Characteristics of Technology Enhanced Learning Within the Instructor Centered Paradigm
As discussed in earlier entries, the instructor centered framework of education takes two flavors (usually a combination of the two): the lecture and the recitation. Technology, when employed in either of these concepts, will exhibit the following characteristics:
* A need on the instructors behalf to be prescriptive in regards to how the technology will be utilized
* The presence of grading rubrics
* Samples / models are distributed to students to demonstrate appropriate / satisfactory work
* Presence of grades as motivation for activities (evidence of external motivation as primary motivation)
* Assignment based
* Considered to be part of the pre-existing concept of "class participation" within the grading structure.
* Language is often seen as imprecise (a sign of students using their own experience as a basis for discourse and not "academic" language). This is followed by a need to "fix" this on the part of the instructor.
* Instructional tools are modified and restricted to fit into learning objectives
The reason these fit the instructor centered framework of education is because in all of these points the authority of knowledge is assumed to be located within the instructor (i.e., samples are provided by the instructor so students know what the instructor believes to be 'of quality').
At this juncture of thought, I am prone to say that the location of authority in the classroom is the sole indicator of just whether a class is truly student centered or not. Of course, it is not so simple as to be black and white, but just because students are asked to participate does not mean they are truly participating with each other. When the source of authority and power reside within the instructor alone, students must act towards the instructor and not within each other.
The reason I caution that this is not so simple is that just creating a message board, for instance, will not mean students will use it. In fact, in moving towards a truly student centered learning environment, the skills and abilities for a course designer become exponentially more important. In other words, this isn't easy. The true test of the ability of an instructor comes in designing the class and in how well the technology is set up.
This reminds me of another important distinction: Allowing students to be part of the network of authority in a classroom does not mean relinquishing all of your power as an instructor. A better way of thinking about is it that an instructor creates an environment and then stands back and lets the students work through it on their own terms. If you think of a classroom where the instructor holds no power or authority, then nothing works. I think this is why many instructors are so fearful of student centered classrooms. But it isn't that this power is given up, rather it is that it is shared.
Or, to say it more clearly... there are three relationships of authority that can exist in a classroom.
instructor as authority and students as subservient.
students as authority and instructor as subservient
students and instructors as authority.
I'm aiming at the last one, not the middle one.
To leave this with one thought, even though the authority for knowledge can be shared, this does not mean all power is shared. There has to be a "prime mover," if you will, for any class to get going and to have direction. This is the responsibility of the instructor. After it is all in motion, the goal is to step back as much as you can.