In “theories of learning”

learning is participation is learning

• Hrastinski, S. (2009/1). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers & Education, 52 (1), 78–82.

Participation and learning are argued to be inseparable and jointly constituting. The implication of the theory is straightforward: If we want to enhance online learning, we need to enhance online learner participation.

In this article, Hrastinski introduces a theory of online learning as one grounded in participation. In line with Abrami et al. (2011), Hrastinski uses Moore’s (1989) definition of participation as learner–instructor, learner–content, and learner–learner interaction; he sees participation as integral to and inextricable from the concept of online learning. As his theory of online learning is founded in constructivism, he summarizes that learners in online situations cannot simply “sit and get”; they must be actively constructing their knowledge through and within a community. His key characteristics of online learning as online participation are:

1. “Participation is a complex process of taking part and maintaining relations with others”: learners need to be a part of a community with similar goals, a common culture, and interdependence. He states, the “concepts of sense of community, learning communities and knowledge-building communities are closely related with learning as participation.”
2. “Participation is supported by physical and psychological tools”: physical tools (like a computer and software) work together with psychological tools (like language) to foster interaction and communication between community members.
3. “Participation is not synonymous with talking or writing”: although talking and writing are indeed participation, other forms of participation include “abstract conceptualization, which emphasizes thinking, and reflective observation, which emphasizes understanding.”
4. “Participation is supported by all kinds of engaging activities”: he states that participation includes all types of relationships and “is a complex process that includes, for example, doing, talking, thinking, feeling and belonging. In short, participation involves everything we do and feel when being part of engaging experiences.”

Hrastinski’s theory is both common sense and groundbreaking. Although this article is very poorly written, the concept is clear: in order for online education to be engaging and a productive learning environment, the learners have to engage. Connecting constructivist theory with cooperative/collaborative learning theories, Hrastinski puts his finger on the connections between learners, instructors, and content, and determines that the nexus is participation. He invites others to refind, expand upon, or criticize his theory and add to the conversation.

This proposed theory hones my focus on the questions I want to ask of the students in my district who are currently engaged in (and struggling with) online classes. I have written quite a bit on this before: K-12 students nationwide are overwhelmingly failing online courses, and yet the enrollment in them is exponential (and seen as the future of k-12 education). So much of the literature and studies I have read discuss online learning in the college environment, but those learners have different motivations and are actively choosing to be there. High school students are different than adult learners — even their brains are different — but often the studies (and course offerings) lump them together. I’ve looked a lot at motivation, but the motivation issues that high school students have cannot be resolved by online education; as an educator, I have to actively and physically interact with and get inside the heads of my students every day to motivate them and I can’t do this online. (Also, I am not, for the most part, teaching these courses; I’m just watching my students fail other institutions’ courses.) So, if I can’t tackle this problem through the lens of motivation, maybe I can tackle this problem through the lens of participation. The online courses my students are taking are not especially designed for high school students; MIVU doesn’t have the emotional investment that it takes to design courses specifically to enhance and engender student motivation and achievement. Hrastinski gives me a lens through which to view the problem and through which to begin to ask the questions I need to ask of our students about their own participation in the courses, and what factors within the courses encourage participation and put them on a path toward success.

Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Bures, E. M., Borokhovski, E., & Tamim, R. M. (2011). Interaction in distance education and online learning: using evidence and theory to improve practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2-3), 82–103.

Holley, D., & Oliver, M. (2010/4). Student engagement and blended learning: Portraits of risk. Computers & Education, 54(3), 693–700.

Moore, G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.