I came to Bass’s “Engines of Inquiry” and Groom and Lamb’s “Reclaiming Innovation” with the kind of scepticism brought on by the “innovation fatigue” the latter article notes, along with my own troubled feelings about the isolating aspects of the “silo” effect of technology brought on by the corporatization of innovation. I felt both as a threat to the basic tenets of pedagogy that I hold dear: exposure to new concepts in safe and supportive spaces, critical thinking and questioning of cultural mystifications, and for me the central importance of human connection in any learning environment. What I took from both these texts is that there are great methodological ways of approaching the integration of technology in the classroom that do not hold new systems as a panacea for education and for that I feel grateful to discover this approach as I begin thinking about hybrid courses.
Groom and Lamb’s take on how we as educators can “reclaim innovation” was for me particularly engaging as I think about the possibility of my own hybrid course (which is not to say that Bass’s work was not helpful…I just don’t see my students cathecting toward CD-ROMs in 2014). Their isolating outsourcing as a key problem in the integration of technology in the educational setting made me develop a loose idea as to how I would like to approach my own use of hybrid learning. If outsourcing–of the software/hardware, of technical/professional support, and really of the expertise away from the classroom to “the latest product or saleable idea”–how can hybrid teaching and learning posit something quite the opposite? Essentially, how can we incorporate technology that does not embrace the silo stack in such a way so that instead of outsourcing innovation, we can”in-source” it–rely upon the capacities of the students as sites of innovation. How can we incorporate technology in the form of open platforms (using any technology that the teachers and students feel mutually comfortable with or willing to teach one another) to harness the pedagogical potential within the class?
Bass’s article articulates first steps of this process or insourcing potential in what I see as an effort to deconstruct the false limitations of the course, mainly its physical (classroom) and temporal (schedule) parameters. His idea of technology not as site of more passive learning (coping mechanism) but as an “engine of inquiry” has the potential to push the course–and its sites of learning and teaching–into times and places that both student and teacher can elaborate through process and experience (through blogs, videochats, sharing pictures, etc., that can make NYC a learning lab). Secondly, by removing the idea that a course has own teleological route (first we learn A to understand B, or first learn A then learn B because of a historical or other kind of ordering philosophy), we may democratize the classroom by de-emphasizing the expert-novice paradigm so that students understand their own key role in the course as a user and producer. I see in-sourcing as a method to use technology in an open and supportive way (beginning with mutual comfort zones and branching into mutual support of learning new tools) to re-imagine the course not as fixed but as full of potentiality. Hybrid courses that look to insource seeks to each student to discover their own potential to understand, analyze and create–not just the potential of satisfying learning goals. My personal goal for this two-week period is open my own pedagogy to a flexible methodology to show students how to use their own resources “to spark” “the possibility” that exists “beyond those predefined uses” of literature, of technology, or of their own affective, experiential, or personal capacities.
The hybrid teaching model–in its potentially wide embrace of different technologies, sites of learning/teaching, and knowledges–seems an excellent way to shift innovation from existing outside the classroom to discovering the potential for innovation within it already. Seeing students as producers of the central innovative work of the class–through group study, assignments, and personal discovery–sets a new goal for the hybrid classroom. Untethering innovation from technology makes the process less “of a technological problem, one that requires a ‘system’ to ‘manage’ it” and returns it to the status of “toolkits that invite their users to adapt and extend them” in hopes of opening students to learning as that mythic “life-affirming adventure.”
Your observation, Miciah, opens up a few questions for me, the least not being, what kinds of technology are not only specifically suited to innovation, but also help to guide both instructor and student to the best possible of learning experiences (although I agree with Bass that mistakes, just as the inextricabilis error in a labyrinth, can be ultimately fulfilling)? And how should I organize and incorporate various learning environments so that each student can reach her potential (and do these learning environments need to be the same for every student)? As far as the kinds of technology I’ll be using, I’m sure I will be experimenting as I embark on my first hybrid course in the fall (English 2100, a composition course). As you noted, various formats seem to lend themselves readily to innovation: blogs, video chats, a number of sharing opportunities (and the advice I seem to be getting from virtually everyone is “keep it simple,” at least initially). Of course, I want the assignments to be about education and not technology, but there are so many exciting options/tools, it seems one is obligated to experiment out of one’s comfort zone, and I hope I can make some occasional leaps, while still keeping the work goals transparent to the students.
The more intriguing problem that your comment has brought up, though, as I think about my own course, is how I can creatively and effectively integrate the disparate environments, so that each learning venue enhances the next, and is not just some exercise in technology or, in the case of f2f, innovation for the sake of it (Groom and Lamb’s “disruption,” even though chaos can often be wonderfully liberating ). Again, much of this shaping/consolidating will be experimentation, but the syllabus is a plan for both the students and myself, after all, and I will have to make some difficult choices before the course begins.
Still, my impression is that hybridity seems much more alive that either simply a f2f or a fully online course. Of course, this apparent richness may be only my naïve perception. I’ll be interested in reading what thoughts/concerns people are grappling with.
Hi Miciah, I keep thinking about your idea that hybrid courses can have “the potential to push the course–and its sites of learning and teaching–into times and places that both student and teacher can elaborate through process and experience (through blogs, videochats, sharing pictures, etc., that can make NYC a learning lab).”
I think it could be really productive to think in this way that you’re suggesting: hybrid education is not just about technology but about time and space. Being in NYC, as you suggest, this opens up so many possibilities. Maybe we can produce some kind of “artifact” (as we’re tasked to do next week) about ways to use NYC productively using multimedia, f2f, solo cultural explorations, etc.
What an interesting and thought-provoking post. The idea that hybrid courses can get classes off the grid structure is one that keeps coming up and that has rich possibilities. The 20th century classroom construct is changing–and that change brings possibility. The ideas you mention, Miciah, and that Groom and Lamb discuss, of embracing disruption and insourcing technology intersect with Jeanne’s point about (I think) nonetheless having to teach a content-based class that does exist in a structured environment. Bass is perhaps the link with his, as you mention, discussion of engines of inquiry vs. passive learning.
Wow, I love the idea of “in-sourcing” as a strategic approach to harnessing the skills and innovative potential of the members of each unique course.
This makes me think very practically about making use of the specific technology skills and interests that my students have. Recently I’ve had a lot of CIS majors showing up my classes. I wonder what would happen if I tasked my students with developing proposals for communication-intensive activities using web-based tools to target certain learning goals? I suspect they would come up with ideas I have never thought of.