The Politics of E-Learning Standardization
In this draft paper, Darryl Cressman and I discuss a number of ways of understanding the potential and limitations of standardization in e-learning. We focus particularly on notions of “black boxing,” as it is understood in the context of both learning object approaches to educational content and Actor Network Theory (from science and technology studies). Here’s an overview:
Standards in e-learning contexts, unlike social science disciplines, appear to be generally understood as “neutral artifacts.” In many cases, they are explicitly described as being pedagogically –and otherwise– “agnostic” or “neutral” (e.g. Allert et al 2003; see also Friesen, 2004, Blandin, 2003). It is the intent of this paper to adopt the perspectives of socio-theoretical research in order to explore the “non-neutrality” of standards as social artifacts –and to show that that they are constructions that embody specific interests and agendas. In doing so, this paper will give special emphasis to what is likely the most widely discussed and implemented e-learning standard, the aforementioned Learning Object Metadata standard (also known as IEEE 1484.12.1 or simply, the “LOM”). This paper will undertake this exploration by considering a range of research on standardization, and by exploring the potential one particular framework of understanding the development and implementation of technical standards: that provided by Actor Network Theory.
The question at hand is the purpose of education for the learning and the faculty (we are talking post secondary education, here). The issue is whether the grand purpose of education has ever been realized in the past and currently where the academic degree has become a rite of passage and a means of certifying rather than the ideal as put forth by Newman, Kant and the Germanic schools and now being revived by those espousing the term “liberal studies” or variances thereof.
As the authors suggest, context is everything, especially when peering into the black box whether that is a standard model or one which is a high end, customized/customizable, one. And the impact is not just on the actors, both students and faculty, but the community writ large. And, while the issue seems to be “click” space, it does include both brick and click space.
Comment by tom abeles — July 13, 2005 @ 12:12 am
standards
The Politics of E-Learning Standardization .
Trackback by Bruce Landon's Weblog for Students — July 13, 2005 @ 7:08 am
Interesting read - and very similar perspectives as mine in my Master thesis three years ago where I studied the impact of standards on e-learning, analysing LOM and others. You might expand the ANT discussion with introducing the concepts of translations and inscription - see http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~oleha/Publications/bok.html - especially Chapter 7
Comment by Tore Hoel — July 15, 2005 @ 2:32 pm