We expect 'successful' parents to understand and empathize with their child; and that they will provide kind, compassionate, and loving guidance through content areas of utmost difficulty....The nurturing educator works with other issues...in different contexts and different age groups, but the underlying attributes and concerns remain the same. Learners' efficacy and self-esteem issues become the ultimate criteria against which learning success is measured, rather than performance-related mastery of a content body.<\/em><\/p>\nThere is a strong emphasis on the teacher focusing on the interests of the learner, on empathizing with how the learner approaches learning, of listening carefully to what the learner is saying and thinking when learning, and providing appropriate, supportive responses in the form of 'consensual validation of experience<\/em>'. This perspective\u00a0is driven partly by the observation that people learn autonomously from a very early age, so the trick is to create an environment for the learner that encourages rather than inhibits their 'natural' tendency to learn,\u00a0and directs it into appropriate learning tasks, decided by an analysis of the learner\u2019s needs. This is further elaborated in Chapter 6, on Building an Effective Learning Environment<\/a>.\n Teachers holding a social reform perspective are most interested in creating a better society and view their teaching as contributing to that end. Their perspective is unique in that it is based upon an explicitly stated ideal or set of principles linked to a vision of a better social order. Social reformers do not teach in one single way, nor do they hold distinctive views about knowledge in general...these factors all depend on the particular ideal that inspires their actions<\/em>.<\/p>\nThis then in some ways is less a theory of teaching as an epistemological position, that society needs change, and the social reformer knows how to bring about this change through teaching and education. Indeed, as Figure 3.7.2 below illustrates, the social reform model of learning can be driven as much by the passions and concerns of learners as by those of their instructors.\n\n[caption id=\"attachment_122\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"755\"] The operation of a peer-matching network would be simple. The user would identify himself by name and address and describe the activity for which he sought a peer. A computer would send him back the names and addresses of all those who had inserted the same description. It is amazing that such a simple utility has never been used on a broad scale for publicly valued activity<\/em>.<\/p>\nWell, those conditions certainly exist today. Learners do not necessarily need to go through institutional gateways to access information or knowledge, which is increasing available and accessible through the Internet. As we shall see in Chapter 5,<\/a> MOOCs help to identify those common interests and connectivist MOOCs in particular aim to provide the networks of common interests and the environment for self-directed learning. The digital age provides the technology infrastructure and support needed for this kind of learning.\n 1. Do you have experience of teaching in one or both of these ways? If so, do you agree with the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each component?<\/p>\n 2. Do you think that connectivism is a modern reflection of either of these models of teaching\u00a0- or is connectivism\u00a0a distinct and unique method of teaching in itself? If so, what distinguishes it as a teaching method from all the other methods I have covered?<\/p>\n There is no immediate feedback for these questions, although the issues will be raised again in Chapter 5.<\/p>\n\n<\/div>","rendered":" <\/p>\n In this section I will briefly discuss the last two of Pratt’s five teaching perspectives, nurturing and social reform.<\/p>\n A nurturing perspective on teaching can best be understood in terms of the role of a parent. Pratt (1998<\/a>) states:<\/p>\n We expect ‘successful’ parents to understand and empathize with their child; and that they will provide kind, compassionate, and loving guidance through content areas of utmost difficulty….The nurturing educator works with other issues…in different contexts and different age groups, but the underlying attributes and concerns remain the same. Learners’ efficacy and self-esteem issues become the ultimate criteria against which learning success is measured, rather than performance-related mastery of a content body.<\/em><\/p>\n There is a strong emphasis on the teacher focusing on the interests of the learner, on empathizing with how the learner approaches learning, of listening carefully to what the learner is saying and thinking when learning, and providing appropriate, supportive responses in the form of ‘consensual validation of experience<\/em>‘. This perspective\u00a0is driven partly by the observation that people learn autonomously from a very early age, so the trick is to create an environment for the learner that encourages rather than inhibits their ‘natural’ tendency to learn,\u00a0and directs it into appropriate learning tasks, decided by an analysis of the learner\u2019s needs. This is further elaborated in Chapter 6, on Building an Effective Learning Environment<\/a>.<\/p>\n Pratt (1998<\/a>, p. 173) states:<\/p>\n Teachers holding a social reform perspective are most interested in creating a better society and view their teaching as contributing to that end. Their perspective is unique in that it is based upon an explicitly stated ideal or set of principles linked to a vision of a better social order. Social reformers do not teach in one single way, nor do they hold distinctive views about knowledge in general…these factors all depend on the particular ideal that inspires their actions<\/em>.<\/p>\n This then in some ways is less a theory of teaching as an epistemological position, that society needs change, and the social reformer knows how to bring about this change through teaching and education. Indeed, as Figure 3.7.2 below illustrates, the social reform model of learning can be driven as much by the passions and concerns of learners as by those of their instructors.<\/p>\n These two perspectives on\u00a0teaching again have a long history, with echoes of:<\/p>\n The reason why the nurturing and social reform perspectives on\u00a0teaching are important is because they reflect\u00a0many of the assumptions or beliefs around connectivism (Chapter 2.6<\/a>). Indeed, as early as 1971, Illich made this remarkable statement\u00a0for the use of advanced technology to support “learning webs”:<\/p>\n The operation of a peer-matching network would be simple. The user would identify himself by name and address and describe the activity for which he sought a peer. A computer would send him back the names and addresses of all those who had inserted the same description. It is amazing that such a simple utility has never been used on a broad scale for publicly valued activity<\/em>.<\/p>\n Well, those conditions certainly exist today. Learners do not necessarily need to go through institutional gateways to access information or knowledge, which is increasing available and accessible through the Internet. As we shall see in Chapter 5,<\/a> MOOCs help to identify those common interests and connectivist MOOCs in particular aim to provide the networks of common interests and the environment for self-directed learning. The digital age provides the technology infrastructure and support needed for this kind of learning.<\/p>\n Of all the perspectives on\u00a0teaching these two\u00a0are\u00a0the most learner-centred. They are\u00a0based on a profoundly optimistic view of human nature, that people will seek out and learn what they need, and will find the necessary support from caring, dedicated educators and\/or from others with similar interests and concerns, and that individuals have the capacity and ability to identify and follow through with their own educational needs. It is also a more radical view of education, because it seeks to escape the political and controlling aspects of states or institutions.<\/p>\n Within each of these two perspectives, there are differences of view about the centrality of teachers for successful learning. For Pratt, the teacher plays a central role in nurturing learning; for others such as Illich or Freire, professionally trained teachers are more likely to be the servant of the state than of the individual learner. For those supporting these perspectives on teaching, volunteer mentors or social groups organised around certain ideals or social goals provide the necessary support for learners.<\/p>\n There are, as always, a number of drawbacks to these two perspectives on\u00a0teaching:<\/p>\n Nevertheless, there are aspects of both perspectives\u00a0that have significance for a digital age:<\/p>\n Freire, P. (2004) Pedagogy of Indignation<\/i><\/a>. Boulder CO: Paradigm<\/p>\n Illich, I. (1971)\u00a0Deschooling Society<\/em><\/a>, New York: Harper and Row<\/p>\n Knowles, M. (1984)\u00a0Andragogy in Action. Applying modern principles of adult education<\/i><\/a>, San Francisco: Jossey Bass<\/p>\n Pratt, D. and Associates (1998) Five Perspectives on Teaching in Adult and Higher Education<\/em><\/a>\u00a0Malabar FL: Krieger Publishing Company<\/p>\n Rousseau, J.-J. (1762)\u00a0\u00c9mile,\u00a0ou de l’\u00c9ducation<\/em>\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0(Trans. Allan Bloom). New York: Basic Books,\u00a01979<\/p>\n3.7.2 The social reform\u00a0perspective<\/h2>\nPratt (1998<\/a>, p. 173) states:\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2025\/05\/Climate-change-demonstration.png\")
Figure 3.7.2[\/caption]\n3.7.3 Past and future: the relevance of the nurturing and social reform methods for connectivism<\/h2>\nThese two perspectives on\u00a0teaching again have a long history, with echoes of:\n
\n \t
3.7.4 The roles of learners and teachers<\/h2>\nOf all the perspectives on\u00a0teaching these two\u00a0are\u00a0the most learner-centred. They are\u00a0based on a profoundly optimistic view of human nature, that people will seek out and learn what they need, and will find the necessary support from caring, dedicated educators and\/or from others with similar interests and concerns, and that individuals have the capacity and ability to identify and follow through with their own educational needs. It is also a more radical view of education, because it seeks to escape the political and controlling aspects of states or institutions.\n\nWithin each of these two perspectives, there are differences of view about the centrality of teachers for successful learning. For Pratt, the teacher plays a central role in nurturing learning; for others such as Illich or Freire, professionally trained teachers are more likely to be the servant of the state than of the individual learner. For those supporting these perspectives on teaching, volunteer mentors or social groups organised around certain ideals or social goals provide the necessary support for learners.\n
3.7.5 Strengths and weaknesses of these two approaches<\/h2>\nThere are, as always, a number of drawbacks to these two perspectives on\u00a0teaching:\n
\n \t
\n \t
References<\/h2>\nFreire, P. (2004) Pedagogy of Indignation<\/i><\/a>. Boulder CO: Paradigm\n\nIllich, I. (1971)\u00a0Deschooling Society<\/em><\/a>, New York: Harper and Row\n\nKnowles, M. (1984)\u00a0Andragogy in Action. Applying modern principles of adult education<\/i><\/a>, San Francisco: Jossey Bass\n\nPratt, D. and Associates (1998) Five Perspectives on Teaching in Adult and Higher Education<\/em><\/a>\u00a0Malabar FL: Krieger Publishing Company\n\nRousseau, J.-J. (1762)\u00a0\u00c9mile,\u00a0ou de l'\u00c9ducation<\/em>\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0(Trans. Allan Bloom). New York: Basic Books,\u00a01979\n\nTan, C.-M. (2012) Search Inside Yourself<\/em><\/a> New York: Harper Collins\n
Activity 3.7 Nurturing, social reform and connectivism<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2015\/04\/Father-with-child.png\")
3.7.1 The nurturing\u00a0perspective<\/h2>\n
3.7.2 The social reform\u00a0perspective<\/h2>\n
3.7.3 Past and future: the relevance of the nurturing and social reform methods for connectivism<\/h2>\n
\n
3.7.4 The roles of learners and teachers<\/h2>\n
3.7.5 Strengths and weaknesses of these two approaches<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
References<\/h2>\n