A Conceptual Model For Understanding Self-Directed Learning In Online Environments

Liyan Song

Towson University

Janette R. Hill

The University of Georgia

Abstract

Research indicates that online learning often situates control of implementation with the learner. Recently, scholars have turned attention to the importance of self-directed learning (SDL) skills for online learning environments. Existing frameworks for understanding SDL focus primarily on process and personal attributes in face-to-face settings. Some frameworks depict SDL as a process, focusing on learner autonomy in the learning processes; other frameworks emphasize personal attributes, focusing on learner’s capabilities of regulating the learning process. Yet, the level of self-direction needed may change in different contexts. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a research-based framework for understanding SDL in online learning contexts. Implications for future research and practice are provided at the end of the paper.

Introduction

The study of online learning has attracted much attention from scholars and practitioners, especially those in higher education institutions (Hill, Wiley, Nelson, & Han, 2003; Hofmann, 2002). Many studies have explored the benefits of online learning such as convenience (Poole, 2000) and flexibility (Chizmar & Walbert, 1999), as well as its challenges including technical difficulties, lack of a sense of community, and delayed communication (Song, Singleton, Hill, & Koh, 2004). An understanding of learner attributes and how these impact what occurs in online learning contexts, however, is equally important. Some researchers have explored specific attributes, ranging from prior knowledge (Mason & Weller, 2000) to time-management (Hill, 2002), to gender differences (Rovai, 2002). An area of particular interest to researchers exploring online learning is the learner‟s ability to guide and direct his or her own learning; in other words, self-directed learning (Hartley & Bendixen, 2001).

The study of self-direction has been explored primarily from two perspectives: process (e.g., Mocker & Spear, 1982), and personal attribute (e.g., Garrison, 1997). Research on SDL has focused in two main areas: (1) the verification of SDL among adults, and (2) descriptions of models for understanding SDL (Brockett, 2002; Merriam, 2001). An area that has received little attention from scholars is the operation of self-direction in a specific context (Brookfield, 1984), especially in higher education institutions (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999).

Some scholars have recognized the importance of the learning context for SDL (e.g., Candy, 1991), noting that learners may exhibit different levels of self-direction in different learning situations. According to Candy (1991), learners may have a high level of self-direction in an area in which they are familiar, or in areas that are similar to a prior experience. For example, a Spanish-speaking learner may have a high level of self-direction in learning Italian, and a learner who plays rugby may be highly self-directed when learning to play football. More

Journal of Interactive Online Learning Song and Hill

28

research is needed in this area if we are to gain a richer understanding of how SDL functions in specific contexts.

One area that is particularly promising for SDL research is online contexts. With the increasing trend of online learning in higher education (Sloan Consortium, 2004), SDL has started to attract more attention due to its speculated and reported impact in these contexts. Research exploring online learning has indicated that SDL skills may assist the learner with the learning process in these contexts (e.g., Hartley & Bendixen, 2001).

The purpose of the paper is to introduce a research-based conceptual model for understanding SDL in an online context (Song, 2005). First, we will review existing perspectives on SDL. Next, we will introduce the conceptual model for understanding SDL in online contexts, describing the individual components as well as the dynamic interaction between them. Finally, we will discuss implications of the model for future research and practice.

Perspectives on Self-Directed Learning

Different scholars have presented different perspectives on SDL. Some scholars see SDL as a process of organizing the instruction (e.g., Harrison, 1978), focusing their attention on the level of learner autonomy over the instructional process. Others view self-direction as a personal attribute (e.g., Guglielmino, 1977; Kasworm, 1988), with the goal of education described as developing individuals who can assume moral, emotional, and intellectual autonomy (Candy, 1991). Several models have been proposed to understand SDL, starting with Mocker and Spear's Two Dimensional Model in the early 1980s to a more recent model from Garrison's Three Dimensional Model in the late 1990s. Three models were selected for further description, as they appear to be comprehensive representations of SDL. The key constructs associated with each model are summarized in Table 1. Descriptions and explanations of the models are provided in the following sections.

Table 1: Perspectives on Self-Directed Learning

Perspectives Description Models Candy (1991) Brockett & Hiemstra (1991) Garrison (1997) Personal Attribute

Moral, emotional, and intellectual management Personal autonomy Self-management Goal orientation (personal attribute)

Self-management (Use of resources) Motivation Process

Learner autonomy over instruction Learner control Autodidaxy Process orientation (learner control) Self-monitoring Context

Environment where learning takes place Self-direction is context-bound Social context: role of institutions and policies

Journal of Interactive Online Learning Song and Hill

29

Candy’s Four-Dimensional Model

In reviewing the literature on various views of SDL or related concepts, Candy (1991) concluded that SDL, as an umbrella concept, encompasses four dimensions: “ „self-direction‟ as a personal attribute (personal autonomy); „self-direction‟ as the willingness and capacity to conduct one‟s own education (self-management); „self-direction‟ as a mode of organizing instruction in formal settings (learner-control); and „self-direction‟ as the individual, non-institutional pursuit of learning opportunities in the „natural societal setting‟ (autodidaxy)” (p.23). The variety of the constructs in Candy's model added an element of depth to our understanding of SDL. Further, Candy's model was the first to state that a learners‟ self-direction might be different in different content areas. Yet, there are elements missing from the model. For example, the model does not describe how SDL is relevant in different learning contexts such as classroom learning or online learning.

Brockett and Hiemstra’s Personal Responsibility Orientation Model (PRO) Brockett and Hiemstra (1991) provided a rationale for two primary orientations in developing an understanding of SDL: process and goal. In the first orientation, SDL is viewed as a process “in which a learner assumes primary responsibility for planning, implementing, and evaluating the learning process” (p.24). In the second orientation, SDL is referred to as a goal, which focuses on “a learner’s desire or preference for assuming responsibility for learning” (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991, p.24). Brockett and Hiemstra (1991) combined both the process and personal attribute perspectives in the model. They also integrated social context as a component in the model in that they discussed the role of institutions and policies in SDL. At the time the model was developed, this was a significant addition to the SDL models. Yet, in today's educational climate, the context factor in the model is rather limited. Brockett and Hiemstra (1991) defined the social context as different physical institutions where learning takes place, such as community colleges, libraries, and museums. In today's educational situation, where virtual learning continues to experience exponential growth, a focus only on face-to-face settings is rather limited.

Garrison’s Three-Dimensional Model

Garrison's model of SDL also includes the perspectives of SDL as a personal attribute as well as a learning process. According to Garrison (1997), SDL is accomplished by three dimensions interacting with each other: self-management, self-monitoring, and motivation. In educational settings, self-management involves learners‟ use of learning resources within the learning context. The focus of Garrison‟s (1997) model is on resource use, learning strategies use, and motivation to learn. Garrison explained that self-management involved learners taking control of the learning context to reach their learning objectives. He further explained that learner control did not mean independence, but rather collaboration with other people within the context. From this perspective, we can see Garrison‟s model did have a certain focus on the learning process perspective of SDL. Like Candy (1991), as well as Brockett and Hiemstra (1991), Garrison (1997) also recognized the context factor in his model in that he specified self-management of resources in a given context. Yet, the role of context was somewhat superficial in Garrison‟s (1997) model and the dynamic interaction between learning context and SDL was not explicit.

Journal of Interactive Online Learning Song and Hill

30

Summary

The models developed to date have been valuable in enabling the extension of our thinking about SDL, examining process and learner control as well as the interaction between the two. In most of the SDL models reviewed, context

...