One issue, identified above, which is key to the success of on-line learning, is the ability of the learners and their tutors to engage with the learning
environment both in terms of access to the technology and secondly in being able to use the technology.
JISC (2009b) research identified potential inequalities in ownership of
technology and that levels of confidence in its use vary considerably. On-line learning has the potential to increase divisions between those who have computers and those who do not, rather than it being a means to promote
inclusion (Gaskell, 2010; Seale, 2010). The JISC report recommends a range of strategies for institutional managers including: monitoring technology
ownership, assessing IT skills of incoming learners, providing guidance on the use of technology supporting learning, embedding technologies in the curricula, enabling access from off-campus and providing support that is accessible off- campus.
Peng, Su, Chou and Tsai, (2009, p177), writing about mobile learning, or m- learning1, recommended that access to learning through mobile devices “should
be intuitive enough so that mobile learners can interact with it in a short period of time” and further, that “learners should learn ‘with’ technology and use technology as a mind tool that supports active, constructive, co-operative, authentic and intentional learning”. Whilst my pedagogy is not specifically
considering m-learning, the idea of supporting learners and intuitive technology is relevant to an e-portfolio. M-learning could be a future consideration for the pedagogy.
In addressing the need to support learners in their use of technology and the need for it to be intuitive we can consider the affordances that the technology offers. Affordances was a term appropriated by Donald Norman in 1988 for use in the context of human-machine interactions. Affordances “provide strong cues to
the operation of things” (Touretzky and Tira-Thompson, 2008) and can be
further explained by the following quotation:
“Well-designed objects make it clear how they work just by looking at them. Some doors have big metal plates at arm-level. The only thing you can do to a metal plate is push it. In the words of Donald Norman, the plate affords pushing. Other doors have big, rounded handles that just make you want to pull them. They even imply how they want you to place your hand on the handle. The handle affords pulling. It makes you want to pull it.”
(Spolsky, 2000) The concept of affordances is something that I have often heard referred to as being intuitive, or more often where it is “not intuitive” when it is not obvious what one needs to do, or where what appears to be an obvious solution is actually something else. The analogy of a plate to push and a handle to pull is one that I can associate with as I have often tried to pull open a door by its
1A newer variation of on-line learning where technologies such as smartphones and
handle, when actually I needed to push, and felt quite frustrated by the unnecessary effort needed to open the door. Humans are likely to respond in a particular way to a stimulus so in our design we need to be cognisant of this and ensure that the new pedagogy offers affordances: handles that do need to be pulled, rather than ones that need to be pushed.
In being able to use a technology another consideration is the, so called, digital literacy of each individual. The potential learners in the small to medium sized enterprises who are the target market for this new pedagogy will cross the full age range from teenage school leavers to those approaching retirement. Across this age range there will be a wide range of experience in relation to use and understanding of technology. Prensky (2001a and 2001b) wrote about the concepts of Digital Natives (those who have grown up with digital technologies) and Digital Immigrants (those who have adopted the technologies later in their lives) and the differences in their approaches to learning and teaching. In presenting this divide Prensky also presents a generational divide, younger people are Digital Natives, older people, if they use technologies, will be Digital Immigrants. However, more recent research (Haigh, 2011) has shown that there is no evidence of such a divide although younger people are more likely to have a positive approach to using technology. This later research showed that “a good
attitude to technology, at any age, correlates with good study habits”. Anxiety
levels of adult learners towards the internet was researched by Collins and Veal (2005, cited in Bromley and Moss, 2009) stating:
“perceptions of their abilities to access information are an integral component of their anxiety levels and this may act as a barrier to engagement”.
Thus the research by Haigh and by Collins and Veal suggests that my pedagogy should be more concerned with learners’ attitudes to technology than whether they are digital natives or digital immigrants, and the pedagogy needs to be cognisant of the learners’ anxiety levels.
The pedagogy I am developing will require learners to have access to, but not ownership of, technology. This access can be at work, at home or at an
alternative environment such as a library or other community-based facility. My expectations are that the learners will represent a wide-range of experience, competence and confidence in the use of technology, that most will not have experienced on-line learning and that none will have used an e-portfolio based
environment. Whilst I cannot change the attitude they have to technology when they start on their studies I can endeavour to design the environment with affordances that encourage a good attitude, through it being a good experience and by providing easy and intuitive access to information and the learning environment. In seeking affordances and to design a learning environment that will offer an effective pedagogy I will now look at suggested models for on-line learning.