Toward an affordance analysis?

I and Michael S. Gallagher planned to write an article about ”Affordance Analysis in Education”.  We ideated together and made some sketches, but noticed then that the approach was not satisfying. I.e. we thought that the writing should be more artistic and ”autoethnographic”. So we are now working on for a new joint article. 

Still – while plugging the new one – I feel willing to share some thoughts I produced in the first writing phase. The topic, an affordance analysis for educational purposes, is not an easy subject. And I think it might be sensible to share ideas still being in a process of becoming. An attempt to interact for a better and shared understanding? Below some drafts about the theme. Educational contexts are formal, informal, serendipitous, digital and hybrid learning.

Sociomateriality in formal learning includes conventional and restricted factors of materiality and sociality of formal learning settings. Formal learning environments consist of sociomaterial frames (conventionality and restrictedness) to perceive and recognize, and then by learning to attune and adapt how to behave, work, study and interact inside those frames. The above mentioned constitutes an affordance system and dynamics for formal learning, which basically affords indication to notice the frames and reinforcement to act within them.  This kind of affordance system maintain the given circumstances and conditions for learning. Possible change orientations are determined by the learning frame of formality and they keep it conventional and restricted. In terms of affordance analysis a question for formal learning is what are concrete sociomateriality factors of indication and reinforcement in formal learning settings and how do they compose those settings.

In informal learning people (open learners) compose themselves inside existent and more or less known but still changing habitats. This, sort of anticipated change gives a tone of unexpectedness for perceptions of the emerging learning situations and events. The unexpectedness ”demands” personal reflection of met physical and social encounters and further to adapt and transform one’s behavior in an informal situation.  This kind of situation constitutes an affordance  system of a specific activity composed by the dynamics of the existent and known, but which are simultaneously unexpected habitats and behaviors  in an authentic situation. This paradoxical or conflicting sociomaterial setting calls for assessment of the setting and re-evaluation of it in relation to earlier and possibly coming settings, though it in many cases is tacit activity. This can be called as flaneuring regeneration of informal learning environments. In terms of affordance analysis a question is how to perceive and meet sociomaterial unexpectednesses of an informal learning environment.

In serendipitous acutely novel learning in instantly present situations of people, learning gets its content from the immediacy of people’s settings that awake people as experiencers in the situation. The (serendipitous) novel is a sort of existential notice in a situ just taking place. The existential notice as a perception act simultaneously re-attune the experiencer and tempts her/him to experiment and test what has been noticed in the immediacy. In serendipitous learning one has to trust in this sort of existent intuition. In terms of affordance analysis a question is how by intuitive experimenting and testing can be find out and explicate the serendipity of a learning event. The serendipity itself as an acutely novel matter is the affordance system of the instantly existent reality of the experiencer, and it has a quality of an intuition. Affordances become touchable and experientable in an intuitive dynamics of being and doing.

Digitality refers to binary and algorithmic realities (behaviour conditions), devices, software  and applications (materiality) and people meeting and experiencing digital reality as mediated sociality of physical and face-to-face world. The digital, though it basically is bites and code sets, roots itself to a mediated material and social content. This mediated content is met and experienced bodily by people via devices  and applications. The digital is not separated from embodiment, it belongs to its sphere as well. The affordance analysis of digital learning should focus to affordances of digitally mediated realms and their connection to things directly perceived and worked out. In this sense the digital learning being mediated activity of sociomateriality is strongly connected with bodily (ie. perceptually and socio-cognitively) experienced digitality and mediatedness.  The perception inside digitality is a direct perception of mediated, which makes  a tough emphasis to interpretative and processual  substances in digital learning.  The digital behaviour and action gets its strength and attunement from mediated and interpreted.  This means that digital activity  has a keen quality of individually interpreted responsiveness. The affordance system of digitality grows from indirect and mediated orientation and has a dynamics of sensitiveness feeded by a certain type of dissonance included in mediated reality and contents.

A hybrid learning may mean many kinds of hybridies. Here it refers to formal, informal and serendipitous learning, which take place both in offline and online environments and activities. Offline learning can have qualities of conventionality and restrictedness (formal learning), personal reflection of learning and adaptation and transformation of behavior in relation to further learning (informal learning), and  trust in intuition at learning settings (serendipitous learning). In offline learning the mentioned qualities are met and experienced directly, whereas in online learning they are met and experienced indirectly mediated by digital artefacts, devices and software. The hybrid learning has especially a quality of dynamics of direct and indirect. The hybrid learning affords this  dynamics of direct and indirect, which means meeting a confusion what is real and what is virtual. In terms of affordance analysis a question for hybrid learning is how to differentiate direct and indirect elements of hybridity in learning, and what potentialities for learning combos of direct and indirect involve and can make actual.

Below is the summary of learning forms and affordances and questions for affordance analysis, which belong to them.

Affordances in formal learning make characteristically possible observing, partaking and solving. In informal learning affordances enable to meet unexpected and implicit factors of a situation. The serendipitous learning allow intuition to awake as a learning capacity and skill by quickly sampling. The digital learning especially affords mediating of offline realities. The hybrid learning makes possible to alternate between direct and indirect elements in the learning environment.

To run affordance analysis in education, an essential question is how to get explicit and understandable affordances in the educational context. The following elements are drafted for making affordance analyses done in practice.

  1. Indication and reinforcement of conventionality and restrictedness (formal learning; observing, partaking and solving): what

– shows and points out that learning is both conventional and restricted?

– makes conventionality and restrictedness stronger and difficult to break off?

  1. Unexpectedness and implicity of personal reflection, and adaptation and transformation of behavior (informal learning; unexpectedness and implicity): what 

– produces and maintains unexpectedness and implicity?

  1. Ad hoc experimenting and testing (serendipitous learning; intuitivity): how 

– serendipitous intuitivity is embedded in ad hoc experiments and tests?

4.   Affording components for digitally mediated things in relation to perceptually detected 

      counterparts (digital learning; mediating): how 

– offline things become mediated in digital 

              counterparts?

5.  Differentiation of direct and indirect elements in learning, and effects of their combinations (hybrid learning; hybridity): 

– what are direct and indirect learning substances?

– how direct and indirect substances get differentiated, and do create combinations?