Dennison, Paul (2007) Learning management: a new framework for higher education. In: Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE) Annual Conference 2007, 11-13 Dec 2007, Brighton, Sussex, UK.

PDF Dennison_Learning_Management_SRHE_Dec_2007_v2[1].docx - Submitted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (142kB)

Abstract

This paper begins by re-examining Kolb’s experiential learning cycle (1984) and asks the question “How far does it actually apply to processes of learning in Higher Education?” Several shortcomings of the model are identified; in particular that the model does not describe the praxis of the learners in Higher Education, nor in education generally. An essential distinction between learning and discovery is pointed out and its consequences briefly discussed in the light of the crucial importance of symbolic language in mediating learning (Deacon, 1997).
The concept of Learning Management is introduced and the need for a new model for Learning Management justified by the advantages of applying management theory, which borrowed extensively from theories of learning in the last century, to Higher Education. The nature of models is discussed. A distinction is made between frameworks and models. Criteria for the effectiveness of frameworks are suggested.
A framework for Learning Management, the Cross-over Framework, is proposed, enlarging the scope of “How we learn” and centring round the concept of “Learning engagement”. The framework is illustrated by applying it to three very different modes of learning, demonstrating its near-universal applicability to learning technologies.
Although apparently “obvious”, “unrevolutionary”, and deliberately “non-prescriptive”, the Cross-over Framework nonetheless reveals interesting perspectives on some of our currently cherished and espoused views on learning;
• it challenges the apparently a priori dictum that learning should necessarily be learner-centred
• it de-couples assessment from the learning process. Assessment is not necessary to learning although it is necessary to Learning Management.
The framework has other surprising consequences; for instance, it suggests that to be effective, learning should also be efficient.
The Cross-over Framework is reformulated in terms of “problem-solving” and in terms of so-called “Hegelian” Dialectic (Müller; 1958). Conclusions are drawn about the necessity of creativity to learning, the exploitation of our species’ avidity for problem-solving, the crucial responsibility of educators to select information which the learning process then reconstructs as knowledge, and the design of learning around the individual learner – mass customisation.
Finally a linkage is made between Learning Management and Boyer’s four scholarships’ thesis (1990) concerning the purpose of Universities.

Item Type:	Conference or Conference Paper (Poster)
Additional Information:	[1] Poster session - Session: P - Parallel Session: 2. Research Domain: Reshaping Academic Practice, Work and Culture. At the Annual Conference of the Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE), 11-13 December 2007.
Uncontrolled Keywords:	learning management, higher education
Subjects:	L Education > LB Theory and practice of education > LB2300 Higher Education
Pre-2014 Departments:	School of Education School of Education > Education Research Group
Related URLs:	Organisation Organisation
Last Modified:	05 Nov 2019 14:53
URI:	http://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/3528

Actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads