So, I have already established I might not be so flexible in my learning when it comes to using new applications of technology. However, flexible learning extends much further than use of technology and the often associated distance learning. Below I have written a brief summary of 5 different aspects of flexible learning, with their advantages and disadvantages.
Flexibility related to entry requirements is mainly focused on conditions for participation. This relates closely to the recent developments in competence-based learning and the recognition of prior learning (RPL; or in Dutch EVC-erkennen verworven competenties). An example of fixed requirements could be a selection test on relevant issues for the course or having to present certain diplomas. A more flexible approach is based on using RPL, whereby different kinds of prior knowledge would lead to participation in the course. The advantage of having fixed requirements is that the entry level of all students can be presumed to be more or less at the same level. A disadvantage is that it may cancel out potential students who do have the relevant RPL, but not the diploma for example. The advantage of a more flexible approach using RPL is the more individual outlook on prospective students, however, it may be more difficult to integrate those different types of students in the course; a more individual route may be necessary. This is logistically not always feasible in the current set up of higher education in The Netherlands. Furthermore, instructors may not have the time or resources to deal with the increased individuality and required variations of the course (Collis & Moonen, 2001).
An item that is connected to flexibility related to content is topics of the course. In a system with little or no flexibility, the course leader determines the content, the order in which it is offered and the approach towards the content (theoretical vs. practical) (Collis & Moonen, 2001). By adding more flexibility; i.e. the learner can make choices on one or more of these elements, the learner is empowered to influence the way and content of the course of learning. This can be seen as an advantage. It also fits with a social constructivism approach to learning, in which the focus is on the fact that students have different approaches to learning, that students are to take responsibility for own learning and gives students control over when and how they want to learn (Dorrian & Wache, 2009). However, this shift towards self-directed learning may lead to student anxiety and resentment (Dorrian & Wache, 2009), as students may not always feel confident enough to decide on their own course of learning. Furthermore, students need to have a certain level of prior knowledge, to be able to determine what is relevant for them. Another advantage is that students’ are no longer required to follow (and pay for!) the entire course, but can follow only those modules that are relevant to them, thus making the course less expensive.
Two aspects connected to flexibility related to instructional approach and resources are learning resources: modality, origin (instructor, learners, library, WWW) and social organisation of learning (face to face; group; individual). An enormous development in resources has taken place the last decade. The growth of Internet, availability of e-books, online I-pod presentations and the like have led to a much more dynamic world with regard to resources. The advantage is clear, students can now access information anywhere at any time. One of the drawbacks is however the validity of sources found by the students. To increase flexibility in learning resources a mix of ‘traditional’ learning materials such as books in the library and the new sources of information is desired. The supplemental resources, which are not prescribed can be used to enrich the prescribed information (Collis & Moonen, 2001).
Depending on learning style, students will have different perceptions on the social organization of learning. With an increased flexibility, students are able to choose the form that best matches their learning style, i.e. face to face communication, online learning environment, working individually or in a group. The advantage is that students then have a choice in learning the way they prefer. A disadvantage is that students are not encouraged to incorporate other learning styles as well. When students are forced to work in different types of social organizations, they can actually learn from other learning styles, and learn to adopt their own learning style based on the composition of the particular group they are working in.
An aspect related to flexibility related to delivery and logistics is types of help, communication available and technology required. In a flexible environment, the student has a choice between a low-end platform (i.e. tv, telephone and stand-alone computer) up until a high-end platform, which uses fast network connections. In a less flexible environment, the course leader would decide on the main platform to be used (Collis & Moonen, 2001). With regard to communication, a more flexible approach is apart from having face-to-face communication as is the case with classroom settings, to include online communication as well. The advantage for the learner is clear; it allows more flexibility in when and how to ask questions, as questions often arise when students are reading the materials, rather than only in the classrooms environment. A disadvantage may be that learners then start to expect immediate answers from the instructor. The instructors however should also be able to manage their own time to deal with questions from students, in balance with other responsibilities and tasks (Collis & Moonen, 2001). In providing different types of communication, clear instructions should be given to students and staff. With regard to technology, realistic expectations of new systems should be created. Support should also be given to students who are less comfortable with using new systems (Dorrian & Wache, 2009). An important aspect of using (new) technology is implementation. The likelihood that a student is going to use it, can be described by the 4-E model (Collis, Peters & Pals, 2000; in Collis & Moonen, 2001). This model describes four factors: environment, educational effectiveness, ease of use and engagement. Environment relates to the context of the education; educational effectiveness can be actual or perceived, and engagement relates to the student’s personal response to using technology and change (Collis & Moonen, 2001).
These are only some of the aspects related to flexible learning. Concluding it can be said that increased flexibility in learning is desired, but does come with some constraints as well. It requires careful planning and implementation.
References
Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: experiences and expectations. New York: Routledge.
Dorrian, J., & Wache, D. (2009). Introduction of an online approach to flexible learning for on-campus and distance education students: lessons learned and ways forward. Nurse Education Today, 29, 157-167.
