Content uploaded by Ulf- Daniel Ehlers
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ulf- Daniel Ehlers on Aug 25, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
„TRANSFER“-
„TUTOR“-„COACH“-
„NETWORK“ –
THE EMERGING
SOCIAL VALUE OF
LEARNING
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers, University Duisburg-Essen,
Anne Steinert, FOM University of Applied Science,
2010
Reference: Ehlers, U.-D., Steinert, A. (2010): „Transfer“-„Tutor“-„Coach“-
„Network“ – The emerging social value of learning.
Correspondence address: Prof. Dr. phil. habil. Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
Duale Hochschule Baden-Württemberg | Baden-Württemberg Cooperative State University
Friedrichstraße 14, 70174 Stuttgart
Deutschland | Germany
mail: ehlers@dhbw.de | ulf.ehlers@googlemail.com
skype: ulf.ehlers
web: www.dhbw.de | www.ulf-ehlers.net
„TRANSFER“-„TUTOR“-„COACH“-„NETWORK“
-THE EMERGING SOCIAL VALUE OF LEARNING
Author
Author
ABSTRACT
The following paper explores the question how self-directed learning can be supported by Networked Learning. Self-
directed learning is though not a novelty, its relevance has been discussed with changing perspectives for a long time.
The decisive one, for this article, is the paradigm change in education, from instructional to experience based learning,
which is attended by a changed perception about learning and instruction styles: Phrasing with Baumgartner (1997), from
a “Transfer-oriented style” over a “Tutorial-style” to a “Coaching-style”. However, they are still based under the
assumption of an “instructor”, who, how “coaching” he/she may be, is still an “impulse-giver”/”initiator”, who can not
always be seen as given in today’s world. Networked Learning offers hence an opportunity to learn in a self-directed way
when- (what-) and wherever learners want to, whereby they can draw on a worldwide resource-pool of knowledge and
“peers” as learning attendants through whom (external) reflection and validation is given.
KEYWORDS
Self-directed Learning; Collaborative Learning; Networks; Instruction style.
1. INTRODUCTION
The following article highlights the question how self-directed learning can be supported by Netwoked
Learning. Self-directed learning is though not a novelty, its relevance has been discussed for a long time.
However, within this discussion the perspective changed in the course of time. The most actual one is
probably the economical and political one (e.g. Prague Communiqué, 2001), which needs self-directed
learning for its postulation for life-long learning. Another perspective is taken lately by studies, announcing
changing learning contexts, which in turn shall require “new learning” (e.g. Canadian Council on Learning,
2006). The decisive one, for this article, is though an older one, which is based on a paradigm change in
education, from instructional to experience based learning (Mandl/Gruber/Renkl 1993; Barr/Tagg 1995,
Gerstenmeaier/Mandl 1995). This paradigm shift is attended by a changed perception about learning and
instruction styles: Phrasing with Baumgartner (1997), from a “Transfer-oriented style” over a “Tutorial-
style” to a “Coaching-style”. Consequently, shifts to “instruction styles” enhancing self-directed learning
already exist. However, they are still based under the assumption of an “instructor”, who, how “coaching”
he/she may be, is still an “impulse-giver”/”initiator”, who can not always be seen as given in today’s world
(cf. e.g. Alheit/Dausien, 2002) remarks to life-long learning). Networked Learning offers on the contrary an
opportunity to learn in a self-directed way when- (what-) and wherever learners want to, whereby they can
draw on a worldwide resource-pool of knowledge and “peers” as learning attendants through whom
(external) reflection and validation is given.
The following article highlights hence shortly three of the leading influential learning theories:
Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism (For a detailed overview cf. (e.g.) Baumgartner (1997)).
Building hereon possible instruction styles according to Baumgartner (1997) will be looked at closer, namely
“Transfer”, “Tutor” and “Coach” (Kember (1997) e.g. highlights another approach, which has different
classifications but comes to a similar conclusion), whereby it is taken into account in how far they stimulate
self-directed learning. In the context of the theoretical foundation of these instruction styles, the concept of
Networked Learning will be presented. Concluding, it will be pointed out, how Networked Learning can
facilitate an “instruction style”, which enhances self-directed and social learning without an external-given
“initiator”.
2. EXISTENT LEARNING THEORIES AND NEW IDEAS
Three of the leading influential learning theories are Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism, which
form gravitation centres for the explanation of instruction and learning strategies’. From these different
perceptions about learning also different points of view for instruction styles can be deducted. Baumgartner
(1997) e.g. allocates three learning styles (cf. tab. 1 first three columns), scilicet “Transfer”, “Tutor” and
“Coach”, to these three theories: (These styles are though not mutually exclusive; on the contrary they all are
needed for different purposes, domains or parts of the learning process respectively different learning
contexts.)
1. Behaviouristic Learning strategies assume that the lecturer knows what the learner needs to
learn. Learning is seen as a conditioned reflex, which is acquired through adaption. Behaviorists
try to breed the “right” reaction through an adequate input, which is supported by an appropriate
feedback. (i.e. transfer model)
2. Cognitivism emphasizes on the contrary the inner processes of the human brain and tries to
explain the in-between processing. Hereby, many different characteristics can be found, however
they grasp the process of human thinking as information processing (i.e. brain ≈ computer).
“Problem solving” takes the centre stage in the learning process here. According to Cognitivism,
learners try to solve problems self-directed, whereby the exercises are already “didactically
adjusted” respectively simplified. Here, the lecturer is equivalent to a tutor.
3. The Constructivism reckons reality as an interactive conception. Learning is seen as an active
process, where knowledge is constructed in relation to former experiences in complex and real
situations. The constructivist perception highlights the personal experience. Learners have both
to manage complex situations and generate the necessary way of looking at a problem. Here, the
lecturer is in accordance with the picture of a “coach” or moderator.
Behaviorists focus hence on the pure transfer of knowledge; the learner is equivalent to a knowledge
recipient. A self-directed learning process is thus not intended. Cognitivism has a changeover-position in the
paradigm change. Interaction between learner and instructor plays already an important role. The learner
starts to explore knowledge – but within a framework, defined and didactically adjusted by the instructor.
The constructivist perception comprises already a self-directed learning approach, moreover social practices,
interaction and reflection into its explanations: The learner constructs its knowledge more or less on its own;
the instructor is only a “learning-attendant”. However, it is still configured under the assumption of an
“instructor” – even though the instructor acts as “coach” respectively “attendant”. A further step in the
development of self-directed learning would hence be, if the learner “constructs” its “attendant” on its own –
like in Networks respectively communities, where e.g. peers, in form of supporting networks, take over this
role. If one factors the new media into these considerations an even bigger resource pool (of peers
respectively connections and thus for both knowledge and the reflection process) becomes apparent as time
and place independency exist. To explain Networked Learning the Constructivism’ thoughts are thus picked
up and continued, whereby it is drawn on aspects of Connectivism and Social Network Analysis (SNA) for
further analysis.
Connectivism explains hereby the relevance of connections for learning in an increasingly conjoined
world. According to Connectivism learning occurs, when a learner connects to a learning community and
feeds information into it (Kop/Hill, 2008). Through this self-initiated process new connections between ideas
and concepts are established. Understanding arises through applying meta-cognition by selecting and
evaluating the network’s elements to maintain the useful ones and eliminate the rest. Learning is hence an
active self-directed “knowledge creation process” instead of a passive “knowledge consumption process”.
(Siemens, 2008) Due to networks, learners are enabled to access (through their connections) new information
easily and update expert knowledge in a self-directed and reflective manner.
SNA helps further to point out the different types of connections and their potential for learning.
Although, any network relation has potential for learning (e.g. Hanft, 1997) as both an exchange of
knowledge and learning (through the interaction process) occurs, some connections are more beneficial than
others are. This aspect can be amplified by referring to Granovetter’s theory “Strength of Weak Ties” (1973),
where he highlighted different kinds of connections in a network and their implications. He differed between
strong (e.g. close friends) and weak ties, whereby the latter are more loose contacts and serve as bridges
between different networks, which in turn support the information flow - not only between networks but also
within networks. This means transferred to learning: Learners need to configure their own learning landscape
by developing a portfolio of weak connections to max out their information access.
Considering Connectivism and SNA against the background of Constructivism, a definition of Networked
Learning can therefore be as follows: Learning occurs through (1) both an active, self-directed and reflective
exchange of knowledge between entities, which are preferably connected through weak ties to max out
information, and (2) a self-guided social interacting process, which leads to the creation of one’s own
supporting network. Additionally, Networked Learning is (3) per se a situative process as connections
respectively topis are selcted according to the (actual) point of interest.
3. EXTENDED INSTRUCTION STYLES
After highlighting the concepts and three established instruction styles, a fourth one will be presented, which
is based on the concept of Networked Learning and focuses on a social, active and (peer-) reflective
connection process instead of an “external initiator”.
Table 1 Extended Instruction Styles (first three columns based on Baumgartner, 1997)
Transfer
Tutor
Coach
Network: (self-initiated
Connecting)
factual knowledge,
„know-that“
procedures, methods,
“know-how”
social practices,
“knowing-in-action”
networking competence
(to navigate through
connections and know-
ledge), learning in
networks, “know-who”
knowledge transfer
dialogue
interaction
network-interaction:
self-directed Networking
knowing, recognizing
practicing, problem solving
acting reflective,
inventing
acting reflective in
networks, validation of
knowledge and
competences through
(peers in) networks
repetition of correct
answers
selection and appliance of
correct methods
managing complex
situations
creation of supporting-
networks
memorizing, recognizing
ability, skill
responsibility, life
experience
social competence, life-
long learning
teaching, explaining
monitoring, helping,
demonstrating
cooperating, conjointly
implementation
self-organized
cooperation
“Networks” as possible fourth “instruction style” illustrate therefore a further step in the development of self-
directed learning in the learning and instruction process, which has though not to be understood as exclusion
of the established ones but rather as “add-on”. The extension enables learners to create their own supporting
network, which can act as their personal “learning attendant”. Therewith learners have the opportunity to
learn in a self-directed way when- (what-) and wherever they want to, whereby they can draw on a
worldwide resource-pool of knowledge and “peers” as learning attendants through whom (external) reflection
and validation is given.
4. CONCLUSION
In this paper it was pointed out that Networked Learning is a possible way to enhance self-directed learning
by creating personal learning “attendants” on the basis of a supporting network. Networked Learning is
hereby not a substitute of established instruction styles; rather it is based on them and offers an extension for
further purposes, domains or learning contexts respectively self-directed learning. However, further research
is required to achieve empirical data over the very nature of Networked Learning and its implications for
self-directed learning. Yet, another step is to investigate and evaluate how Networked Learning can be
integrated in instructional concepts respectively formal learning settings.
REFERENCES
Alheit, P. (1999): On a contradictory way to the ‘Learning Society’: A critical approach. In: Studies in the Education of
Adults 31 (1),( pp. 66-82).
Alheit, P. / Dausien, B. (2002): Bildungsprozesse über die Lebensspanne und lebenslanges Lernen. In: R. Tippelt (Ed.),
Handbuch Bildungsforschung, Opladen Leske + Budrich, (pp. 565-585).
Barr, R. B. / Tagg, J. (1995): From teaching to learning--a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change Magazine,
27 (6), (pp. 12-25).
Baumgartner, P. / Payr, S. (1997): Erfinden lernen. In: Konstruktivismus und Kognitionswissenschaft. Kulturelle
Wurzeln und Ergebnisse. Zu Ehren Heinz von Foersters. K. H. Müller & F. Stadler (Eds.) Wien-New York, Springer.
8: (pp. 89-106).
Canadian Council on Learning (2006): Canadian postsecondary education: A positive record, an uncertain future,
retrieved March 10, 2010 from
http://www.ccl-cca.ca/CCL/Reports/PostSecondaryEducation/Archives2006/PSEChapterHighlights.htm?Language=EN.
Field, J. (2000): Lifelong Learning and the New Educational Order. Stoke on Trent. Stirling (Trentham Books).
Gerstenmaier, J. / Mandl, H. (1995): Wissenserwerb unter konstruktivistischer Perspektive. in: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik;
41. Jg. 1995, Nr. 6; S. 867-888; Beltz Psychologie-Verlags-Union; Weinheim, Basel.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, (pp. 1360-1380).
Hanft, A. (1997): Lernen in Netzwerkstrukturen. Tendenzen einer Neupositionierung der betrieblichen und beruflichen
Bildung. Arbeit, 3 (6), (pp. 282-303).
Kember, D. (1997): A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics' conceptions of teaching. Learning
and instruction, 7, 3, (pp. 255-275).
Kopp, R. / Hill, A. (2008): Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? In The International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol 9, No 3.
Mandl, H. / Gruber, H. / Renkl, A. (1993): Learning to apply: from "school garden instruction" to technology-based
learning environments. research report No. 15, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München.
Overwien, Bernd (2008): Informelles Lernen. In T.Coelen & H.-U. Otto (Eds.), Grundbegriffe Ganztagsbildung Das
Handbuch. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, (pp. 128-136).
Prague Communiqué (2001): retrieved March 13, 2010 from http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-
Main_doc/010519PRAGUE_COMMUNIQUE.PDF.
Simons, P.R.J. (1992): Theories and principles of learning to learn. In: Tujinman, A. & van der Kamp, M. (Eds.)
Learning Across the Lifespan. Theories, Research, Policies. Oxford (pp. 173-188).
Siemens, G. (2008): About: Description of connectivism. Connectivism: A learning theory for today’s learner, website,
retrieved March 11, 2010 from http://www.connectivism.ca/about.html.
