In response to Charles' thoughts on Learner Autonomy

This post originally started out as a comment reply to a comment from Charles in reply to this post. (Sorry, couldn't think of a better way to write that.) It eventually became long enough to become a post of its own, and thus worth more points for my Distance Ed class. (YEAH!)

"In my view learner autonomy can be a good thing and a bad thing."

You know, you are absolutely right. At first I disagreed with your statement, thinking that we had just been using a different definition of "learner autonomy." I was using the phrase to designate only the quality and extent of the autonomy characteristic exhibited by the learner, and I thought you were using it to describe the degree of autonomy encouraged or allowed by the instructor.

However, despite the possibility of our using different definitions of the phrase, I am nonetheless forced to agree with you after more careful consideration of the matter. Imagine a classroom full of learners who are fully autonomous, needing no help at all from the teacher, and can come to all of the correct answers on their own, solely through interaction with the textbook. (Please ignore for a moment, if you will, the fact that the situation just described is, arguably, a contradiction.) Now, imagine a classroom full of students who, in order to truly learn the content, desperately need the instructor to hold their hands and spoon-feed them all course content. The first scenario I described sounds much less easier to me as an instructor, and thus much more appealing. So learner autonomy is obviously a good thing, right?

But here's the problem and the reason why the situation described can be a contradiction: sometimes coming to "all of the correct answers" necessarily requires real-time interaction with an intelligent (i.e. non-textbook), more experienced agent (e.g. one's instructor.) A learner who has no experience simply cannot always know the answers to certain questions, such as:

• Was there any portion at all (even extremely minute aspects) of my performance that could have been improved?


• What are the proper contexts in which to apply this knowledge?


• Given an appropriate context, how can I know that I am applying this knowledge correctly?


• ...

This is why we run into problems when there is a significant disparity between the quality and amount of autonomy exhibited by the learner and the quality and amount of autonomy accomodated for or expected by the instructor. To this end, Charles, you wrote:

"Autonomy that is thrust on" (or I would say expected of) "a learner unprepared to be completely autonomous can be a very frustrating proposition. At the same time not allowing for autonomy can be equally frustrating for a learner who is highly self-motivated."

As a student having personally found myself in both of those situations, I completely agree. Disparity of expectations regarding learner autonomy can indeed be frustrating. You gave one common example in your comment:

"Think of courses that require individuals to work in collaborative groups . . . any time you are “required” to work with or interact with others you lose some autonomy. So, under what conditions do the benefits seem to outweigh the costs? That is a question that is not easily answered . . . and one that instructors have to make all the time."

I believe this question must be answered on a case-by-case basis with careful consideration for each learner as an individual. Alternative guiding questions that may help us answer the previous question might be:

• If I require more learner autonomy from this student than he or she is currently exhibiting, will the student display a survival-reaction increase in learner autonomy (and rise to the occasion), or will the student struggle, only to fall behind and become lost (a failure of the instructional system)?


• If certain activities (e.g. Charles' description of group work) require a self-denial of learner autonomy from this student, will the student concede and refrain from the full exercise of his or her autonomy, or will the student refuse to participate in a way that is conducive to the aims of the activity?

An instructor can, with reasonable confidence, answer such questions only when they are considered in the light of his or her previous interactions with an individual student. Therefore, to know when the benefits of autonomy disparity outweigh the associated costs, an instructor must know his or her students individually.

Now we can finally get to your invitation for me to share my thoughts on how this relates to the Gospel:

"So - here is a thought (a Gospel parallel) that I had regarding learner autonomy . . . there seems to be a paradox between the idea of trying to be “self-sufficient” on the one hand and knowing on the other hand that we are ultimately dependent on the atonement and others and cannot be completely self-reliant.

"It seems that there is an oblique parallel here with learner autonomy - “agency” being the key concept. What thoughts do you have on this connection before I elaborate more on mine with you . . . ?"

First, we must start from the premise that God respects our agency (that is, our role as the sole responsible executor for our own individual actions). Because His only desire is for us to learn to become like Him, He will never force the outcome of any decisions we make for the following reasons: Any situation requiring our personal choice in which He could force our hand to choose this way or that way would not be an act of our agency; it would be an act of His coercion. If our individual agency were not the motivating force behind a decision, there would be no associated adjustment or reinforcement of our individual attitudes. If there is no adjustment of attitudes and behaviors then we have "learned" nothing, in the sense that we do not become more like Him. Therefore, any behavior such as would lead to our learning to become more like Him must be an act of our personal choice, not of coercion. Such godly coercion would not truly bring us closer to Him and would therefore be counterproductive to HIs own goals. God will not force us to choose one way or another.

In this way, drawing a parallel from the classroom, the learner autonomy that we personally exhibit trumps all. It doesn't matter how God structures the instructional environment--whatever God says or does through His scriptures, His prophets, provident moments of blessing, or attention-getting moments of unrest and turbulence, we always retain our autonomy and ultimately have the choice of whether we will participate in God's instructional activities in a way persuant to His instructional goals.

But having said this, let us also now remember that He does know each of us individually. And because he knows us individually, He knows in every situation how we will react in the event of an autonomy disparity. Because He knows what we need to learn to become more like Him, and because He knows how best to help us learn those things, sometimes He uses autonomy disparity to help us learn those things we still lack.

For example, sometimes He may place me in a situation, the successful outcome of which depends on my ability to rise above and beyond the level of autonomy to which I have currently attained. In other words, He may place me in a situation in life where I don't know what to do and how to find the answers to my problem, but He expects me to just use my agency and my current knowledge of righteousness to do the best I can, knowing that I will come out stronger, more self-sufficient, more autonomous in the end.

In another situation, I may have too great a sense of learner autonomy, to the point where I do not want to heed His council anymore. In such a situation, He may place me in difficult circumstances that encourage me to humble myself, to rein in my sense of autonomy to the point where I allow myself to be instructed by Him again.

In both situations, He is able to use an autonomy disparity for instructional purposes. And He is able to do this because He, the great Instructor, our Father, knows me, a student, a son, individually and better than I know myself.