This resource has been drawn from discussions in the General Forum of the Australian Flexible Learning Community during the period July 2002 to December 2004. Many thanks to all who contributed.

Sometimes members of the Australian Flexible Learning Community posted messages with the deliberate intention of stirring up a debate. The following is an example. It began with this series of questions, in this case posted by the facilitator Carole McCulloch who may have throught that things were a bit quiet and needed stirring up...

Where is self-directed learning taking us?

• Is there any gratification, personally or peer-based, in self-directed learning? You post your documents by email, or you point your cursor and click, in the hope that you are clicking the right check box.
• Can anyone see you, or hear you?
• Your feedback is right there in front of you, and yet can you ask a relevant question of your monitor, and expect an informed answer?
• There is always the 'help' index, if you can enter the right search parameters. Perhaps the FAQ page will tell you if anyone has had a similar query to your own. What? You have no compatriots in the 'what if' column? Bugger!

'Teaching' has always had the 'mentor' equation for me, but maybe I'm old-fashioned. If you are feeling lost ask the teacher; If you are unsure of something you have read ask a colleague and get some feedback.

Don't get me wrong now, I am all for new ways to deliver education to the masses, but the whole personality of teaching is slowly but surely drifting by the wayside, it seems.

• Are we replacing it with a worthwhile set of tools for the majority of the stakeholders?
• Are we meeting the expectations of the new generation of learners?
• Can we assess by the 'attendance' records, or the 'drop-out' rate, if we are delivering a successful online course of study?
• Do we need an indicator of success divided by the length of attendance?

Hmmm… Clearly this was an invitation difficult for Community members to ignore. First in was a contribution quite definitely in support of self-directed learning. Though it seems the contributor and the author of the original posting may be defining self-directed in different ways.

I'd like to take the podium and address the debate on the status of self-directed e-learning for the affirmative team!

I will make three points and within them answer the critical questions - massaged a little to suit my presentation:

1. Are we meeting the expectations of the new generation of learners? Do we need indicators of success based on 'attendance' or 'participation'?
2. Are we providing a worthwhile set of tools for the stakeholders? Is there any gratification, personally or peer-based, in self-directed learning?
3. Where is self-directed learning taking us?

1. Self-directed e-learning is alive and well for a large segment of the learning community. The X, Y and Z generations are now, or will be soon, very comfortable with the kind of self-directed e-learning that is now emerging. Consider for a moment the game based preferences for many computer users between the ages of 12 and 18 right now. They play, compete and LEARN in a self-directed manner using the games devised by games developers not much older than themselves. Consider now the self-directed courseware this cohort may elect when ready to make choices about future vocational or lifelong learning.

So I say Yes, we are meeting the expectations of the new generation of learners? They will make their own decisions about whether the experience is successful by voting with their mice and keyboards.

2. Self-directed e-learning in the first decade of the 21st Century provides a plethora of tools for many stakeholders. Let's consider one group of stakeholders - the teachers! It is a fact that a large percentage of the teaching fraternity in adult education are now aware of, familiar with or indeed expert in a wide range of technological teaching tools. Those in the lead at the moment are the ones who have embraced the technology to find solutions to educational issues of access and equity. The teachers are still providing their wisdom and mentoring skills, but they are now taking on a new guise. The X-Gen cohort are still reliant upon the expertise of teachers who create their self-directed learning environments. And believe it or not, the teachers themselves value highly the Self-directed e-learning experiences available for them.

Let's consider also the other stakeholders - the learners. What tools do we give them? We actually provide them with the best tool of all - enabling them to 'learn how to learn' in a self-directed way. Isn't that what all good mentors believe - Lead, mentor and get out of the way!

3. Self-directed e-learning is taking us into the second decade of the 21st Century where User Choice rules. The cohort of stakeholders remain the same - learners and teachers - however the learning environment will be shaped quite differently. E-teachers will take on much more of a mentoring role and they will be doing so in more technological ways to support the independent e-learners.

Learners will still flock to schools, institutions, universities and other learning environments but will be able to control much more of their learning patterns.

Teachers will still lead, guide and mentor the learners in each of these learning environments but will be much more engaged in developing learning experiences that suit the preferences of the new learners.

So I say Yes Self-directed e-learning is both HERE and THERE.

The gauntlet had been thrown down. Was there someone willing to tackle the questions from a different perspective?

Yep!

Heh - this could be fun. I don't deeply hold the views that I'm about to post but thought it'd be fun to join the debate and given that Carole has presented the 'yes' position, here's a 'no'.

1. While it's true that the "next generation" of learners may appear to be more savvy with the various tools, my observation is that they're especially good at superficial online chat and those LAN games where you shoot people. This is the previous equivalent of hanging out at the shopping mall and going to Time Zone and, to me, doesn't represent a capacity for self-directed learning nor an especially desirable level of literacy.

Making these assumptions could mean that we're expecting more from these students than they're capable of, assuming they have the requisite skills for online learning (in terms of literacy issues and self directedness in particular) and running the risk of losing them as they quietly drop off the map.

2. While we all know that there are organisations out there who are delivering using state-of-the-art tools and toolboxes, it seems that for the most part organisations who are delivering online are mostly using the equivalent of print based resources supported by forum and chat applications (rather than sophisticated, interactive, intuitively designed, technically reliable pieces of courseware that replicate complex processes, provide deep learning, measure true comprehension rather than parrot responses etc). Additionally, learning is a social act and I wonder whether we can assume that we're at a point where these processes seamlessly translate to an online context.

3. If we're genuinely interested in learning something (cos we're in love with the topic or need to solve an urgent problem) we tend to persist and make the effort. In fact, in these situations, I suggest that we are so self-directed (ie motivated) that it wouldn't matter whether there was a "course" in this area or not - we'd be just as likely to surf the Net, ask people for help, join online interest groups etc, nut it out ourselves.

On the other hand, in a world where people are often studying because they need skills for employment rather than genuinely being motivated to learn those specific skills, I imagine that the additional work involved in doing this online would be burdensome. Ditto for skills sets that are especially complex. In scenarios where a topic is boring (but makes you employable) or is really difficult, there's no substitute for the "sage on the stage" who can guide you, answer your questions, modify the explanation (and monitor your response - facial expression, body language, tone of voice, the words coming out of your mouth rather than the ones you type), until it's in a form that makes sense to you and can build on your existing understanding of the topic rather than a one-size-fits-all set of resources that could be quite hit and miss.

Well, what more could be said? Apparently quite a lot. For example…

" Where is self-directed learning taking us?"

I say: where does other-directed learning take us? Somewhere we don't want to go, usually.

"Is there any gratification, personally or peer-based, in self-directed learning?"

Of course there is - the gratification of learning something that is not necessarily the same as a piece of paper that says that someone else thinks that you have learnt what they wanted you to. And maybe peers will be grateful when you can help them with something that they want or need.

"You post your documents by email, or you point your cursor and click, in the hope that you are clicking the right check box."

What has that got to do with learning- isn't that about assessment and other issues? I could suggest an alternative of sitting on a hard seat squinting at a power point slide show before sitting a multiple choice test- not a lot to do with learning necessarily.

"Can anyone see you, or hear you?"

It can be difficult to be seen and heard but it is possible to be seen and heard by the people you want to see or hear you if you choose an effective strategy. This forum was a good choice perhaps:-)

"Your feedback is right there in front of you, and yet can you ask a relevant question of your monitor, and expect an informed answer?
There is always the 'help' index, if you can enter the right search parameters. Perhaps the FAQ page will tell you if anyone has had a similar query to your own. What? You have no compatriots in the 'what if' column? Bugger!"

You are describing a common experience of online, distance and I'd go so far as to say conventional education, and if they are to be the norms of 'self directed learning ' then yes, 'education' will be an alienating experience.

"'Teaching' has always had the 'mentor' equation for me, but maybe I'm old-fashioned; If you are feeling lost, ask the teacher; If you are unsure of something you have read, ask a colleague, and get some feedback."

Now you are talking about 'teaching' and I do think there is a tension between 'self directed learning' and 'teaching', especially for the teacher. Teachers can be found everywhere and there is nothing preventing you from learning from and with your colleagues

"Don't get me wrong now, I am all for new ways to deliver education to the masses, but the whole personality of teaching is slowly but surely drifting by the wayside, it seems."

It seems to me that technology has enabled massive, not always, comfortable changes in many industries, including the education industry.

"Are we replacing it with a worthwhile set of tools for the majority of the stakeholders?"

Well, I think the tools are worthwhile: rapid global communication, self publishing, data and information storage and retrieval amongst other things, and I think that we are all stakeholders in the future and our children’s futures.

"Are we meeting the expectations of the new generation of learners?"

Maybe not any less than before.

"Can we assess by the 'attendance' records, or the 'drop-out' rate, if we are delivering a successful online course of study? Do we need an indicator of success divided be the length of attendance?"

Well, I don't think so, but I suspect that those who control the purse strings would like simplistic measures based on throughput, but that wouldn't measure the value of 'self directed' learning, particularly to the individual learner. Counting bums on seats and the length of time they've been there doesn't either.

Wouldn't it be great to have a massive investment in all forms of education and learning, including building up useful choices for those who don't want or can't fit into the conventional constraints. But it seems we are going further down the divide and conquer path pitting one form of educational delivery against another and shifting more and more of the costs of learning onto individual. As a community we all will bear the costs of not supporting self- directed, and other forms of learning. Let's argue to make the learning opportunity pie bigger not squabble over the crumbs.

And the point of all this was? A very good one in fact. Here’s the author of the original posting back again.

My intention was to incite people to think about why they are so intent on e-learning, and why we wish to convince others to join in on the push for online resources and assessment tools.

I sincerely believe that for a micro RTO like mine that services an area larger than Victoria, the more online resources and assessment tools we can generate, the less travel and associated costs we will have to bear.

I also sincerely believe that any healthy 'debate' needs proponents with assertive skills on both sides of the 'fence'. You might recall being selected for a debating team at school or UNI, where you found yourself on the 'wrong' team. To be a truly dedicated debater, you need to put your personal values aside, and concentrate on winning the debate for your team, regardless of your personal leanings.

We could all waffle on about how great this or that resource is, or how well so-and-so assembled that Beta test version for our perusal, but without the nay-sayer, we all think we are travelling along swimmingly, if you catch my drift.

You might notice in my original posting I tossed up a lot of questions without attacking any single methodology or resource; just a lot of questions requiring thoughtful input. The start of any useful debate is, and should be, an informed question as to why we are all merrily charging off along a path without a map or compass.

Go girl! :-)