One of the challenges I face in building my knowledge in the field of education is the myriad learning theories and trying to understand how they might inform Dental Education, which is the field in which I teach. How they fit with other learning theories, and how they might help guide the development or learning activities, subjects or an entire course.
A little over a week ago, I read Dave Cormier’s piece on rhizomatic education (Cormier, 2008) and have been thinking about it since. Cormier describes rhizomatic education as a model of learning where “curriculum is not driven by predefined inputs from experts; it is constructed and negotiated in real time by the contributors of those negotiated via the learning process” (Cormier, 2008. p.3).
Upon the first reading, I dismissed the theory of rhizomatic education as not being relevant to dental education. This was based on the nature of rhizomatic learning being that knowledge is constructed by the community of learners, and that “external validation of knowledge, either by an expert or by a constructed curriculum” (Cormier, 2008. p. 4) is not necessary; indeed, it is integral to the definition of this theory.
This idea opposes what we try to instill in our students in regard to practicing evidence-based dentistry (Afrashtehfar & Assery, 2017). As health care professionals, the clinical decision making of our students should be firmly grounded in research which largely makes up the canon of our profession. My main concern with rhizomatic education was that unless our students had developed the foundational knowledge of clinical dentistry, left to construct their own curriculum they risked following a path to misinformation.
But, I have read enough education literature to consider that perhaps I just didn’t understand. As a scientist, education literature can seem like another language. Rather than letting it go, I was determined to challenge myself, and went searching. I stumbled across a storytelling artifact explaining rhizomatic learning, an accompaniment to a paper by Alexios Brailas describing a practical implementation of this theory (Brailas, 2020b). In this artifact, (Brailas, 2020a) the author employed a comic-book format to summarise the main points of the his paper.
At the same time, I have been reading about clinical humanities experiences in dental education to promote observation, reflection and critical thinking skills (Zahra, 2018). Students explore the subjectivity of the Arts through topics such as inequalities in access to care, perspectives on experience of illness and aesthetic ambiguity (Zahra, 2018). As part of these activities, students are encouraged to share their reflections through video or as written reflection as part of an e-portfolio. Through engaging with these activities, the learning of the students is not based on established canon, but on their own experience and reflection. With their peers, they are working collaboratively to build knowledge which is not, and does not need to be validated by an expert. An example of rhizomatic education.
Which led me back to a second reading of Cormier (2008), where I could now see the clarification that rhizomatic education may be a good model for some disciplines where an established body of knowledge does not exist – such as clinical humanities.
References
Afrashtehfar, K. I., & Assery, M. K. (2017). From dental science to clinical practice: Knowledge translation and evidence-based dentistry principles. Saudi Dent J, 29(3), 83-92. doi:10.1016/j.sdentj.2017.02.002
Brailas, A. (2020a). Rhizomatic Learning Explained. Retrieved from https://edarxiv.org/n4xhs/
Brailas, A. (2020b). Rhizomatic Learning in Action: A Virtual Exposition for Demonstrating Learning Rhizomes. Paper presented at the Eighth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, Salamanca, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434780.3436565
Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic Education: Community as Curriculum. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4(5). Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=eric&AN=EJ840362&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=s2775460
Zahra, F. S. (2018). Clinical Humanities; informal, transformative learning opportunities, where knowledge gained from Humanities epistemologies is translated back into clinical practice, supporting the development of professional autonomy in undergraduate dental students [Version 2]. MedEdPublish, 7(3). Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=edsdoj&AN=edsdoj.4b8eb144cf3547168d3f08526e2ac360&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=s2775460
I tend to think that a correlation can be drawn between the cognitive development and level of the learner, and the teaching method employed, as a continuum. Like yourself, I have doubts about rhizomatic learning, and I increasingly think that those doubts are part is locating where it should be taught.
To illustrate by way of examples, a teacher who attempted andragogical teaching methods in a primary school class would soon find themselves in a real of chaos. The children do not have the same background knowledge as an advanced adult learner, for example. It would be idealistic to treat them as social equals. They are there because they are required to be, rather than through a voluntary nature, etc.
Likewise, an educator who applied a pedagogical approach to a class of adults would encounter a rebellion of a different sort. The learners would find their teaching officious, their approach dictatorial, and their indifference to their needs and experience disheartening.
But there is also a third category in the continuum, heutagogy, for self-managed learners. Perhaps here, as the “beyond andragogy” end of the continuum that rhizomatic learning can be of greatest value.
I think the notion of ‘continuum’ of pedagogical strategies is useful to design how a learning environment might authentically navigate or move between Pedagogy – Andragogy – Heutagogy as appropriate for where specific learners are at. I don’t believe it is tied directly to the age of the learner – most learning theory has been developed through observation of how children learn and then applied to adult learning. See this conversation thread on the 2020 #EDUC90970 cohort:
https://pauladebarba.wordpress.com/2020/06/12/fostering-cognitive-presence-in-online-courses/comment-page-1/#comment-12
Some useful references:
Gandini, L. (1993). Fundamentals of the Reggio Emilia approach to early childhood education. Young Children, 49(1), 4-8. http://www.naeyc.org/yc/pastissues
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
Montessori, M. (1948). The discovery of the child (2004 ed.). Aakar Books. http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?index=books&linkCode=qs&keywords=8187879238
I was really interested in your exploration of rhizomatic learning theory as related to dental education. Useful reference regarding personal and professional development of Dental undergraduates promoting ‘transdisciplinary, informal, transformative learning’. (Smyth Zahra, 2018) Bright idea to borrow methods and understandings from the Humanities.
The comic book format artifact you linked to, was very enticing. it made me realize I still have a lot to learn about rhizomatic learning theory.
Smyth Zahra, F. (2018). Clinical Humanities; informal, transformative learning opportunities, where knowledge gained from Humanities epistemologies is translated back into clinical practice, supporting the development of professional autonomy in undergraduate dental students [Version 2]. MedEdPublish, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2018.0000163.2
Hi Samantha, really interesting reading your blog on rhizomatic learning… I’m giving a presentation on this next week with Kate, so I’m in the same headspace right now. It made sense to me that your thinking led you to the health humanities space. You talk about the ‘subjectivity of the arts’, and how students’ opportunities for reflection and creative response aligns with the idea of rhizomatic learning. I couldn’t agree more! Did you ever work with Mina Borromeo at the Dental School? She and I did a lot of work together with Dental students in the Ian Potter Museum of Art, and she expanded this museum-based program to include students’ creating new artworks as a way of expanding their understanding of Special Needs Dentistry. … We did a book chapter, The visual arts in health education at the Melbourne Dental School, Mina Borromeo, Heather Gaunt, and Neville Chiavaroli’, in https://www.brusheducation.ca/books/creative-arts-in-humane-medicine; and students presented their creative works in the Dental School as well.
Unfortunately I didn’t get a chance to work with Mina while she was at the school – I was mainly working in oral microbiology rather than education while she was doing her work with you. I did get the opportunity to see a presentation on it, but thank you so much for the chapter link – that will wonderful to read.