Learner Control: What Does it look like?

What does it look like?

If the Instructor is altering the format of the presentation or the structure of the learning to better suit a learner-controlled environment then isn't the instructor in control? I think learner control is something that the learner assesses and controls.

Some readings suggest a type of student who is best suited for a learner-controlled environment. In fact one article I read suggested that "giving too much control to the majority of learners is 'like giving them enough rope to hang themselves.'" (Higginbotham-Wheat, quoted on the Internet). This lit review suggests that only the "highest and most knowledgeable" should be allowed complete learner control.

Another lit review I read went so far as to create a profile of the best type of student for a learner controlled environment. Williams suggests that students who are self-motivated, well-organized, highly structured in their attention to detail, task oriented, above average intelligence and older. While he creates a convincing case for this profile I remain skeptical. Aren't these characteristics of good students in general? Why are these people particularly well suited to a learner control environment? (Student3, 1997).

References

Friend, C. L., & Cole, C. L. (1990). Learner control in computer-based instruction: A current literature review. Educational Technology, 30(11), 47-49.

Williams, M. D. A Comprehensive Review of Learner Control. ED 362 211.

Online

"Learner Control" http://wwwcream.une.edu.au/oldSite/learnercontrol.html

At first I didn't give much thought to the connotation of the word control, especially when juxtaposed against learner, but during some of my searches. I came across a paper by Capt M. McCarthy-Senebald at http://home.interhop.net:80/~cflstc/learn-1e.htm. Captain McCarthy-Senebald says the main point of his article is to show "that the type and degree of control CBT provides learners is superficial and that most of the control of training, specifically job-related training, rests with trainers and training designers, and should continue to do so. This is not to suggest that learners should have no control of the learning experience, quite the contrary. . . ."

I found these words a little, how shall I say it, irritating though at first I wasn't sure why. Now, I think that my irritation was at the use of such a strong commanding word as "should" coming from someone in the military, obviously, from his title and the server where his article was located. All this got me thinking about that word control.

As others have said throughout this discussion, it seems that what we need is not an either or situation, but rather a balance. What I mean by this is that neither the learner, nor the instructor need be in full control, but rather, each needs to share responsibility for the overall learning. Furthermore, I think that the way to ensure this sharing is through communication, as pointed out in the Garrison and Baynton quote (Student4, 1997).

Great thoughts! This raises a question that's been eating at me since this discussion took this turn. Do Learner truly have control, if, as Webster thinks, control means "to exercise restraint or direction over; dominate command?" But then I realized I was losing sight of the operational definitions (if that's the right term to use), the repeated emphasis from the literature on the aspects of learning that learners should be able to control. Learner Control isn't an all or nothing proposition. Learners don't need to make all the decisions to still have some level of control over their learning. Control is more of a continuum with learners at one end and instructors at the other. And the optimum placement is somewhere toward the middle depending on all those factors that teachers must consider when making any educational/curricular decisions (Student3, 1997).

You make a good point when you say "Control is more of a continuum with learners at one end and instructors at the other. " This got me to thinking about other ways to look at this idea of learner control. I propose that we could also consider this continuum as not being linear, if this is not a contradiction in terms, but rather more of a cycle or of a spiral. As learner and teacher continue to interact with each, both continue ever upward in their individual goals for the learning. Not sure if that makes sense to anybody else but me (Student4, 1997)

. . . what you are saying certainly makes sense. I propose that we could also consider this continuum as not being linear, if this is not a contradiction in terms, but rather more of a cycle or of a spiral. As learner and teacher continue to interact with each, both continue ever upward in their individual goals for the learning. Not sure if that makes sense to anybody else but me.

I think question from what you say may be....what "spiral" is of optimal educational value for both the learner and the instructor, and how does this become a part of research....what would be a valid research question concerning this issue.....(Student5, 1997).

Could it be that learner control can be greater depending upon the goal of the instruction? Perhaps in job-related training where there is a specific body of knowledge, or set of skill to learn, there has to be more instructor control. On the other hand, where the student is doing exploratory learning, more learner control can be allowed. Defining learning objectives is the key.

Looking at our course and the amount of learner control we have, I see that we have moderate control since there are theoretical constructs in distance learning that our instructor wanted us to focus on. While learning about them, we have the freedom to explore. We also have freedom to choose our research paper topic. I think this is a good balance. Seeing this model gives me a better understanding of what goes into planning a DL course and puts the construct of learner control into a context with which I can relate (Student6, 1997).

Return to Home Page
Return to Distance ED Page
Return to Learner Control Page