Epistemology: Self-Organisation and Learning Culture: Schmidt

Self-Organisation and Learning Culture

Siegfried J. Schmidt • University of Münster, Germany • sjschmidt@gmx.net

> Problem • Many disciplines talk about “learning“, but since each of them relates this term to another domain of reference, each one selects, by this term, other phenomena that are then called “learning.” > Method • This article does not strive for a substantial definition of “learning” nor does it compete with psychological and pedagogical theories of learning, which are therefore not discussed. Instead I will analyse how we talk about learning and whether or not we might perhaps improve the plausibility of this discourse by applying a crucial constructivist concept, namely self- organisation. The main idea of this article reads as follows: “Learning” serves as an explanatory model for the observa- tion of a specific type of change that happens in terms of contingent self-alterations of self-organising systems. The changing system and the observer of this system are inseparably related to one another since there “is” no change without an observation. Thus, talking about learning means talking about the observer and his culture of observation, description and evaluation at the same time. > Benefits • The results of my analysis of the learning discourse are nei- ther meant to serve as how-to knowledge for ameliorating learning processes nor do I regard them as an elaborated or new theory of learning as some ideas developed in this paper have a long tradition. Instead they can contribute to a more complex observation of these processes, aiming at a second order observation of the complicated, since comple- mentary, interrelations between the individual, the socio-cultural, the institutional, and the situational components of the domain called “learning.” In other words, I try to demonstrate the plausibility of observing learning from the perspective of self-organisation.

> Key words • change processes, contingency, culture, knowledge, second order observation, self-organisation.

Let me sum up these considerations concerning learning processes:

ƒ Learning processes need an agent, who might be individual or collective.

ƒ In the case of an individual agent, cog- nitive autonomy and self-organisation have to be taken into account. Cognitive activities are geared by cognitive, emo- tional, moral and empractical2 process components.

ƒ Learning processes happen in time and space and in histories and discourses that are embedded in social, political, economic and technical contexts and developments and are characterised by power relations, gender- and genera- tion-constellations.

ƒ Even if agents can establish common histories and discourses for a certain period, agents experience them as their own history and discourse.

ƒ Learning processes constitute and main- tain their identity via difference from other processes in the same social di- mension.

ƒLearners act on the basis of specific ideas about the reasons for and goals of their learning processes, which might differ in many respects.

ƒ Learning processes might be planned or spontaneous.

ƒ Learning processes can be self-observed or other-observed. The relation between these directions of observation is rel- evant for the evaluation of these pro- cesses.

ƒ According to the actual implementation of these components, different modes, types and styles of learning processes can be realised.

ƒ I call the framework of interactive de- pendencies between learner and teacher, learning processes, performances and observers, a “learning system.”

ƒ For the agents, learning processes are bodily processes imbued with emo- tions.3

(Constructuvist Foundations (5(3)) 2010