Is the DE Institution Ready for the Rogue

Node?

The emphasis for learning needs to shift more to individual learners. So far, DE
institutions are limited to this discussion of choosing between the LMS like Moodle
or Desire2learn, or to committing to social networking application like NING or
ELGG.

However, in my view, the very concept of enabling autonomous learners free reign
within the DE institution’s practice network (not a Network of Practice) to make
mistakes and ask questions and contribute to discussions on every topic within
every group is not even considered. The possibility of allowing rogue nodes to
engage as free agents within a controlled environment is disconcerting for many
educators. I don’t think it should be a reason for alarm. It should be considered
carefully.

Institutions have a great deal of potential for offering the SOLO type of learner a
unique, engaging experience, and this can be provided within either a LMS like
Moodle or Desire2Learn, or the more open social network application like ELGG.

But are faculty willing/able to support solo learners seeking to skim across multiple
groups, contributing to many different conversations, with no commitment to
handing in assignments or being assessed by any one expert assessor?

I define “rogue node” as an autonomous learner pursuing independent study who

has access to several course cohorts related to their course of study. They propose
an independent course of study to be approved. They seek a faculty advisor as a
mentor, and undergo a cognitive apprenticeship. They are free to interact with
students, comment on posts, link to others’ ideas, and complete their own
assignments at their own pace. They also independently move among several
networks, only one of which is the institution’s practice network.

Currently, DE institutions do not provide support for solo learners or autonomous

learners participating in learning partnerships or autonomous, cooperative sharing
circles of peers. There is as yet little precedent for faculty members to engage
these types of learners. The majority of learning events within a DE course is that of
the group – whole group discussions and small group work involving collaboration.
The central authority figure is the instructor. The rules are clear. The
evaluator/arbiter has clear norms for group members to follow. (Anderson & Dron,
2009). Little encouragement or scaffolding is in place for learners to independently
develop their own learning networks. It is a potential effect, yet it is still an
unplanned, unintended result, not a planned part of the required learning outcomes.

There is as yet no place for cultivating learners with the following learning goals:

Transformative learning

Lifestream planning

Life-blogging, including educational biography

Reflective writing

Self-regulation competencies for lifelong learning

I am unsure whether DE institutions are adequately preparing learners to contribute

to an online participatory culture in a meaningful way beyond the core groups of
cohorts. Learners require a much more comprehensive set of skills to manage their
own learning. They will need to manage systems that deal with coordinating,
monitoring, self-development, and self-steering.

Learning Systems for Student Bloggers (Johnson

and Liber, 2008)