Discussion: When can children create a learner generated context (lgc)?
RE: "... there's a need to stop worrying about boundaries"
Nigel, I was interested to read your comments on boundaries... whilst I agree we needn't find ourselves worrying about boundaries, nevertheless, I think boundaries are interesting insofar as they are not so much barriers to learning as markers ... in lgc terms, it may be better to consider boundaries not so much as the delimitations of authority/agency but rather as recognition of the extremes of knowing of the learner. In this sense, boundaries are helpful indicators for facilitating learner experience and enabling learners to progress beyond their present experience in the sense that in order to know what you're aiming for, you need to know where you're headed (and how to get there). In terms of the learner's shifting perceptions, it's not so much a case of spontaneous combustion as the shaping of directed goals. Learners don't always know what they know, nor what they don't know and understanding these contexts (and the boundaries between them) is what enables learners to extend the journey and to negotatiate new directions and unanticipated learning pathways. So, if we consider the boundary as being a marker on the continuum between being and becoming and learning as the process of becoming... then the lgc may be regarded as an active participant in that process but active, here, doesn't necessarily mean the assumption of an authoritative role but may simply mean the facilitation of a negotiated activity space between the learner and their environment which enables them to access all areas. If, on the other hand, we consider 'authority' as a part of a knowledge domain... then the learner's growing and developing awareness of the contexts/structures and rationale/purpose attached to that domain may be framed/shaped by the notion of boundary1.
RE: "... when could you allow children to run their own lgc?
I found this question to be very interesting as it really made me think hard about what we actually mean by the term learner generated contexts. The way in which the question is phrased appears to presuppose elements of authority and formalisation of the learning context. Words like "allow" and "run", for example. I found myself asking whether this was how we should be (or are) perceiving lgcs. My own feeling is that lgcs are perhaps more organic than these words permit us to see. For me, it seems more appropriate to ask: How do we recognise, facilitate and, where appropriate, repurpose the lgc? In this sense, I see the lgc as being constructed by the learner and the notion of appropriateness being a device for scaffolding the learner's appreciation of a particular context in order to enable them to progress beyond that space. Also, I'm not entirely sure that facilitation of the lgc needs to be regarded so much as a designed learning environment as, perhaps, a negotiated or co-designed one. I do like the idea that the decision-making process is an emergent one... In terms of collaboration and teamwork skills - perhaps part of our understanding of what an lgc is or could be needs also to incorporate notions of expanding the learning context to bridge the gaps in the learner's existing repertoire.
RE: It always interests me when the first responses to a new idea are to test its limits and in learning the knee jerk response seems to be, as last week: “This sounds very democratic, but when could you allow children to run their own lgc?” This type of question makes me huffy..."
Sorry, Nigel, didn't mean to make you huff! I don't actually disagree with most of your points. I certainly wouldn't argue that kids are incomplete or incapable. I would speculate, however, that there is a developmental aspect relating to the cognitive, social and metacognitive skills which are required to successfully contribute to the design of your own learning environment. I say this for 2 reasons: one from theory and one from experience.
a) Theory. Kuhn's studies on metacognitive development suggest that metacogntivie regulation begins to happen around 11 years, and takes a while to develop. I would have thought to successfully design a learning environment, you'd need to be able to reflect on what knowledge and skills you have, identify gaps and come up with a strategy to fill the gaps. And you'd need to identify when your design was not successful. This requires metacognitive regulation, so maybe under 11's would struggle. We certainly shouldn't assume that younger kids can do it.
b) Experience. If there isn't "someone" to decide things about the structure and activities, then maybe it emerges from the group. To do that you need successful collaboration skills. From working in software design teams which include kids, I would say that it can be hard if the kids don't have the teamwork skills.
We certainly wouldn't want to place children who were still developing metacognitive or social skills at a disadvantage relative to their peers. Maybe we need to think about how teachers can facilitate learners in the skills needed to successfully design and manage their own learning contexts.
More on Kuhn's Thinking
Bibliography:
1. Lotman, J (1990), Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture (trans. A. Shukman), London: I.B. Taurus
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.