Summary
This framework is based on the idea of the learning process being a conversation or, as Laurillard (1993) phrases it, “… a continuing iterative dialogue…”
This conversation, between teacher and student, or student and student, involves:
- Discussion
- Adaptation
- Interaction
- Reflection
The goal is the convergence of the teacher’s and student’s understanding though, as the teacher is positioned as the expert in this model, that would involve the student moving their ideas towards those of the teacher.
The teacher and student must first agree learning objectives. Then the teacher sets a learning task, along with providing the appropriate environment and support. The student responds to this task. The teacher then uses the student’s response to judge their understanding, gives feedback and adapts the task and environment accordingly. The student applies the feedback given when completing the next task. This continues, with further iterations, until convergence of understanding is achieved.
Comments
- As this does position the teacher as expert; this might not be appropriate for all disciplines or levels.
- Nevertheless, it has the potential to be very student-centric as each iteration is based on what the student does not just what is on the next page of the course schedule.
- This reflexive approach is more akin to coaching. It could therefore possibly be rejected on the basis of what seemed familiar (and therefore appropriate) to a discipline or level of education, without consideration about whether it could be useful.
- It relies on a large amount of feedback therefore could look impossible to achieve at scale. It could be possible to increases the number of possible feedback points by including peer to peer instruction, automated feedback via online quizzes, or a tutor/bot augmentation.
- It relies on the best quality feedback: timely, meaningful, precise & actionable. Without it, the iterations may never lead to convergence, or not quickly enough.
- It relies on the full engagement of the student: without their response to the teacher or peer, it would be impossible to judge the terms of the next iteration.
References
