This document summarizes a doctoral thesis that examined factors affecting online graduate learners' ability to integrate emergent technologies. It reviewed literature on learning paradigms and technologies. The study found the perceptual learning paradigm, where learners direct their own learning, most empowered technology integration. While most learners were shifting paradigms, the perceptual paradigm learners significantly improved their skills. Key factors included learners taking responsibility for their own learning. The study concludes by proposing a new dynamic paradigm shift model and framework to better represent learning as an individual process and promote learner empowerment.

1. Norine Wark
Ed Doctoral Program
Centre for Distance Education
Athabasca University
August 27, 2018

2.  Introduction
 Literature Review
 Research Design
 Findings and Conclusions
 Final Thoughts

4. Emergent technology • “Tools, concepts, innovations, and advancements utilized in
diverse educational settings to serve varied education-related purposes” (Veletsianos,
2010, p. 33).
Technology • “Tools, means, skills, crafts, or systems that are outward reflections of
individual and societal values and motivations” (Wark, 2018, p. 4).

5. THESIS:
As humans advance technology,
technology alters humanity
Spiritual machines by
2045 (Kuzweil, 2005)
Exponential growth in new
technologies (Moore’s Law;
Moore, 1965/1998; 1975)
Major epochs in human
history marked by technological
advances (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014)

6. State of flux between dynamically evolving educational technologies and
educational practices requires learners to cope with perpetual ambiguity,
while thoughtfully and purposely integrating needed technology on an
ongoing basis.

7. To critically reflect online graduate level learners’ perspectives on what key
factors and learning paradigm most empowers learners to integrate emergent
technologies for learning on demand.

8. What educational paradigm most empowers online graduate level learners to
acquire higher levels of emergent technology integration for learning on
demand?
 What are the key institutional, curricular, instructional, and contextual factors that
empower the learners in this study to integrate emergent technologies for learning
on demand. Will these perceptions change as the learners progress through the
course?
 Is there a difference in technology integration levels between the learners who
identify a preference for a traditional teacher-directed learning paradigm or a
learner-determined one, or who appear to be in the midst of a paradigm shift? If so,
what key learner-identified factors are most likely associated with the reported
differences?
 Is there a difference in the amount of scaffolding and learning curve reported by the
learners who identify a preference for a traditional teacher-directed learning
paradigm or a learner-determined one, or who appear to be in the midst of a
paradigm shift? If so, what key learner-identified factors are most likely associated
with the reported differences?

9. Jane Addams
(1860-1935)

10. Theory, nature, and power of learning
DE: Technology-enabled learning

11. Epistemology Objective/Behavioural Subjective/Perceptual
Learning Theory Behaviourism Cognitivism Constructivism Connectivism ?
Mind Is Blank Slate Computer Architecture Organic Network
Pedagogy Andragogy Heutagogy
Learning
Approach
Locus of Control Teacher Learner
Figure 1. Theories and learning approaches derived from two epistemologies on learning.

16. Exploratory study; transformative mixed methods methodology

18. What are the key institutional, curricular, instructional, and
contextual factors that empower the learners in this study to
integrate emergent technologies for learning on demand?
Will these perceptions change as these learners progress through
the course?

19. Figure 2. Ten most empowering technology integration factors (689 units by %;
1 unit=1 interview sentence).

20. Figure 3. Ten least empowering technology integration factors (193 units by %;
1 unit=1 interview sentence).

21. Mid- vs Post-term factor lists:
• 2/3 of encouraging factors were common to both lists
• Order of factors changed
• Number of units per factor changed
By the end of the term:
• Encouraging units increased
• Use of technology primary factor on encouraging list
• Being responsible for one’s own learning was second on encouraging list

22. Is there a difference in technology integration levels between the
learners who identify a preference for a traditional teacher-
directed learning paradigm or a learner-determined one, or who
appear to be in the midst of a paradigm shift?
If so, what key learner-identified factors are most likely associated
with the reported differences?

23. All respondents’ pre-term integration mastery levels = early
practice
Post term levels:
• Behavioural paradigm – slight drop in practice level
• Shifting paradigms – slight to moderate increase in practice level
• Perceptual paradigm – significant increase to early competency level

24. Figure 4. Key technology integration empowerment factors by paradigm (Units by %;
1 unit=1 interview sentence).

25. Is there a difference in the amount of scaffolding and learning
curve reported by the learners who identify a preference for a
traditional teacher-directed learning paradigm or a learner-
determined one, or who appear to be in the midst of a paradigm
shift?
If so, what key learner-identified factors are most likely associated
with the reported differences? (Note: Already addressed in response to
Question 2.)

26. Scaffolding:
• Behavioural paradigm – strongly disagreed
• Perceptual paradigm – strongly disagreed
• Shifting paradigm – strongly disagreed to agreed
Learning Curve:
• Behavioural paradigm – strongly disagreed
• Perceptual paradigm – disagreed
• Shifting paradigm – disagreed to agreed

27. What educational paradigm most empowers online graduate level
learners to acquire higher levels of emergent technology
integration for learning on demand?

28. DETAILS
PARADIGM
Behavioural Shifting Perceptual
Emergent tech integration
level (end of term)
Slight decrease in
practice level
Slight to moderate
increase in practice level
Significant increase to
early competency
Personal emergent tech goal No
No, yes, and changed
goal
Yes
Scaffolding Strongly disagree
Strongly disagree to
agree
Strongly disagree
Learning curve Strongly disagree Disagree to agree Disagree
Change in thinking No Yes and No No
Top 5 empowerment factors
4 of 5 are
disempowering
3 of 5 same as
perceptual paradigm
4 of 5 are nearly
equally empowering
Responsible for learning Government Self Self
Table 1.
Summary of responses to research questions.

30.  Most empowering paradigm = perceptual paradigm
 Most respondents = in the midst of a paradigm shift
 Learning = non-linear, individual process
 Paradigm shift framework graphics must reflect the dynamic
nature of learning

31. Figure 5. New Paradigm Shift Model.

32. Figure 6. New Paradigm Shift Framework.

33.  Captures theory, nature, and power of learning
 Illustrates dynamic, non-linear nature of learning
 Identifies relationship between learning paradigms, learning
approaches, and integration of emergent technologies
 Provides framework for identifying and enhancing learner-
determined integration of emergent technologies
 Offers learner-determined emergent technology integration
taxonomy
 May be adapted to other areas of learning as well

34.  Government, institution, faculty limits
 Sample size
 Reliance upon respondent self-perceptions
 Instrument short-comings

35. Learner-empowered technology integration
Future research

36. • Critical pragmatic paradigm + transformative mixed methods study
• Relates paradigms, learner empowerment, and emergent
technology integration
• Means for improving learner empowerment and emergent
technology integration
• Identifies learning as an individual, dynamic process
• Challenges beliefs about learner empowerment and emergent
technology integration
• Promotes adoption of perceptual paradigm

37. Time is of the essence:
• Future of learner-empowered, egaltarian nature of DE threatened
• Emergent technology-enabled DE can emancipate learners if learners seek
emancipation
• Learner empowerment = instrumental reasoning, rational thinking, creative
intuition, and emancipatory action
Study provides:
• Evidence for why learner emancipation is desirable
• Means for enhancing the development of self-determined learners
Aim:
• To promote a better humanity and world

38. SHIFTING PARADIGMS:
A Critical Pragmatic Evaluation of Key Factors
Affecting Learner-empowered Emergent Technology Integration