Has the rise in portability and accessibility to large bodies of educational knowledge helped or hindered the development of educational systems? I think this is a good question and I will try to address it (in my fragmented way) below.
While reading through Willinsky’s 2002 article titled: Democracy and Education: The Missing Link May Be Ours I couldn’t help thinking of the very premise he is discussing, which in my opinion was whether giving people access to knowledge brings us closer to Dewey’s vision “to enable individuals to continue their own education” (Dewey, 1916)? I couldn’t help but put what I was reading in my current context as an educator overseas in a non-democratic system. As a teacher in this system I have seen first-hand that access to knowledge isn’t always a positive if used in an improper way or interpreted to fit the needs of the individual. I have seen research used out of context to further an agenda, or justify a poorly thought out educational intervention. The person seemingly had access to the information, due to the internet and PDF copies of the research but did not actually read the entire article and only selected “snapshots” to justify what they wanted to get done.
Willinsky’s vision of people accessing research more freely is indeed coming into play, but is the information available to everyone? I know when I use a google scholar (not using my UBC credentials) search on various research interests I am met with abstracts of research, but to gain access to the entire document I must pay. Alternatively, if I use my UBC CWL account and do the same searches, I gain complete access to full text and can even download it to my computer. Which makes me think that Willinsky’s vision (Public Knowledge Project) has not completely come to pass. Maybe the ignorance shown in my scenario above is simply due to the fact the person could only get the “abstract” of the research but did not have access to the entire document. This brings up a very interesting question, whether access to a snippet of information is better than no access at all. I believe these scholarly sites provide the abstract to entire people to purchase access to it, but if the individual accessing the abstract has no intention to purchase and is just seeking justification and references, was it a good idea to give them access to that abstract? In any case Willinsky’s passion for allowing the public to consume knowledge is admirable but 20 years later it is still a work in progress.
The last thing I will touch on is whether the education system has given students what they need to be self-guided learners. I unfortunately have not been a member of a democratic education system for well over 25 years. I remember when I was a child we were led like sheep to listen to the teacher, take notes and do what we were told. When I reached University, I can honestly say I did have to take more ownership of my own learning, but that is only due to how horrible the professors were. It was obvious their passion lied in research, other than educating. Now when I returned to school to pursue my Bachelors of Education there was an intense focus on being that self-directed learner, then completing some Additional Qualification courses online where you have no choice but to direct your own learning. All that culminating in the MET program where (in my opinion) the professors are here to give us some information but guide us to make our own conclusions and seek our own learning opportunities. So, to sum that rather long explanation I do not think the Education system has been successful in producing Dewey’s vision even though the access to the information is out there and rather easy to get access to.
Now to directly answer the question I stated initially I would have to say that the access to the information has progressed but the system has not. One hundred plus years have passed and we are truly in an information age, but I still believe the system itself needs a lot of work to truly produce citizens that can direct and continue their own education.
References
Willinsky, J. (2002). Democracy and education: The missing link may be ours. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 367. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/212256317
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.
NathanLott
May 27, 2018 — 5:55 pm
Great post, just thinking about your comment “whether the education system has given students what they need to be self-guided learners.” I think it will be a long time before we swing in that direction and perhaps it never will. As you talked about there really is no shortage of information for us or our students to seek out to develop whatever path we want for seeking out knowledge. Most of the problem currently is I think we are in the midst of a swing from our traditional educational system to one that is fundamentally based in Constructionism. I believe our strategy to open student choice and really develop a deep seating love of learning is to scaffold a learning system where we can guide them and expose them to information gathering through a multitude of methods and sources. This will lead them to a passion of some kind in which they will develop self regulation and a thirst for learning more about something they truly love. If I give my grade 5 class a choice they will sit and watch youtube videos until the day ends, really they will! However if I guide them to perhaps the youtube editor, give a short session on how to build their own edited videos they will probably begin to construct their own content and begin to share it with each other and people beyond our classroom.
To have citizens that direct and own their own learning we need to help children understand how to use the tools that will open doors for them to step through. So often students are opening doors in the information highway and are flooded with whatever multimedia is blasted at them. There is no question we can access information more easily than ever before but how we help our students filter this information and sort the useful from the harmful is a valuable skill. Within this skill lies the ability of the teacher to monitor all students access to information and how they are processing it when it is received. Reading Ong I came across an interesting passage where he talks about how when a teacher or speaker talks in a group there is a sort of unity, a moment where everyone shares a bond. As soon as everyone goes back to their books/computers etc, that common bond is shattered and everyone moves into their own world. I never really thought about that but it is a very accurate perception of what happens in my class everyday. We are a unit then separated, and what happens in that time when we are acting as individuals is where we are susceptible to that vast digital information overload and how to sort, compile and make sense of what is there. I do my best to construct models for my students to follow when they are on the net but I cannot be everywhere at once. I suppose I have to let go and hope what I have taught them will resonate and carry through to how they search for knowledge individually. Thanks for the post I thought you brought up a very important point.
Stephen Campbell
May 27, 2018 — 6:20 pm
Thank you for the very insightful post. Willinsky’s (2002) vision of sharing research fully and publicly is becoming more and more important considering the direction that information sharing is going.
A huge problem nowadays is fake news and the veracity of online information. Wherein Willinsky would have us share academic research with the public, the full research papers remain inaccessible except to those who pay or are members of certain organizations. However, one can find a “published” opinion as fact on any topic they wish to search for through Google. This “published” opinion/fact is not necessarily vetted in any way, but through professionally designed sidebars, will be taken as being true.
I really liked that you wrote about how research can be used solely to support your own opinion or agenda. If you search for ‘information’ on the Internet on any given debatable idea, you can always find one that agrees with yours (even if yours is the 1 to the 1000 opposing ideas), proving that you are always right about everything you ever thought. Research abstracts are never the full picture of research. Many times I have read a promising abstract, only to delve into the methodologies and limitations of the research and find that the research conclusions were not applicable to my investigations. Unfortunately, even scholarly and vetted research is quite easily erroneous due to unreported confounding variables such as institutional pressure.
I have taken many courses in many different fields in the last three years. All my studies have used the Internet as an information resource. I have studied health, teacher education, workplace education; in both public and private education. All disappointing. Traditional educational institutions need to work a lot harder to create valid, authentic and timely education that meets the needs of its students.
References
Willinsky, J. (2002). Education and Democracy: The Missing Link May Be Ours. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 367-392.
Steve
Jamie Tooze
May 28, 2018 — 9:20 pm
Jamie Tooze
Thank you, Michael, for your thoughts on this article. I agree with everything you outlined in your post and I especially like your thoughts on how technology has set the foundation for Willinsky’s vision but the system has failed to deliver. I wonder if this is another case of innovation providing a solution to a problem that has yet to develop. In other words, I think we all recognize that the push for open access research is dedicated and eager to advance but I question if there is enough pull from the general public to help the OA advocates overturn the apple cart of knowledge? I will try to explain.
Early in your post you mentioned a situation that we’ve all encountered where we have collided into the dreaded “Purchase Article?” pop-up window after finding the perfect abstract for our paper. After being away from formal studies for 20 years and before joining the MET program I thought this was the norm. I simply thought access to literary research had not changed significantly since my undergrad when we made due with the paper journals the university subscribed to and we did our best to piece together what we could find in the stacks. But frankly I was truly amazed when I took the ETEC 500 tutorial on accessing scholarly articles. It blew my mind that just because I was a registered student I had access to this deep well of knowledge. I immediately asked myself why didn’t I know about this earlier? Why doesn’t everyone know about this? Why aren’t they clamoring for access. Well now I wonder if we are still witnessing a serious case of unrealized demand?
To quote another article we’ve read and listened to this term James O’Donnell warns, “we’ve been here before.” (Engell et al., 1999) As Willinsky points out, in 1960 the chances of you knowing a postsecondary graduate were half they were in 2002. (Willinsky 2002, p.10) The institutions were there, research had post-war funding but the true potential was being unrealized because masses were just starting to see the utility of advanced education. Perhaps we are still in the early stages of adoption of open access. Today, to further squelch demand peer reviewed research, a troubling anti-intellectualism has been spreading its tentacles from Texas biology classes to vaccination clinics in Kansas to the highest offices in government. Critical thought has much to contend with in this age of post-truth media.
I would like to continue but I’ll expand this thought with my own post.
Jamie
Engell, J. (Presenter) & O’Donnell, J. (Presenter). (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace [radio broadcast]. Retrieved from https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/4290/files/609973/preview
Willinsky, J. (2002). Education and Democracy: The Missing Link May Be Ours. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 367-392.
amy
May 29, 2018 — 2:05 pm
Hi Michael,
As someone who loves technology, I find myself conflicted at times. I must admit I have a love hate relationship when it comes to technology. There are bad things that have come from it and I wish that it would change. It seems as though you can’t have a conversation with someone unless it is through text and simultaneously, cyberbullying has become more rampant than ever before. If you send a text or a Snapchat it can be screenshotted and reposted on the Internet. Once on the Internet, it is there forever and cannot be deleted. Don’t get me wrong, technology in my opinion is incredible. Many good things have also come out of it as well. Nonetheless, I don’t think I am able to say with certainty that with the rise of portability and accessibility to large bodies of educational knowledge via technology, the Internet and the like has helped the development of educational systems. I could not agree with you more when you state that “the access to the information has progressed but the system has not” (Yates, 2018).
In my opinion, we are spoiled by technology and take it for granted. Especially, those who have grown up in the post-internet era. I recall when I was a student going to the library and being taught how to look for books, do my research, and write down the bibliography. Now doing my graduate degree, I have yet to step foot in a library, as everything is at the tip of my fingers all thanks to my tablet and the Internet. However, I strongly believe that my traditional training has prepared me for this new modern “system” and has enabled me to better understand how to utilize the vast unlimited knowledge available via the Internet. As O’Donnell (1999) puts it, “making rational choices and rational application” when it comes to the use of technology.
There are many programs and “shortcuts” available on the internet. Gone are the days of manually writing out references. The Internet now offers programs where you simply plug in the information and voila it is automatically formatted for your use in your bibliography. All one has to do is simply cut and paste it. Sadly, for my students who are of the post-internet era, these “shortcuts” are all they know. Hence, the foundation is no longer there and as a result, they are unable to truly comprehend the processes behind the educational knowledge. Everything is shortened and made “easier”, for better or worse. Ironically, the educational knowledge has become vast and unlimited, but the information learned and retained by our students is diminishing.
There is a need to educate our students on how to properly utilize the plethora of knowledge available to them via the Internet. I think that it is very important as educators that we at least attempt to resolve this imbalance. Technology is something that we all have learned to live with. There are so many great things that come from technology and the Internet, but also so many bad things that have come from it. I just wish that we could find a good state of equilibrium in which the good outweighs the bad all the time.
Amy
References
Yates, Michael. (2018, May 27). Blog Post #1: Module One [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec540summer2018/2018/05/27/blog-post-1-module-one/
Engell, J. (Presenter) & O’Donnell, J. (Presenter). (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace [radio broadcast]. Retrieved from https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/4290/files/609973/preview