Today over on Facebook a former TAFE colleague, Kate Wise, wrote:
"Thinking of our
virtual learning Michael. Did it ever take off? Missed those wonderful sessions
with the rest of the world.
Did virtual learning
ever take off?"
It certainly did. Virtual learning can mean different things but
Kate is referring to those international events hosted by the Australian vocational
education and training (VET) sector where scores of people, and sometimes
hundreds, joined live virtual classroom (webinar) sessions from across the
world to discuss educational issues. They were enormously popular and most
everyone who joined those sessions would testify to their effectiveness. The
model worked brilliantly for professional development.
I always found it
frustrating that the same model never really worked for classroom delivery in
the VET sector. It got some traction in higher education, but even there the
predominant model turned out to be the one way non-collaborative lecture style
webinar offered by tools like Echo 360.
It seems that there
were too many hurdles and ideological leaps for the average teacher to teach
their classes this way. What’s interesting is that the corporate word adopted
this model with gusto and today virtual meetings for companies with a
distributed workforce is commonplace.
Virtual learning is also
used as a synonym for online learning. Online learning is everywhere these
days, but the model that has been widely adopted is essentially the set and
forget model that offers little real interaction and almost no real time
virtual sessions. Many people who were employed as e- or online learning
specialists in professional development (ie people like me) have been discarded
and deemed unnecessary. The prevailing model is still static content plus quizzes.
It was decided that nothing more was necessary.
So people like myself
who were encouraging a richer form of elearning that emphasised collaborative
approaches with a synchronous real time component are left bemused that we
spent so much of our professional lives promoting a model we knew was powerful
and effective but in the end was deemed superfluous. It still sits uneasily
with me. It feels sometimes as if I wasted my time; that my belief in this
richer model was misguided and naïve. But I’m left with the memory, like Kate,
that some remarkable and deep learning occurred in those virtual sessions
sponsored by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework. But we failed to in
our quest to have that model become part of standard delivery.
3 comments:
Michael, I believe something less visible remains and is still influential - a shift in educators' minds, imaginations and horizons.
Thank you Delia. I hope you're right.
Post a Comment