Online learning opens up a variety of interactive and collaborative opportunities transcending the limitations of time and space in traditional learning. While students may well be able to acquire knowledge via online learning without the “bodily” interactions of a traditional learning environment, at what cost does this come by? Taylor (1996) argues on the value of bodies as being “mindful”; as co-contributors to meaningful educational activities. The pedagogical practices of a traditional university are embedded in physical interactions and architectural features that are akin to “rites of passage” that a student makes into an educated culture (Taylor, 1996, p. 67). In other words, pedagogy is more than just a focus on content.
Umbridge makes this statement in her Dark Arts class:
“…it is the view of the Ministry that a theoretical knowledge will be more than sufficient to get you through your examination, which, after all, is what school is all about (…) as long as you have studied the theory hard enough, there is no reason why you should not be able to perform the spells under carefully controlled examination conditions” (Rowling, 2003, p. 243-244)
But is it truly enough? Lave & Wegner (as quoted in Taylor, 1996, p. 69) emphasize the importance of “legitimate peripheral participation”; learning that arises from shared social spaces through which an individual is exposed to models of how to be. Online learning driven by a curriculum-centered pedagogy might risk reverting to the Umbridge approach by stripping the student of the social and cultural support provided through body-to-body interactions, relegating education to being an “information-to-mind” process that is detached from the “socially constructed interpretive conventions” of pedagogical practices.
Reflecting on both my online undergraduate and graduate programs, Taylor’s (1996) article brings to light the pedagogical practices that govern such learning environments. He argues that a powerful interaction lies between the material and pedagogical aspects of education. In particular, the social inertia of traditional pedagogy is strongly associated with authority, so, while an educational artifact, such as a lecture, may remain constant as it moves from a live lecture hall to a video recording, its authority may not. The social demassification of online learning may have afforded me a more than accessible learning environment, but not necessarily an authoritative one in its altered pedagogical practices. It can then be said that the relative value of my degree might not be all that I had sought out for, should the contributions of pedagogies and materially/culturally inscribed bodies be compromised.
References
Rowling, J. K. (2003). Harry potter and the order of the phoenix. London, UK: Bloomsbury.
Taylor, P. G. (1996). Pedagogical challenges of open learning: Looking to borderline issues. In E. McWilliam & P. G. Taylor (Eds.), Pedagogy, Technology and the Body (pp. 60-77). NY: Peter Lang.