View
92
Download
4
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
A SOCIO-TECHNICAL HIGHER EDUCATION PERSPECTIVE (STHEP): THE IMPORTANCE OF PERSONAL LEARNING NETWORKSBY NIC FAIR – PHD RESEARCHER, WEB SCIENTIST AND DIGITAL EDUCATOR WWW.NICFAIR.CO.UK WWW.EFOLIO.SOTON.AC.UK/BLOG/INNOVATIONINHE/ @NIC_FAIR NSRF1G12@SOTON.AC.UK
SOCIO-TECHNICAL SYSTEMS THEORY
Society
Technology
Socio-technical systems focus “on the interdependencies between and among people, technology and the environment” (Cummings, 1978)
Technology is “socially embedded – i.e. seamlessly intertwined with the expectations and skills of technology users, with institutional structures and with broader infrastructures” (Borri & Grassini, 2014)
SOCIO-TECHNICAL TRANSFORMATIONS
Landscape
RegimeNiche
- Physical and external context = slow transformations
- Semi-coherent ‘rules’ within a community = moderately slow transformations
- Space for individual innovation = rapid, dynamic transformations
(Geels, 2002)
TENSION
STHEP 1The learner can not be separated from the
technology used for learning
HE learnER + technology = fully integrated
HE learnING + technology = partially integrated (at best)
TENSION
STHEP 2HE students sit at the centre of their own Personal Learning Network (PLN)
Autonomously created
Online AND offlinePreferred devices and services
Range of people and institutionsWide range of distributed information sources
STHEP 3Learning Theory may benefit from
reformulation through a socio-technical lens
Meaningful interactions
and connections
through your
Personal Learning Network
Socio-technical
Constructivism
Humans
Technology
ActionActivity
Social Relations
hips
STHEP 4Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) can provide an outlet for High Impact HE
PedagogiesPLNs are autonomously created
PLNs are a space for identity and social capital creation
PLNs are networks of people, institutions and services
PLNs are self-maintained
PLNs are activated at times, places and ways of choosing
Learner autonomy
Creativity
Peer learning & Collaboration
Learner self-regulation
Learner self-direction
STHEP 5HEIs must embed the development of Digital
Literacies and Networking Skills in all teaching & learning activities
(Both images from JISC 2015)
Digital Literacies
CONCLUSION – THE 5 STHEPS
The centrality of Personal Learning Networks
Socio-technical Constructivism
Personal Learning Networks provide pedagogical benefits
The learner can not be separated from learning technologies
Development of Digital Literacies and Networking Skills
STHEP 1STHEP 2
STHEP 3
STHEP 4STHEP 5
REFERENCES• Bijker, W.E., Hughes, T.P. and Pinch, T. J., eds. 1987. The social construction of technological systems: New
directions in the sociology and history of technology
• Borri, D. and Grassini, L., 2014. Dilemmas in the Analysis of Technological Change. A Cognitive Approach to Understand Innovation and Change in the Water Sector. Tema. Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment.
• Cummings, T.G., 1978. Self-regulating work groups: A socio-technical synthesis. Academy of management Review, 3(3), pp.625-634.
• Downes, S (2007). What Connectivism is. Available on : http://halfanhour.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/what-connectivism-is.html
• Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2015). Emerging approaches to educational research: Tracing the socio-material. Routledge.
• Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research policy, 31(8), pp.1257-1274.
• Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics. The new Blackwell companion to social theory, p. 141-158.
• Siemens, G. (2014). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Available on http://er.dut.ac.za/bitstream/handle/123456789/69/Siemens_2005_Connectivism_A_learning_theory_for_the_digital_age.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• van Plon Verhagen, B. (2006). Connectivism: a new learning theory?
• White, D.S. and Le Cornu, A., 2011. Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9).
Recommended