Implications for flexibility (Lesson design with TPACK - part 5)

In the fifth and last part of this post series, I want to focus on the opportunities and challenges of flexibility that arise when designing with the TPACK model.

Designing with the TPACK model can promote flexibility in many ways. Simply the way of presenting teacher knowledge as an integration of content, pedagogy and technology emphasizes flexibility. The integration automatically points to opportunities for flexibility such as pedagogical approaches that one did not think of before (see my first posts about the TPACK model for more examples).

The TPACK design approach secures that everything will be taken in consideration if in one of the circles a design decision is made that opts for flexibility. So if designer chose for example to use a certain pedagogy that stresses the adaptive education, considering the TPACK model makes sure that the designer also thinks about the positive and negative implications this has on the technology and the content. The TPACK model helps designers to exhaustively address all important factors for the design.

Designing with the TPACK model does not impose a lot of challenges on flexibility. The only problem that arises is that if one chooses for flexibility in one component, this immediately puts restrictions on the design for the other two components of the model. One cannot simple change an existing practice with implementing more flexibility. No, if one makes changes in one circle, this will also affect the other circles and ultimately TPACK.

A short reflective note

As you can see from my last posts, I was pretty occupied with flexibility in education and with pedagogical and technological issues over the last couple of weeks. Now it’s time for a short personal reflection. What is the influence of these components on education and how do they all fit together?

Flexibility, the use of technology and a learner-centered pedagogy are the corner stones of prospective education. There are a lot of new challenges education has to face now and in the future. Just to name some buzzwords: knowledge society, competencies like communication and social skills, life long learning... Students are also more diverse, concerning their interests, prior knowledge and their social and living situation. There is no one approach that fits all. Students do not want traditional education. They want education adjusted to their needs. The flexibility- technology-pedagogy triad can be a very effective means in achieving that. For example, flexibility and technology can create possibilities that were not attainable before (see my earlier blog posts about dialectic pedagogy and Elgg).

But it’s not that simple. What these three components also have in common is that they place a lot of implications on the organization and the teachers. Flexibility causes logistical problems and will take up more time and will cost more money. The same is true for current pedagogies. With learner-centered pedagogies the teacher will have to fulfill the role of a coach or facilitator. This is more time intensive than just standing in front of the class. Although technology can offer a lot of new possibilities it is also very expensive and it takes a lot of time to develop suitable software. And of course not all teachers know how to use the technology or might not even want to.

Stay tuned to my blog and learn along with myself more about the possibilities and implications of flexibility, technology and pedagogy.

6 ways to create more flexibility in higher education

Granting more flexibility in education is a powerful tool for empowering learners. Students can tailor their learning situation to their needs. They are no longer bound to a scenario where all key decisions about learning are preset by the instructor or the institution.

But decisions concerning flexibility should not be made without good considerations. Letting students make their own choices will supply them with a lot of benefits but it can also confront them, their teachers and their institution with problems.

Basically all parts oft the curriculum (see the curricular spider web of Jan van der Akker above) can be made flexible. The key ones you should keep in mind are:

1. Give students a choice about the content.
   

   Students should be able to make decisions about what they are learning. This can for example comprise the choice of topics or of the choice of the sequence of different parts of a course. Especially students from different backgrounds and with diverse prior knowledge will benefit from this freedom. However, not all students will want to make this decision. Choices will at the same time bring more responsibility and a greater need for self-motivating. Too much flexibility in content can impede cohesion of the study program and give problems with recognition for the course. It will also cause a lot of extra workload for teachers because they have to adapt to the interests of the learner.
   

2. Let teachers act more flexible.
   

   It should be more flexible for the students how the teacher is facilitating learning. The teacher can be flexible in what type of help he is giving, how he communicates and in his availability. This gives advantages for the students as well as for the teachers. The teacher can adapt the contact with the students more to his own time schedule. For example he can work from home and communicate with the students via the internet. Communication can be faster, more individually supporting and more targeted. Great problems one might encounter are that some teachers persistently resist any innovation. This is understandable because a more tailored approach is time consuming and brings more workload. Many teachers will also need extra training for fulfilling their new roles.
   

3. Provide flexibility in materials and resources.
   

   With flexibility in materials and resources, students are given more choices with what they are learning. The choices can concern the delivery method, different learning resources, technologies used for support and communication or the source of material (instructor, learners, library and internet). Students with learning disabilities and students with diverse learning styles will draw a lot of advantages form more flexibility in materials and resources. Disadvantages are that teachers always have to be on top of new technology and their use. Technology can also be very expensive to purchase. Students might have difficulties to make informed choices between different materials and resources. A great range of materials won't be manageable by the teachers either.
   

4. Make grouping more flexible.
   

   Let students make their own choice whether they want to learn in lectures, in groups, individually or in a combination of both. Students have different preferences in how they like to work. Some benefit most from working in groups other more from working independently. Giving students more flexibility in grouping can however lead to logistical problems. Institutions will face problems in reserving rooms and teachers won't be able to adjust to different grouping needs.
   

5. Let students choose the learning location.
   

   Students should have more autonomy in selecting the location where they want to study. This choice can result in distance learning or combination with face-to-face and distance learning. An advantage for the students is that they can stay in their current home, work and social situation and still follow education. Problems are mainly technological. Students and the institution will need the right hardware and the right programs. This may imply a lot costs.
   

6. Let students choose at what time they want to learn.
   

   Students should have more freedom in choosing at what time they want to learn. This can for example concern the time for starting and finish the course, for submitting assignments and for interaction with the teacher and other students. Students can adjust the progress of the course more to their own pace of studying. This will benefit strong and weak learners equally. But also "normal" students won't experience all content even easy. Problems with leaving students with a flexible time schedule are again of logistical nature. The institution and teachers won't be able to adjust to the timetables of all students. They will for example have great problems in scheduling lectures. A disadvantage for students is that they have to be more self-directed and self-motivated to study if they do not have to stick to a preset roster.
   

If you are interested in more possibilities for flexible learning look at a multinational study founded from the European Union performed by Collis, Vingerhoets and Moonen in 1997, the book Flexible learning in a digital world by Collis and Moonen and for a practice example at the article Introduction of an online approach to flexible learning for on-campus and distance education students: lessons learned and ways forward by Dorrian and Wache from 2008.