29.5: Summary

Last updated
Save as PDF

Page ID: 90125

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

“Slave is an Ephebian word. In Om we have no word for slave,” said Vorbis.

“So I understand,” said the Tyrant. “I imagine that fish have no word for water.” (Prachett, 2000, p. 356)

Like a fish in water, we are so steeped in the notion of identity that we tend to take it for granted, and we feel that many online initiatives fail, or are not as successful as anticipated, precisely because of this oversight. Though we are seldom aware of the issue until it is brought to our attention, we feel that one of the primary challenges of online learning is the question of learners’ identities; how educators working in online environments address this challenge may determine the success or failure of an initiative. We also feel that identities are malleable as well as extensible, so, when we endeavour to foster cooperation and collaboration, we must keep in mind how learners’ (and educators’) identities have been established and how they can be stretched and adapted in ways to best facilitate online learning. We think it is useful to consider online classrooms expanding not only space (as distant learners can be incorporated into the classroom) and time (as asynchronous CMC permits time shifting), but also in terms of how much more flexible our views of online learners’ identities are, and how learners can consciously develop their identities in ways that facilitate learning. Harvey’s discussion emphasizes how the online environment is akin to a universal solvent, forcing us to reconsider concepts and ideas, and it is important for online educators to be aware of this when creating and maintaining learning environments.

We then looked at the state of play in a Canadian province, British Columbia, to gain an understanding of issues of learner identity and participation, and how they operate in this setting with relatively advanced online educational offerings.

As a practical example, and a possible end point for educators, we considered e-portfolios, the construction of which involves making a learner’s identity concrete not only for evaluation by educators, but also for learners to use to understand themselves and to make their way into the wider world. When viewed through the lens of learner identity, the organizational principles of e-portfolios take on an added significance. It is probably beyond the realm of possibility that the online teacher in lower elementary school classes would be able to teach while having a clear idea of what students will want or need to do 10 or more years in the future, but, by aligning the basic raw material of learner identity with the firmly practical notion of e-portfolio development, we hope to highlight the fact that the elementary educator is connected to final outcomes of online education in serious and meaningful ways.