H809 – Fitting Jones & Preece framework into Conole et al. model (A7.7)
How does Jones and Preece (2006) framework fit into Conole et al.’s (2004) model?
I see Bob’s health community represented in socially situated learning. The focus in on interaction and communication. Social situated learning emphasis on interpersonal relationship and views learning as a social participation. Language has two functions. As a communicative or cultural tool, used for sharing and jointly developing knowledge and as psychological tool for organising our individual thoughts, for reasoning, planning and for reviewing actions.
Activty theory applies more for the Dublin’s teacher community. The focus is on activity, collaboration and communication. Activity is task-orientated and structured (constructivist). Action is mediated through artefacts within a framework of activity within a wider socio-cultural context of rules and community.
How helpful is the model?
Certainly Conole et al.’s model is explanatory and helps to understand learning theory, although in a very general way. It can also serve as a mechanism for locating theories through the identification of key learning characterisitcs. The model might even enable practitioners to evaluate their own practice and make more explicit their underpinning pedagogical approaches, but I don’t really see how that tool should help me to plan, design and profile learning opportunities. Sure Figure 3 and Figure 4 show a difference in the traditional PGCE module and the online module, but what else does it tell me. I would need a lot more detailed information to grasp the whole new concept and the underlying pedagogy behind the new designed online module. The model is very abstract and theoretical, but I somehow miss the connection to the practice. Kwowing that I want to favour e.g. more collaboration and participation, thus applying a social learning perspective rather than e.g. behaviourism, is one side, but knowing how I translate that into an activity is the other side.