Traditsiooniline klassiruumikeskne pedagoogika didaktika võimalused piirideta õpivõimaluste loomisel on üsna tagasihoidlikud. Tehnoloogia pakub teadmiste omandamiseks täiendavaid võimalusi, kuid püstitab ka mitmeid väljakutseid nii teadmiste vahendajatele kui omandajatele. Siinviidatu võiks kuuluda kõikide hariduskäsutajate lugemisvara hulka. Ei või küll kindel olla, kuid ehk oleks selle teksti lugemisel lootust edenemiseks printeri- ja klassiruumikesksest õppemudelist lähemale avatud ja dünaamilise õppekorralduse suunas.


“The concept of “flexibility” has been spreading in policy, research, and practice around the world, typically engendering the idea of a technology-driven strategy for improving educational inclusion, equity, and quality. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2016), for instance, encourages institutions to deliver “flexible learning pathways” and remove barriers to (in)formal education by using digital means.” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 1)

N-ö paindlike õppevormide rakendamine ilma tehnoloogia võimalusi kasutamata … sestap on õppeplatvormide roll oluline:

“Although researchers have argued that flexible and unbundled curricula exist and need inquiry, how technology plays a role herein has often been overlooked in curriculum studies (Krause, 2022).” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 2)

Relatsiooniline perspektiiv:

“We build on a relational understanding of curriculum as social practice (e.g. Priestley & Philippou, 2018) but point to some analytical constraints of assuming only humans have agency. What is at stake here is that technologies in curriculum making may be reduced to inactive tools that merely facilitate education.” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 2)

Õppekava disain ja digitehnoloogiad …

“Curriculum designs and digital technologies are considered “tools” to “transform” and “enhance” access, quality, and curriculum in innovative ways. MOOC platforms, for instance, have been designated as the means to make education accessible “anytime and anywhere” (e.g. Lambert & Alony, 2018, p. 73; Li et  al., 2018).” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 3)

Neli analüütilist dimensiooni:

“We distinguish four analytical dimensions to help us investigate how open education platforms become actively involved in curriculum making.” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 5) “First, the graphical user interface (GUI) is a part of the platform’s programmed architecture that both enables and constrains user actions.” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 5) […] “A second analytical dimension, and another part of the platform architecture, is the algorithms that demarcate user actions.” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 5) […] 3) “A third dimension involves the user, the one (expected) to interact with the platform architecture and take part in curriculum making.” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 5) […] “A final analytical dimension helps us acknowledge how platforms are situated in a wider ecology, and constituents in this relational field describe or idealise a curriculum (Decuypere, 2021; Edwards, 2011).” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 5) 4)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“Given these findings, we propose the concept of platform curriculum as a specific form of (in)flexible curriculum that is the result of humans, materials, and technologies (pre)ordering education in particular but contingent directions (cf. Nespor, 1994). A platform curriculum enables flexible education in the sense that the learner gains access to various courses at convenient yet specific times and spaces for personal or economic purposes (see Veletsianos & Houlden, 2019).” (Vanermen et al., 2022, p. 22)

Vanermen, L., Vlieghe, J., & Decuypere, M. (2022). Curriculum meets platform: A reconceptualisation of flexible pathways in open and higher education. Curriculum Inquiry, 1–26.