Digimodernism and Learning

“Did-ja-what?” I hear youasking. Digimodernism (digital modernism)is a term that describes “a new paradigm of authority and knowledge formedunder the pressure of new technologies and contemporary social forces.” If youhave colleagues who struggle to accept the notion of rapid eLearning authoringby subject matter experts, or who have a hard time seeing how social media,informal learning, and peer-to-peer learning can have a part in theirinstructional designs, you know people who are experiencing some of the turmoilthat marks the rise of digimodernism.

However, whiledigimodernism may sound esoteric and academic, looking at the world from thisperspective can help make sense of new approaches to learning and instructionaldesign. In this article, I describe a few of these ideas, in the hope that youwill find them useful in your practice. I also raise some questions that weneed to be asking ourselves in this time of change.

(Before continuing, I feel I shouldadd that “digimodernism” has nothing whatsoever to do with “digital learners,”“digital natives” or any other imaginary tribe.)

OK,what is digimodernism, and why should you care?

Alan Kirby is a writer and researcherin twentieth-century literature and culture. In the first paragraph above, Iquoted his introduction to an article on the topic in Philosophy Now (see the References at the end of this article).Kirby coined “digimodernism” while searching for a way to summarize the effectsof computerization. Kirby says the word “denotes the point at whichdigitization intersects with cultural and artistic forms.” He goes on to saythat, “digimodernism is the label under which I trace the textual, cultural andartistic ripples which spread out from the explosion of digitization. Under itssign, I seek patterns in the most significant cultural shifts of the lastdecade or so, in such a way as to have predictive value.”

I believe that the readers of thismagazine are caught up in one of those significant shifts. I believe that wewill continue to be challenged by it for at least the next decade as our roles,working methods, theories, and even the value of what we do evolve and aretransformed under the pressures of those new technologies and social forces.

This is not, as youcan imagine, a simple topic, and I am not going to try to summarize it here.Again, see the References to find more of Kirby’s work and thought – it isworth reading. I am beginning to understand that what Kirby is saying can alsohelp us to understand the changes in what we do in instructional design and thevarious activities that come under the name of learning.

If a brand is a promise, what is thepromise of the brands eLearning, mLearning, social media, and the othertechnology-supported approaches to improving human performance? Perhaps it isto help people learn whatever they need to learn, when they need it, whereverthey are, for as long as they want. Many professionals involved in learning andinstructional design are excited by the cultural and communication effects ofdigitization, and want to experience this excitement in their work.

In fact, I believe Kirby’s analysiswill help our dubious, uncertain (perhaps fearful) colleagues understand thatthe new paradigm of authority and knowledge does not mean the end ofinstructor-led courses, the Facebooking or Twitterization of eLearning, or thedeath of instructional design. Instead, it means the extension and expansion ofopportunities for learning.

Realand present-day examples

There are already a number of examples of responses to that “newparadigm of authority and knowledge” in the learning community. Here are fourthat may be new to you.

#lrnchat

#lrnchat is informal, social,collaborative, peer-to-peer learning on Twitter. This format evolved ratherrapidly, beginning in 2009. According to the Web site that supports it, “#lrnchatis a place for people interested in the topic of learning to learn from oneanother and discuss how to help other people learn.” (lrnchat.wordpress.com/about/) 

Ina sense, #lrnchat is a new form of text: a microblogged dialogue amongprofessionals. Participants come and go during regularly scheduled meetingtimes, identifying their Tweets as part of the dialogue by using the hashtag(“#lrnchat”). Past sessions are available to all (participants andnon-participants alike) on the site lrnchat.wordpress.com.#lrnchat is an exact example of a text form that has evolved under the paradigmthat Kirby describes. If you have not taken part in a #lrnchat, I highlyrecommend that you do so, even if only to observe. 

Edupunk

Edupunk is a term created by JimGroom to describe “a scrappy, DIY spirit in some sectors of educationaltechnology.” (Quote from Leslie Madsen Brooks) However, note that Edupunk ismainly about people, not about technology.

Edupunk is interesting, and oftenmisunderstood (I will try here to avoid adding or perpetuating anymisunderstanding). Sometimes, when people read that Edupunk is a DIY (“Do ItYourself”) movement, they think this means going out and finding experts tofollow online or in the real world, or finding materials to read about topicsof interest. This may be part of an Edupunk approach, but for the most part,DIY literally means “DO it yourself.” In other words, the emphasis is onhands-on engagement, involving a demotion of the expert.

Among the things that Edupunk is NOTis a quick and cheap shortcut to an education. Edupunk is also not aboutgetting a degree or a certificate. In his review of a “Guide” to Edupunk (whichhe did not think much of), Stephen Downes not only examines themisunderstandings, he also provides a number of good examples of what Edupunkis and what it intends to bring about. There is a link to the review in theReferences.

Edupunk seems extreme to many who arehearing about it for the first time, but it is also the approach that comesclosest to how people actually learn. Read Downes’ description of how millionsof people learned to write software. It may seem very familiar to you if youare a self-taught programmer!

Personal Learning Environments (PLEs)

Personal Learning Environments involve the use of technology by anindividual to organize his or her own learning, in different contexts andsituations and from different learning providers, including informal learning.

In Graham Attwell’s paper on PersonalLearning Environments (see the link in the References at the end of thisarticle), note this statement in his summary: “… we are coming to realize thatwe cannot simply reproduce previous forms of learning, the classroom or theuniversity, embodied in software. Instead, we have to look at the newopportunities for learning afforded by emerging technologies.” This perfectlyexpresses the necessary response in our field to the effects of technology.

MOOCs

MOOCs are Massive Open Online Courses, a peer-to-peer knowledgeexchange or learning method. In her recent article inLearning Solutions Magazine, Inge de Waard defines a MOOC as “a gathering ofparticipants, of people willing to jointly exchange information andcollaboratively enhance their knowledge.”

“Massive” may be somewhat misleading as a description. There is norequirement to have tens of thousands of participants. The word Massive impliestwo things. First, that there is no arbitrary limit on the number of people whocan take part. Second, the expectation is that enough people will participateto provide a sufficiently complete exchange of information and to support thequality of that information.

Mobile technology can play an important part in MOOCs, bothbecause it extends the potential population to include emerging regions of theworld, and because it makes possible near instantaneous participation, evenwhen participants are away from their workplace.

Blending, extending, expanding

I’m sure you can think of otherexamples after reflecting on what these four just discussed have in common.

In addition, and somewhat more formally, we are seeingmore and more examples of what could be called an extension of the idea of“blended” learning. Originally, blended learning referred to designingstructured courses that made use of instructor-led sessions in classrooms andonline, as well as asynchronous eLearning modules. But with the rise and popularityof social media, many designers are making use of online services to supportlearning through more-or-less directed learner interaction. This is a departurefrom what we have traditionally thought of as instructional design, and bringsus into unknown territory regarding outcomes/objectives, certification,compliance, and evaluation.

Where do we go from here?

In a time of change, there are always alot of questions.

• Dowe need another term or another acronym to describe our work in the age of digitalmodernism? Do we need to start calling what we do “digilearning”? (I sincerelyhope that we don’t do that!)
• Iswhat we do still “instructional design” if it goes beyond designinginstruction?
• Whendoes our work product become “education” instead of eLearning, mLearning, orsome other flavor of the week?

References