Week 7: Mapping IDEL as a space

IDEL: Before and Now

Note to Huw: I’m going to use APA instead of Harvard for my citations and reference list. I hope you are okay with that. After nearly 2 decades of using APA, I find it cumbersome to learn a new format. It really slows me down and raises my anxiety.

My space for IDEL has somewhat evolved in my mind. Before I embarked on this course, I sought to create a physical space in my study dedicated to IDEL. I believed then that having this nook would help me focus on the course better. This physical area that I created is no longer representative of my “university life”. Now, I seem to view this folder on iPad as my campus and IDEL exists within these apps.

Whenever I open this folder, it seems like I’ve stepped onto my campus grounds. I must admit that feeling is quite surreal. Each app corresponds to a physical space on a real-life campus for me. It appears to me that this surreal feeling aligns with the new mobilities paradigm, which Urry (2007) claims “enables the ‘social world’ to be theorized’ differently from the sedentarist assumptions that treats place as normal and distance as abnormal (as cited in Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, p. 571). For me the ‘social world’ of my IDEL education feels close and immersive digitally. Facebook (and the MSc in Digital Education group page in particular) is the common room, where I meet up with my course mates to talk about anything under the sun. Teams is the office of my personal tutor, Dr Phillpa Sheail as I only visit it to seek counsel with regards to my studies. I can’t remember entering this app or room for any other reason. Lastly, Chrome is the university library where I can search for my study materials. While this entire experience is surreal, it hasn’t been disappointing because of my initial expectations. I will return to this point later.

Personally, I have never felt like an “outsider” or viewed the physical campus of the University of Edinburgh (UofE) as “a guarantor of the authenticity” of my education with it (Bayne, Gallagher & Lamb, 2013, p. ). I don’t feel like an “outsider” because I never expected to be an “insider”. When I signed up for this course, I wasn’t excited at the prospect of being a student of UofE despite having visited the city and falling in love with it in 2017. Therefore, I also do not have the same “homecoming” sentiments shared by some of the participants in Bayne, Gallagher and Lamb’s (2013) study. I was primarily looking forward to the course content. The authenticity of my education comes from the reputation of UofE (hence it didn’t matter if I was ever physically there), the fact that the course is accredited and the rigour of the course.

Perhaps, my background is the confounding variable. I already possess an “on-campus” master’s degree and pursing this course is more about expanding my knowledge and skill sets. “Authenticity” in terms of being able to claim that one is an alumni of UofE could be more important to someone who is pursuing his or her first degree (p. . In Singapore, employers still distinguish between “on-campus” and “distance” learners. It is an open secret that the Ministry of Education does not recognise distance degrees, even if the degree was completed in-person on a satellite campus in Singapore, when it comes to the requirement of education officers (i.e. teachers) in the public sector. For job applications, I’ve always had to state whether my degree was completed “on-campus”. Therefore, it is easier for me to understand and accept Huw’s previous point on how education should not be a preparatory stage for the workplace. I expect it to be very different for others who need this degree to even get through the interview room doors. They need to prove the legitimacy of their certificate.

While I have forged a fairly strong friendship with one course mate, Jane (pseudonym), again my initial expectations have largely shaped how I view and approach my social relationships with others on this course. Having completed my first MSc, I do have a better understanding of what is expected and required of me academically. This means that I have less reliance on collaborative learning and I say this without arrogance. Strong relationships are often fostered in times of hardship. My close friends and I still speak fondly of the tough times we endured during our studies where we were cracking our brains together, burning the midnight oil in the school library. In this sense, the ‘constancy’ that Mol and Law (1994, p. 658) suggest that acted as an adhesive for these relationships was the shared times being “at” university and specially certain physical spaces (e.g. library). In contrast, Jane, also a masters’ degree holder, and I frequently converse in our digital common room (Messenger) but it’s always about non-academic topics such as our personal lives, cultures and countries. Our relationship isn’t held together (mainly) by our shared experience on this course but instead our lives outside of our education.

Thus far, my concept of “learning space”, at least for this course, has shifted. I think I would describe it as a digital core (e.g. the folder on my iPad) with a physical periphery, where the furniture and room are complementary. Previously, it was the opposite, as I viewed the physical space (my study nook) as the core but with supplementary digital elements (e.g iPad, laptop) . Nonetheless, I still do not consider myself to be a student of UofE due to my initial expectations, current experience and social relationships. I will discuss this in further detail in my next post but now I think I might have to rename the folder on my iPad from “Edinburgh University” to “MSc in Digital Ed”.

References:

Bayne, S., Gallagher, M.S., & Lamb, J. (2014). Being ‘at’ university: the social topologies of distance students. Higher Education, 67(5), pp. 569-583.

Mol, A. & Law, J. (1994). Regions, networks and fluids: Anaemia and social topology. Social Studies of Science, 24(4), 641-671.