Week 6-7: Considering learner diversity in perceptions and experiences of studying online
In this second HEA-related post, I would like to turn to the issue of learner diversity and discuss this with specific reference to the different ways in which online students perceive being ‘at’ university. This is an area worthy of consideration because the more awareness course designers and tutors have of these differing perceptions and the way in which they might influence online students’ learning experience, the more inclusive a course is likely to be, which is particularly important for courses with such a diverse student cohort as the MScDE.
Recognising learner diversity
In a previous post I referred to the commonly held expectation that a certain degree of continuity and familiarity will be retained in the transition between physical and digital environments, and this could equally apply to the experience of being ‘at’ university. The conclusion of the Week 7 core reading which explores and analyses what being ‘at’ Edinburgh University means to MScDE students, was that ‘distance students … need their own version of the ‘certainties’ of bounded, campus space (Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, 2014)’. On the other hand, students in the study appeared to differ considerably in terms of their degree of attachment or sense of belonging to the University of Edinburgh as a physical institution, and some associated being ‘at’ Edinburgh most strongly with the course itself and the part they played in its networked online community. In acknowledgment of this, I believe it is important to keep in mind the diversity between students in terms of what being ‘at’ university as an online student means to them individually, and attempt to factor this into the design and delivery of courses in order to create a climate of inclusivity.
Student perceptions of being an online university student are likely to vary depending on numerous factors, including the amount of time which has lapsed since their first degree, previous experience of studying online, and their learning preferences. It’s possible that the degree of nostalgic attachment a student feels towards the location and institution where they completed their first degree could impact on how they experience the transition to online study. Although I continue to feel some nostalgia towards Brighton and Sussex University, in the process of becoming a student again I haven’t felt the remotest sense of yearning for days gone by and haven’t noticed myself making much connection between that period of my life and my present situation. Perhaps the act of returning to university has a different kind of significance for me than it might for somebody who is returning to academia after a much longer period of time. I personally haven’t felt a particularly strong urge to find a library to study in, to try to reconstruct the sensation of physically attending a place of study, which some of my course colleagues have alluded to in our forum discussions. I am also conducting my studies entirely digitally – bookmarking articles and reading them on my laptop or downloading books onto my e-reader – whereas I am aware that other students prefer the printed format, more in keeping with their previous studies. Overall then, I have noticed significant differences among the IDEL cohort in terms of our degree of attachment to the physical university and how we adapt our study habits to the online mode of course delivery.
Challenging the privileging of presence
One of the features of the MScDE programme which most attracted me was its exclusively online delivery, as opposed to other related programmes which also offer a physical attendance mode (e.g. Manchester’s MA in Digital Technologies, Communication and Education). My selection of the MScDE was partly motivated by a concern that as an online student there might exist the possibility of being disadvantaged in some way, of being potentially sidelined, neglected in favour of my physically-present counterparts on the course. It was therefore interesting to see the term ‘distance education’ – which I have never particularly liked for reasons I couldn’t quite pinpoint – problematised in the reading as ‘negatively defined’ in the sense of being other to the ‘norm’ of studying on campus (Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, 2014). This could qualify as an example of the process of ‘othering’ discussed in the Nelson and Parchoma paper (2018), where one practice is defined in light of another. In order to avoid the ‘privileging of presence’ to the potential detriment of distance students on mixed-modal courses such as the Manchester MA, the mobilities approach outlined in the reading could be instrumental in challenging ‘‘sedentarist’ assumptions within social science which ‘treat as normal stability, meaning, and place, and treat as abnormal distance, change, and placelessness’’ (Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, 2014).
Embracing learner diversity
One possible approach to acknowledging and embracing learner diversity in online communities could be the adoption of a ‘transcultural’ perspective, as put forward by Nelson and Parchoma (2018), which involves a recognition of the ‘cultural boundedness’ of Western educational norms, the promotion of a culturally inclusive approach, and the formation of a new ‘hybrid’ culture resulting from interaction between different cultures. In the context of an online course, this perspective could inspire the inclusion of activities which aim to enhance the ‘cultural-emotional connectedness’ between course participants, enabling them to feel more closely connected despite their individual differences and the geographical distance between them. An example of this could be the Week 7 IDEL task, in which students were asked to share their conceptions of the IDEL course so far in the form of a personally significant spatial metaphor. In my opinion, this was an effective and engaging way of increasing our awareness of the diversity of interpretations among the group, similar to the mapping and representation of student spaces by digital postcards which formed part of Bayne et al’s (2014) research on MScDE student experiences.
The ‘third space’
Returning to the matter of metaphors in closing, I am attracted by Nelson and Parchoma’s (2018) concept of a ‘third space’ as a metaphor for the online study environment, as a site where diversity may be embraced and creativity fostered; a space which offers ‘the opportunity for negotiation, understanding, and clarity, for integration of seemingly incommensurable ideas, discourses, ideologies, knowledge, and practices…holds the potential for something new/hybrid to emerge from the process’. There would seem to be a connection between the concept of ‘topological multiplicity’ referred to in Bayne et al (2014) and the ‘third space’ when applied to online education, as constituting a dynamic, diverse and creative site of continuous flow and flux which cannot be adequately defined in the limited terms of ‘bounded’ campus or cultural space. Conclusion: the metaphors need to move with the times!
Bayne, S., Gallagher, M.S., & Lamb, J. (2014). Being ‘at’ university: the social topologies of distance students. Higher Education, 67(5), pp. 569-583.
Nelson, D., & Parchoma, G. (2018). Toward theorizing spatial-cultural ‘othering’ in networked learning and teaching practices. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Networked Learning 2018. M. Bajić, N.B. Dohn, M. de Laat, P. Jandrić, & T. Ryberg (Eds.).
This is excellent Jemima. Very well done and very much in line with what HEA is looking for: conceptual engagement, analysis, synthesis with your own practice. On a slightly biased note, glad you picked up on the following as well:
“It was therefore interesting to see the term ‘distance education’ – which I have never particularly liked for reasons I couldn’t quite pinpoint – problematised in the reading as ‘negatively defined’ in the sense of being other to the ‘norm’ of studying on campus (Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, 2014).”
Besides cowriting that bit, I experienced it myself as an online student: the term distance felt like a rebuff for reasons I couldn’t fully explain. That paper emerged from a project exploring spac
This could qualify as an example of the process of ‘othering’ discussed in the Nelson and Parchoma paper (2018), where one practice is defined in light of another. In order to avoid the ‘privileging of presence’ to the potential detriment of distance students on mixed-modal courses such as the Manchester MA, the mobilities approach outlined in the reading could be instrumental in challenging ‘‘sedentarist’ assumptions within social science which ‘treat as normal stability, meaning, and place, and treat as abnormal distance, change, and placelessness’’ (Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, 2014).
Let me try again.
Picking up from the following:
Besides cowriting that bit, I experienced it myself as an online student: the term distance felt like a rebuff for reasons I couldn’t fully explain. That paper emerged from a project exploring space (http://edinspace.weebly.com/) which corroborated many of my feeling towards the term.
The following is well put.
“This could qualify as an example of the process of ‘othering’ discussed in the Nelson and Parchoma paper (2018), where one practice is defined in light of another. In order to avoid the ‘privileging of presence’ to the potential detriment of distance students on mixed-modal courses such as the Manchester MA, the mobilities approach outlined in the reading could be instrumental in challenging ‘‘sedentarist’ assumptions within social science which ‘treat as normal stability, meaning, and place, and treat as abnormal distance, change, and placelessness’’ (Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, 2014).”
This othering is at once both natural (defining things via comparison) and limiting (the othering) and this is particularly relevant in HE online where that sedentarist assumption is implicit in all of this: the physica
I did it again! Let me just pick up again: the physical space is presented as the norm from which all others will be measured (and almost undoubtedly fairly to surpass). Agreed all around that we need new metaphors for new times.
My apologies for this series of comments rather than one coherent whole!