Flexible Learning in Modern Education

Flexible learning has recently gained currency in discussions touching on “modern education.” But is this concept actually new? If it is not new, why has it moved to occupy the center stage in the educational discourse? What new meaning has it taken on to gain this prominence?

Otto Peters (2001) has suggested that flexible learning is not all that new. According to him, experienced teachers will be quite surprised that so much emphasis is being laid on this concept. Such teachers know that every form of instruction and of imparting knowledge should have flexibility as an essential quality. The flexibility in the context known to such experienced teachers revolves around being student-oriented, professor-oriented, or content-oriented. Flexibility may also mean that the material being taught should be adapted to the requirements of different disciplines, and must mirror the current trend in research and cultural developments.” (Otto Peters, 2001:156).

The traditional image of flexibility can be summarized as covering and limited to the following:

  • Forms of instruction
  • Methods of imparting knowledge
  • Approaches should be student oriented
  • Content of what is taught
  • Material should be adapted to discipline of learners
  • Cultural factors
  • Current trends

The above factors have always been recognized as time-honored essential elements in judging the quality of teaching.

Taking such a view, flexibility is obviously not new, as these tenets have been cherished in the past. This view of flexibility has underpinned the design of pedagogical structures, which recognize the fact that there are many elements and components that impact on one another in the teaching process. Flexibility has therefore always been an inherent quality in any form of pedagogical endeavor (Otto Peters, Ibid).

Why then has flexibility moved to occupy the center stage if it is not all that new? The answer may be simply that it has assumed a far wider meaning and greater importance as Kentworth (2000:5) and Gosper (2000:1) have shown. Another reason, perhaps, is that important persons have joined the train of flexible learning. Corporate organizations have found that it is cost-effective just as corporate executives have discovered that it is convenient for them to achieve their learning objectives whether it is to gain a qualification or to enhance their knowledge while still in the comfort of their jobs and homes.

The New Image of Flexibility

In the present context, flexibility means all the former elements attached to it by the experienced teachers cited above plus many, many more things:

  1. Student-oriented
  2. Professor-oriented
  3. Material-oriented
  4. Student centered
  5. Adaptable to culture
  6. Adaptable to discipline
  7. Relevant or flexible curricula
  8. Choice of time, particularly for the learner but also applicable to the tutor.
  9. Learner’s own pace
  10. Emphasis on increased Accessibility
  11. Choice of what to learn
  12. Life long learning
  13. Learning environment
  14. The death of distance (No constraint of distance)
  15. Learning methods
  16. Emphasis on the student
  17. Learner autonomy
  18. Emphasis on developing and empowering autonomous learners
  19. Use of new technologies
  20. Open learning
  21. Virtual Learning
  22. No fixed place for learning
  23. Learning styles
  24. More student control on learning processes, i.e. students being allowed to learn what they want, when they want and how they want.
  25. Progression
  26. Students taking responsibility for their learning
  27. Learning pathways
  28. Individual counseling and support – more than in conventional institutions
  29. Assessment modes
  30. Multimedia
  31. Group work
  32. Accreditation of Prior Learning
  33. Action Learning
  34. Learning Journals
  35. Experiential Learning
  36. Flexible Assessment (Traditional form of examination, continuous assessment, open examination or a combination of these)

Flexible learning is actually very much about “enabling the student to learn to learn how to learn as well as learning specific subject knowledge” (Department of Employment, UK, 1991).

Characteristics of Flexible Learning
  • Emphasis on meeting individual needs
  • Help learners to take on more responsibilities
  • Use of multi learning sources (resources)
  • Allows for differential learning
  • Supports staff development
  • Reliance on staff support (Calder and McCollum, 1998:1)
The Drivers in Flexible Learning
  • Cost
  • Demand
  • Globalization
  • Changing Values
  • Quality
  • Recognition
  • Acceptability by reputable corporate organizations
  • Changing favorable government policies
  • Need to overcome skills shortages by keeping employees on the job while they receive training.
  • Individual needs demand to update their skills.
  • Legitimization of open flexible learning.
Conclusion

Although flexibility has been a time-honored hallmark in education, the concept has taken on a completely new image. It has been extended beyond the imagination of any previously schooled or experienced educationist. In fact, educationists who aspire to be relevant in the new learning environment must be prepared to change their attitude and accept new interpretations of pedagogical flexibility.

References
  • Gosper, M (1997-2000) Flexible Learning, Macquarie University (www.cfl.mq.edu.au/cfl/flexible/cflflexl.html)
  • Kentworth, B (2000) “Distance education and flexible approaches to teaching and learning – a response to the changed learning environment,” in Distance Learning: Global Trends. Conference Proceedings of the Danish Institute for the Training of Vocational Teachers, May 24th, 2000
  • Peters, Otto (2001) Learning and Teaching in Distance Education, Kogan Page, London.
  • Saggers, R (1994) “Training Climbs the Corporate Agenda,” Personnel Management July 1994