Scientific Journal "Sociology: Theory, Methods, Marketing"
LATEST PRINTED ISSUE
LATEST FREELY ACCESSIBLE MATERIALS
LEARNER AGENCY IN THE CONTEXT OF INNOVATIVE LEARNER ENVIRONMENT: ITS CONCEPTUALIZATION AND THEORETICAL BASIS
stmm. 2022 (1): 144-164
DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2022.01.144
VIKTORIA HUMENIUK, PhD Student, Sociology Department and Yukhymenko Family Doctoral School, National University of “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy” (18, Volos’ka St., Kyiv, 04070)
vita.gumeniuk@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1046-7459
The centrality of learner agency notion, as an indicator of school learning environment transformation, implies the necessity of its conceptualization by the academics. The concept of learner agency is being elaborated following the rails of sociological definition of agency, which puts this notion in the procedural field of interaction with structural and cultural factors. Two theoretical perspectives — social cognitive theory of Bandura and social morphogenesis theory of Archer — form the basis for understanding the notion of learner agency, defined in the framework of a given theoretical research. The key features of learner agency concept are its emergent and temporal character, as well as agent’s personal identity level. Such understanding of learner agency requires from school learning environment: a) to coordinate the learning process with learners’ different time horizons in order to enable learning process taking into account past experience, future plans and aspirations, and present knowledge and skills’ level; b) to provide the possibility, firstly, for Self-knowledge, Self-identification, and, afterwards, for realization of learners’ individual peculiarities and interests throughout the whole learning process; c) to maintain a conducive mode of learners’ interaction with both structural and cultural factors of learning environment.
Keywords: agency, learner agency, innovative learner environment, emergence, critical realist perspective, temporality, personal identity, social identity, reflection.
References
Bandura, A. (2000). Theory of social learning / Tr. from English; Ed. by V. Chubar’. [In Russian]. St-Petersburg: Ltd. Izdatel’skaya gruppa «Evrazia». [=Бандура 2000]
Humeniuk, V. (2020). The Plurality of Definitions and Operationalization in the context of School Education. [In Ukrainian]. NaUKMA Research Papers. Sociology, 3, 27–36. [=Гуменюк 2020]
Nova Ukrains’ka Shkola (NUSH). The conceptual principles of secondary school reforming (2016). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Ministry of education and science of Ukraine. Retrieved from: https://mon.gov.ua/storage/app/media/zagalna%20serednya/nova-ukrainska-shkola-compressed.pdf [=Нова українська школа 2016]
Osypchuk, A. (2007). Theory of morphogenesis of Margaret Archer as an attempt of «structure-agency» synthesis. [In Russian]. Sociology: theory, methods, marketing, 2, 150–163. [=Осипчук 2007]
Shchudlo, S., Zabolotna, O., Lisova, T. (2018). The Ukrainian teachers and learning environment. According to the results of all-Ukrainian survey of teaching and learning among school directors and teachers of general education institutions (Following TALIS methodology). [In Ukrainian]. Drohobych: Ltd. «Track-LTD». [=Щудло 2018]
Archer, M. (1982). Morphogenesis versus Structuration: On Combining Structure and Action. British Journal of Sociology, 33(4), 456–483.
Archer, M. (1995). Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (1996). Culture and Agency. The place of Culture in Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2000). Being Human: The Problem of Agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2003). Structure, Agency, and the Internal Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2007). Making our Way through the World: Human Reflexivity and Social Mobility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2006). Towards a Psychology of Human Agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180.
Bhaskar, R. (1986). Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. London: Routledge.
Brown, G. (2008). The Ontology of Learning Envirnoments. In: Learning and Learner: Exploring Learning in New Times / Ed. by P. Kell, W. Vialle, D. Konza, G. Vogl. Australia: University of Wollongong. Retrieved from: https://ro.uow.edu.au/edupapers/47
Brown, G. (2009). The Ontological Turn in Education. Journal of Critical Realism, 8(1), 5–34. DOI: 10.1558/jocr.v8i1.5
Callero, P.L. (2003). The Sociology of Self. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 115–133.
Charteris, J., Thomas, E. (2016). Uncovering “Unwelcome Truths” through Student Voice: Teacher Inquiry into Agency and Student Assessment Literacy. Teaching Education, 28(2), 162–177. DOI: 10.1080/10476210.2016.1229291
Charteris, J., Smardon, D. (2018). A typology of agency in new generation learning environment: emerging relational, ecological and new material considerations. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 26(1), 51–68.
Delgarno, B. (2014). Polysynchronous Learning: A Model for Student Interaction and Engagement. Retrieved from: https://ascilite.org/conferences/dunedin2014/files/concisepapers/255-Dalgarno.pdf
Dumont, H., Istance, D., Benavides, F. (Eds.) (2010). The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice, Educational Research and Innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264086487-en
Ertl, H., Wright, S. (2008). Reviewing the literature on the student learning experience in higher education. London Review of Education, 6(3), 195–210.
Fisher, K. (2016). The Translational Design of Schools: An Evidence-Based Approach to Aligning Pedagogy and Learning Environments. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Gao, X. (2010). Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context. Multilingual Matters.
Gecas, V. (2003). Self-Agency and the Life Course. In: J. Mortimer, M. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the Life Course. New York: Kluwer.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society Introduction of the Theory of Structuration. Berkley: University of California Press.
Hitlin, S., Elder, G. H. Jr. (2007). Time, Self and the Curiously Abstract Concept of Agency. Sociological Theory, 25(2), 170–191.
Imms, W., Cleveland B., Fisher, K. (2016). Pursuing That Elusive Evidence about What Works in Learning Environment Design. In: Evaluating Learning Environment / Ed. by W. Imms, B. Cleveland, K. Fisher (pp. 3–17). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Istance, D., Kools, M. (2013). OECD Work on Technology and Education: Innovative Learning Environments as an Integrating Framework. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 43–57.
Istance, D. (2015). Schooling Redesigned: Towards Innovative Learning Systems. Paris: OECD.
Kahn, P., Qualter, A., Young, R. (2012). Structure and Agency in Learning: a Critical Realist Theory of the Development of Capacity to Reflect on Academic Practice. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(6), 859–871.
Manyukhina, Y., Wyse, D. (2019). Learner agency and the curriculum: a critical realist perspective. The Curriculum Journal, 30(3), 223–243.
Martin, J. (2004). Self-Regulated Learning, Social Cognitive Theory, and Agency. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 135–145.
OECD (2013). Innovative Learning Environments, Educational Research and Innovationю. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264203488-en
OECD (2017). The OECD Handbook for Innovative Learning Environments. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/9789264277274-en.
OECD (2018). The Future of Education and Skills. Education 2030. Published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf
OECD (2019). Conceptual Learning Framework. Student Agency for 2030. Retrireved from: https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/student-agency/Student_Agency_for_2030_concept_note.pdf
Schoon, I. (2018). Conceptualising Learner Agency: A Socio-Ecological Developmental Approach. Published by the Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies. Retrieved from: https://www.llakes.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/LLAKES-Research-Paper-64-Schoon-I.pdf
Toohey, K., Norton, B. (2003). Learner autonomy as agency in sociocultural settings. In: D. Palfreyman, R.C. Smith (Eds.), Learner Autonomy Across Cultures (pp. 58–72). Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Ushioda, E. (2007). Motivation, autonomy and sociocultural theory. In: P. Benson (Ed.), Learner Autonomy 8: Teacher and Learner Perspectives. Authentik (pp. 5–24). Dublin.
Vaughn, M. (2018). Making sense of student agency in the early grades. Phi Delta Kappan. 99(7), 62–66.
Williams, K. (2012). Rethinking ‘Learning’ in Higher Education. Viewing the Student as Social Actor. Journal of Critical Realism, 11(3), 296–323.
Received 18.02.2022
LEARNER AGENCY IN THE CONTEXT OF INNOVATIVE LEARNER ENVIRONMENT: ITS CONCEPTUALIZATION AND THEORETICAL BASIS
stmm. 2022 (1): 144-164
DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2022.01.144
VIKTORIA HUMENIUK, PhD Student, Sociology Department and Yukhymenko Family Doctoral School, National University of “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy” (18, Volos’ka St., Kyiv, 04070)
vita.gumeniuk@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1046-7459
The centrality of learner agency notion, as an indicator of school learning environment transformation, implies the necessity of its conceptualization by the academics. The concept of learner agency is being elaborated following the rails of sociological definition of agency, which puts this notion in the procedural field of interaction with structural and cultural factors. Two theoretical perspectives — social cognitive theory of Bandura and social morphogenesis theory of Archer — form the basis for understanding the notion of learner agency, defined in the framework of a given theoretical research. The key features of learner agency concept are its emergent and temporal character, as well as agent’s personal identity level. Such understanding of learner agency requires from school learning environment: a) to coordinate the learning process with learners’ different time horizons in order to enable learning process taking into account past experience, future plans and aspirations, and present knowledge and skills’ level; b) to provide the possibility, firstly, for Self-knowledge, Self-identification, and, afterwards, for realization of learners’ individual peculiarities and interests throughout the whole learning process; c) to maintain a conducive mode of learners’ interaction with both structural and cultural factors of learning environment.
Keywords: agency, learner agency, innovative learner environment, emergence, critical realist perspective, temporality, personal identity, social identity, reflection.
References
Bandura, A. (2000). Theory of social learning / Tr. from English; Ed. by V. Chubar’. [In Russian]. St-Petersburg: Ltd. Izdatel’skaya gruppa «Evrazia». [=Бандура 2000]
Humeniuk, V. (2020). The Plurality of Definitions and Operationalization in the context of School Education. [In Ukrainian]. NaUKMA Research Papers. Sociology, 3, 27–36. [=Гуменюк 2020]
Nova Ukrains’ka Shkola (NUSH). The conceptual principles of secondary school reforming (2016). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Ministry of education and science of Ukraine. Retrieved from: https://mon.gov.ua/storage/app/media/zagalna%20serednya/nova-ukrainska-shkola-compressed.pdf [=Нова українська школа 2016]
Osypchuk, A. (2007). Theory of morphogenesis of Margaret Archer as an attempt of «structure-agency» synthesis. [In Russian]. Sociology: theory, methods, marketing, 2, 150–163. [=Осипчук 2007]
Shchudlo, S., Zabolotna, O., Lisova, T. (2018). The Ukrainian teachers and learning environment. According to the results of all-Ukrainian survey of teaching and learning among school directors and teachers of general education institutions (Following TALIS methodology). [In Ukrainian]. Drohobych: Ltd. «Track-LTD». [=Щудло 2018]
Archer, M. (1982). Morphogenesis versus Structuration: On Combining Structure and Action. British Journal of Sociology, 33(4), 456–483.
Archer, M. (1995). Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (1996). Culture and Agency. The place of Culture in Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2000). Being Human: The Problem of Agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2003). Structure, Agency, and the Internal Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2007). Making our Way through the World: Human Reflexivity and Social Mobility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2006). Towards a Psychology of Human Agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180.
Bhaskar, R. (1986). Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. London: Routledge.
Brown, G. (2008). The Ontology of Learning Envirnoments. In: Learning and Learner: Exploring Learning in New Times / Ed. by P. Kell, W. Vialle, D. Konza, G. Vogl. Australia: University of Wollongong. Retrieved from: https://ro.uow.edu.au/edupapers/47
Brown, G. (2009). The Ontological Turn in Education. Journal of Critical Realism, 8(1), 5–34. DOI: 10.1558/jocr.v8i1.5
Callero, P.L. (2003). The Sociology of Self. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 115–133.
Charteris, J., Thomas, E. (2016). Uncovering “Unwelcome Truths” through Student Voice: Teacher Inquiry into Agency and Student Assessment Literacy. Teaching Education, 28(2), 162–177. DOI: 10.1080/10476210.2016.1229291
Charteris, J., Smardon, D. (2018). A typology of agency in new generation learning environment: emerging relational, ecological and new material considerations. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 26(1), 51–68.
Delgarno, B. (2014). Polysynchronous Learning: A Model for Student Interaction and Engagement. Retrieved from: https://ascilite.org/conferences/dunedin2014/files/concisepapers/255-Dalgarno.pdf
Dumont, H., Istance, D., Benavides, F. (Eds.) (2010). The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice, Educational Research and Innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264086487-en
Ertl, H., Wright, S. (2008). Reviewing the literature on the student learning experience in higher education. London Review of Education, 6(3), 195–210.
Fisher, K. (2016). The Translational Design of Schools: An Evidence-Based Approach to Aligning Pedagogy and Learning Environments. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Gao, X. (2010). Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context. Multilingual Matters.
Gecas, V. (2003). Self-Agency and the Life Course. In: J. Mortimer, M. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the Life Course. New York: Kluwer.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society Introduction of the Theory of Structuration. Berkley: University of California Press.
Hitlin, S., Elder, G. H. Jr. (2007). Time, Self and the Curiously Abstract Concept of Agency. Sociological Theory, 25(2), 170–191.
Imms, W., Cleveland B., Fisher, K. (2016). Pursuing That Elusive Evidence about What Works in Learning Environment Design. In: Evaluating Learning Environment / Ed. by W. Imms, B. Cleveland, K. Fisher (pp. 3–17). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Istance, D., Kools, M. (2013). OECD Work on Technology and Education: Innovative Learning Environments as an Integrating Framework. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 43–57.
Istance, D. (2015). Schooling Redesigned: Towards Innovative Learning Systems. Paris: OECD.
Kahn, P., Qualter, A., Young, R. (2012). Structure and Agency in Learning: a Critical Realist Theory of the Development of Capacity to Reflect on Academic Practice. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(6), 859–871.
Manyukhina, Y., Wyse, D. (2019). Learner agency and the curriculum: a critical realist perspective. The Curriculum Journal, 30(3), 223–243.
Martin, J. (2004). Self-Regulated Learning, Social Cognitive Theory, and Agency. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 135–145.
OECD (2013). Innovative Learning Environments, Educational Research and Innovationю. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264203488-en
OECD (2017). The OECD Handbook for Innovative Learning Environments. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/9789264277274-en.
OECD (2018). The Future of Education and Skills. Education 2030. Published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf
OECD (2019). Conceptual Learning Framework. Student Agency for 2030. Retrireved from: https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/student-agency/Student_Agency_for_2030_concept_note.pdf
Schoon, I. (2018). Conceptualising Learner Agency: A Socio-Ecological Developmental Approach. Published by the Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies. Retrieved from: https://www.llakes.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/LLAKES-Research-Paper-64-Schoon-I.pdf
Toohey, K., Norton, B. (2003). Learner autonomy as agency in sociocultural settings. In: D. Palfreyman, R.C. Smith (Eds.), Learner Autonomy Across Cultures (pp. 58–72). Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Ushioda, E. (2007). Motivation, autonomy and sociocultural theory. In: P. Benson (Ed.), Learner Autonomy 8: Teacher and Learner Perspectives. Authentik (pp. 5–24). Dublin.
Vaughn, M. (2018). Making sense of student agency in the early grades. Phi Delta Kappan. 99(7), 62–66.
Williams, K. (2012). Rethinking ‘Learning’ in Higher Education. Viewing the Student as Social Actor. Journal of Critical Realism, 11(3), 296–323.
Received 18.02.2022
LATEST PRINTED ISSUE
LATEST FREELY ACCESSIBLE MATERIALS