Flexible Learning Joy Pasco/4EDFIL7A

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 5

Flexible Learning

Joy Pasco/4EDFIL7A

ABSTRACT

With flexible learning there are aspects to consider regarding to the time, content,

access, approach, and delivery. In this kind of set-up the teachers, the learner and the

institution have important role to play in flexible learning. The nineteen dimension of

flexible learning are grouped into five categories throughout teaching process. This is

the effective way to consider in this flexible learning.

INTRODUCTION

Flexible learning is a method of learning where students are given freedom in

how, what, when and where they learn. Flexible learning environments address how

physical space is used, how students are grouped during learning and how time is used

throughout teaching. According to Shurville et al. (2008) “Flexible Learning is a set of

educational philosophies and systems, concerned with providing learners with

increased choice, convenience, and personalisation to suit the learner. ‘Flexible learning

is a movement away from a situation in which key decisions about learning dimensions

are made in advance by the instructor or institution, towards a situation where the

learner has a range of options from which to choose with respect to these key

dimensions.’ (Collis & Moonen, 2001).

In a traditional course there is little or no room for learner choice: usually, course

dates are fixed, the content is pre-determined, instructional approaches are chosen and

learning materials are prepared in advance; course organisation is pre-defined. This is


one extreme. On the other extreme of the continuum is a just-intime, workplace-based,

problem-induced learning, about which the learner makes key choices and which occurs

life-long.

In this process where student expectations are matched with the willingness and

abilities of their teachers. In a multinational study Collis and van der Wende (2002)

undertook, they identified 19 dimensions of flexibility and listed them under five key

categories as follows:

• Categories of time

1. Time and date at which module starts and finishes;

2. Periods of time students are able to participate;

3. Pace of learning;

4. Time when assessment occurs;

5. Sequence in which topics are covered.

• Categories of content

6. Choice of topics covered;

7. Amount of learning activities expected to be completed;

8. Level of difficulty of module content;

9. Assessment standards.

• Categories of access/entry requirements

10. Prerequisites for module participation


• Categories of instructional approach/design (pedagogy)

11. Social organisation of learning (group or individual);

12. Times available for support;

13. Choice of who decides what modes of flexible learning are available;

14. Language for communication.

• Categories of delivery

15. Time and place where support is available;

16. Methods of obtaining support;

17. Types of support available;

18. Places for studying;

19. Delivery channels (ie, lectures, tutorials, Internet, podcasts).

The study of De Boer and Collis (2005), suggested that two types of flexibility are

operationalisable by instructors (2005, p. 46): planning flexibility, which maintains

largely the same teaching and learning programme but offers more delivery flexibility

(such that pedagogy tends to remain unaltered); and interpersonal flexibility, which

implies pedagogical change to more student-centred contributions. They concluded that

the change to interpersonal flexibility is more difficult because it requires instructors to

redesign course activities and their assessment. As we shall see, our own study

revealed findings consisted with these.


The identified 19 dimensions of flexibility is important; time, must be consider in

flexible learning because it will help the teacher, learner and the institution to arrange

and organize the details to provide the needs of everyone. Time help us to decide for

the process of learning of the student. Content, the topics covered the sequence of

topics, the types of learning materials, the range of assessment methods. The content

defines and motivates the student to understand the topic. To get the attention of the

student the content must be clear. Instructional Approach/Design: the social

organization of learning, whether that means group learning, individual or independent

learning, and the format of learning resources, and the origin of learning resources

(instructors, students, library, Internet). The delivery: place of study (on campus, off

campus, blended, flipped, work-based), opportunities for contact with instructors and/or

students, methods of support, and content delivery and communication channels

(Palmer, 2011). All of this must be considered in engaging the flexible learning.

CONCLUSION: In implementing the flexible learning it’s always considered the

nineteen dimension of flexible learning process that suit for the students, teacher and

the institution. To make it effective there must be a plan and decision making. In their

Guide to Providing Flexible Learning in Further and Higher Education, Casey and

Wilson provide some important planning and design decisions that need to be made

before trying to make a course more flexible (2005).

REFERENCES:

Casey, J. and Wilson, P. (2005). A practical guide to providing flexible learning in further

and higher education. Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Retrieved from
Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and

expectations. London: Kogan Page Limited.

Collis, B., & Van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of technology and change in higher

education: An international comparative survey on the current and future use of ICT in

higher education (External research report). Retrieved from http://doc.utwente.nl/44610/

De Boer, W., & Collis, B. (2005). Becoming more systematic about flexible learning:

Beyond time and distance. Association for Learning Technology Journal, 13(1), 33–48.

doi:10.1080/0968776042000339781

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/publications/a-practical-guide-to-

providingflexible-learning-in-further-and-higher-education.pdf?sfvrsn=34

Shurville,S., O'Grady,T., and Mayall,P. (2008). Educational and institutional flexibility of

Australian Educational Software. Campus-Wide Information Systems, Emerald Group

Publishing Limited, 25 (2), 74 – 84.

You might also like