Monday, October 18, 2010

How much can you really learn at a computer?

After close to thirty years of espousing the benefits of computer-assisted learning in its many forms, a creeping doubt is setting in. I have no doubt at all that technology affords learners many advantages - it brings them closer to millions of fellow learners, it provides access to a wealth of information - but I do doubt how meaningful learning can be when you're sat at the computer itself. In other words, online may be how you connect with others and post or retrieve valuable info, but offline is where, if at all, the real learning happens.

I must admit to being heavily influenced in this line of thinking by Nicholas Carr's The Shallows, to which I have referred in a previous post. Carr claims that: "When we go online, we enter an environment that promotes cursory reading, hurried and distracted thinking and superficial learning." He quotes neuroscientist Jordan Grafman: "The more you multi-task, the less deliberative you become; the less able to think and reason out a problem."

It seems to me that being online on a computer is a lean forward activity - it's goal-oriented, it's about getting things done in the face of multiple distractions. But surely learning, in any meaningful sense, is a lean back activity, requiring the time and space for reflection.

That's why, when I need to think about anything seriously, I print out any material that I need to review, grab a pen and paper, and retreat from my computer to the sofa. Sometimes I only need five minutes, sometimes much longer, but the fact is I can't even contemplate any serious reflection while at the computer. Being online provides the stimulus, but the response is offline.

If this is even remotely true, the major implications are for those forms of e-learning which up until now have usually required people to undertake the complete learning experience at a computer, obvious examples being self-study lessons and virtual classroom sessions. My tendency is to keep these relatively short - enough to excite interest and provide an overview of the content - but then allow the learner to respond away from the computer, with some form of offline activity. They may well return,of course, perhaps to input the results of their activity, which allows the cycle to begin again.

Now I know this idea doesn't make sense when the learner needs to be on a computer to engage in a simulation, practise using software or complete an assessment, but I'd be surprised if it didn't work well in other cases, particularly when you're looking to achieve deeper learning.

What do you think? Am I losing it?

13 comments:

  1. Hi Clive,
    I would tend to agree, but with one exception...
    ... where the learner chooses (or is encouraged) to engage with the materials through creative activity. Eg. Writing a blog post, preparing a diagrammatic summary etc.
    Mark

    ReplyDelete
  2. I wrote about this also sometime ago. It actually led to a floury of posts that went from addiction to cognitive overload and ended up somewhere is nomands land. I had many discussions on this topic and I'm not really finished with it ...even received a personal reply from Nicholas Carr for one of the posts I wrote.

    If you like an informal chat about this topic contact via Skype id: simbeck-hampson.

    Btw. Don't think your losing it :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. At present, since I'm not in a formal learning program, *all* my lean-back learning is computer-mediated. I watch or listen to long-form lectures offered up for free from universities and Edge.org, etc., and I download these plus audiobooks from iTunes, and e-books onto my Kindle from Amazon.

    I develop these ideas primarily in lengthy Gmail exchanges with my colleagues and business associates, as well as face-to-face meetings with these people (but we found each other online via blog posts, etc.)

    Classrooms, tutoring sessions and solitary reflection do each concentrate your attention and your learning support in unique and valuable ways. It's also true that online self-study generally prompts us to breadth instead of depth (deep dives into Google Scholar are an exception - and the closest most of us can come to the kind of document database access that universities enjoy). But I'm happy to maintain that more learning is possible thanks to the online channel than was possible before it. It's not a full substitute for face to face learning, but it's not just shallow topic-hopping, or doesn't have to be.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No, you're definitely not losing it. Computers are tools (and very useful ones): they're nice and shiny, and deliver lots of great information to appeal to our magpie tendencies.

    But when all's said and done, we're tactile creatures so we benefit from balances of noise and quiet. And we are naturally attuned to sensory inputs: we have added channels of the mind engaged when we turn a page or experience the multiple senses involved when we put pencil to paper.

    You hit on another key element: we need time to reflect. Our minds are wired to respond to action, to stimuli (which is great if, for instance, you're backpacking in bear country); but they need time when they're not on alert for new inputs (whether that be from predators or from our computer screen) to reflect and process what we've experienced.

    And we are social creatures - I can get a lot from an email or a skype call, but there's a different level of connection and inspiration that comes from a personal exchange between two (or more learners) who are actually together.

    Computers are great for gathering information, for seeing things we might not otherwise, for writing, for sharing... but they are only a part of the larger picture. And thank goodness for that.

    Cheers,
    Jsnet

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think it depends on what you've become accustomed to. Like Neil I do all my lean- forward and back activities online. The only time I write with pen and paper is shopping lists and haikus. Perhaps it has more to do with one's personal learning preferences which may be linked to generational differences or how one was taught to study (study being deeply reflective interaction primarily with a text).

    I wonder if you would change your mind with a different form factor, like an iPad?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous12:37 AM

    I tend to agree as well...but in the corporate environment when students need to learn at a specific level by a specific period of time, how can you build in reflection? That is my biggest challenge.

    ReplyDelete
  7. seems to me what you are describing is your own preferred learning style and then 'the losing it bit' generalising this :)
    I am guessing but assuming that your partiuclar 'classroom' is very rich including, f2f networking, conferences, written meterails, tv/media, colleagues and online etc - so i believe you are more able to pick n choose what you prefer for learning. You're also working at an expert level and so have learned to judge/assess well the quality of things put in front of you. I pressume you are also in a position to be doing most of your learning about things that interest you.
    so my question is 'in how many real-life elearning scenarios could the participants, be expected to be, even slightly passionate about the content of their course, are at a level where they could self teach or know the difference between good/bad sources or know anything about their own learning styles?'
    i sort of see this the same way a classroom teacher does - its my job to capture the attention of all the students in the room whether they are invested or not and whatever their learning style. Most good classroom teachers don't find a 3 humped camel solution but look to cover all the bases by variety of delivery within one room/one lesson. I think good elearning coures do this also.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I often notice how much like the Borg we are becoming - always connected to the collective whether through in/on-ear speakers or through visual interaction with handheld devices. How long until the devices are implanted into our brains? The other day, in a medical clinic waiting room, five out of seven people were interacting with the collective through mobile devices while ignoring the "no phones" signs as well as each other. What will we do if the voices go silent?

    Programming classes

    ReplyDelete
  9. Clive, you're not losing it - you're getting it!

    You're might be familiar with the term "70:20:10" (originally came out of the Centre for Creative Leadership). They found that people learn 10% of what you know and do through formal learning, 70% through reflection and experience from actually working and 20% through conversations e.g. coaching and peer-to-peer.

    So instead of creating a piece of learning content as a solution, the challenge is to consider how that learning content will support the learners across the 70 and the 20. And it’s not a case of just saying let’s produce a performance support system, or chunk the content down! (to me that’s still in the domain of the 10%).

    Based on 70:20:10, I believe the key to success of online learning, is actually the coaching culture within the organisation.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I really think it depends on the person. I appreciate your sharing the way you learn, for example:

    "...when I need to think about anything seriously, I print out any material that I need to review, grab a pen and paper, and retreat from my computer to the sofa...but the fact is I can't even contemplate any serious reflection while at the computer."

    But, of course, you can't generalize about learning based on your own experience. I know plenty of people who do most of their serious reflection online. (And even this depends on my buying the assertion that "meaningful learning" requires reflection; I'm not sure this is always the case.)

    I also think it depends on content. I could argue that topics like computer programming, video editing, and even anthropology are learned mainly "in the field"--even if reflection can enhance that learning.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I realized recently when completing an elearning course that I needed digestion time to maximize the effectiveness of my learning. When I completed two chapters in a row (no matter how short), I did not retain the information as well as when I took a brief intermission sans computer to think over what I had learned.

    A "lean-forward" session at the computer stimulates thinking and new ideas, but without time to reflect on or discuss those ideas, they don't stick (for me at least). I think newer elearning methods that include social media concepts will address some of these needs.


    Kelly
    @OpenSesameNow

    ReplyDelete
  12. Learning has a rhythm - after breathing in you need some time to breathe out. That's one of my principles to structure classroom lessons.

    A computer can be used to 'breathe in' - eg reading, watching videos etc. But it's also a tool to 'breathe out', writing blog posts, for example.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Gerard6:24 AM

    I have spent three decades relying on the printed word. I need it to study and make sense of things. At least that is the way it has been in the past.

    Today, I still print out things to help me learn; however, the number of pages printed has reduced significantly. I would estimate I now only print 10 percent of what I have been used to doing.

    The question is why? The answer is that I use two monitors. One for my work and what I am doing and the other for reading reference material. I can get up the relevant page of reference material and continue with my work on the other screen. It is actually easier in most cases to finding the relevant page in a hard copy book that helps me with my work.

    Yes, I still sit down and read hard copy books. I love them, and I resist the kindle. I guess if I spent hours traveling in a bus or train I would use a kindle. Maybe I am old fashioned. I like the feel of a book in my hands.

    Now if I have given you mixed messages here, it is intentional. My preferred learning style is situational. Depending on the situation I like electronic, digital, input and at other times those old analog books work wonders.

    Neither one is better. The art is pulling back and reflecting on the input we have received, and forming our own conclusion.

    ReplyDelete