some form or way? Are we still so driven by tradition?
I find it interesting that we want to change the landscape of education in many ways, yet we still teach about euro-centric traditional holidays, we are still teacher-centric, and we still teach content instead of students. Many, if not most, schooling systems are likely far behind the innovations of educational technologies and educational approaches/models like CL. In the end, there will always be proponents and opponents to change, which ultimately affect the students the most.
I really liked the Quest to Learn model and it’s great to see students getting excited about learning and having their work validated by their peers and others. As a parent I get excited when my kids want to tell me something that they just discovered and are extremely excited about, it makes me feel happy for them that they have had a taste of learning something new, hoping that they will continue to search for this throughout their lives. I guess this is where CL is going, allowing the students to search out their own learning without it coming directly from the teacher, because let’s face it, we don’t know everything.
How does CL fit into the curriculum outcomes, objectives and standardized tests of today, I’m not yet sure, but I agree that if these things do not change more students will get lost in the shuffle and not succeed.
I like the idea of validation for doing the work. We have an instructor this year who teaches in our Animal Health Technology program who went to using decals and stars that I remember getting for good work in school. The students’ response was unbelievable that when there wasn’t the recognition, they wondered why. It has been a very positive motivator and the marks have improved also.
Authentic learning contexts and problems are the heart of learning. How individually-centred those contexts and problems can be within education systems that require measurable outcomes seems to me to be where today’s discovery is focused.
Quest to Learn is a fabulous model of teaching and learning. Nothing can be disputed about the student engagement and value of individual student input to learning problems for authenticity of learning. However, the video doesn’t show how that model fits into either state curricula or the academic performance requirements of the cohort or school. What boundaries exist to the model?
Hi Jann, Thanks for your thoughts and for the question. Q2L is a public school in the US, just like any other, and thus has to meet Common Core State Standards (http://www.corestandards.org/). They have a standards-based integrated curriculum (http://q2l.org/curriculum), which includes college prep and internship programs starting in grade 8. Cheers, Jen