Guilt-free selectivity

This is a reflective one...

Two weeks into the second module, & the new approach seems to be working out. Pick'n'mix, on my terms, is making me feel much more in control of my learning. I know there aren't enough hours in a week to study everything thoroughly, partly because my brain's not as young as it was & I have to go through academic articles several times, slowly, to absorb what they're saying. But instead of panicking or sacrificing other activities to indulge my perfectionist tendencies, I'm only giving one or two topics per week the deep treatment, & it feels great :-)

I've reminded myself of my primary reason for doing this course: to gain a better understanding of my own organisation (the OU) & my role within it as an online tutor & moderator. That's not to say I'm ignoring all the material about "training", because what happens in the corporate world will spill over into the academic world, as universities become ever more more business-oriented - & in fact the most interesting case studies have been about e-learning at Shell & company intranets at a pseudonymous "Eurobank". But I'm not beating myself up about collecting knowledge I'll never need to apply.

I'm also introducing a greater element of instrumentalism into my study & giving more attention to those activities I'm likely to be able to re-use for the end of course portfolio. The others are being read closely if they're intrinsically interesting or potentially useful for the end of module assignment, or just skimmed if they don't meet any of these conditions. Or if they clash horribly with my preferred learning styles - my scepticism about the validity of learning styles analysis goes out of the window when I'm asked to make an audio recording! Instant Messaging was difficult enough....

I still haven't completely skipped any sections of the course (some old habits die very hard) but my personal learning is definitely changing, & that, conveniently, is what the course is all about.

Non-dependent learning

I'm using that term intentionally, in contradistinction to "independent learning", which could be a private & solitary affair. "Non-dependent learning" (I made it up) is simply learning that people get on with, without waiting for somebody to come along & hold their hand & tell them what to do.

I've read statements like this before:

"Instruction can foster a dependency relationship, in which the learner waits for instruction rather than takes charge of their own learning agenda. Effectively, this presents a barrier to self-directed learning."

(CIPD Report: How People Learn, p. 10)

I've probably even written them, during casual discussions of didactic versus constructivist approaches to learning.

But old habits die hard, & I found myself feeling adrift during the first module of H806 because I was waiting for somebody to tell me what to do. How silly is that? I'm going to be more grown-up in Module 2.

looping the loop

Lots of new learning this week!
Here's one I hadn't come across before: Argyris & Schön's three levels of organisational learning (1978).

Seriously simplified, these are:

• single loop learning - find out what has gone wrong, & fix it. This tends to preserve the status quo (an organisation's practices & assumptions) regardless of what's happening 'out there'.


• double loop learning - find out why it has gone wrong, & fix the underlying causes. This can enable an organisation to change its habits, in response to external change.


• deutero learning - find out how best to do the first two (learning about learning). This can enable an organisation to be ready for external change before it even happens.

Seconds out, round two...

So, we've had our Recovery Week & now it's on to Module 2, Learning and the connected organisation. My first instinct is to quibble (surely all organisations are connected, otherwise they're not organisations....) but I really must try to keep my scepticism under control for a while.