The Sorcerer's Apprentice - when autonomous apprenticeship goes wrong...Colbeck points out that teaching in the sciences often follows a 'master-apprentice' model in which lecturers work alongside undergraduate and postgraduate 'research apprentices' (p. 658).
I think the benefits to both learning and research are pretty self-evident, as long as the student isn't getting exploited (all the dangers of internships - another example of the 'master-apprentice model' also apply here).
The 'apprentice' model is much more common in the sciences than in either the social sciences or the arts. Conventional wisdom has it that this is in the nature of the different fields - 'research' means different things in different disciplines, and some forms of research just don't lend themselves to group endeavors. As Colbeck puts it, the distinction is supposed to be that sciences explore 'subdividable problems' while the arts and social sciences tackle 'holistic issues' (p. 659).
Colbeck herself is having none of it. According to her research,
the contrasting methods of research training in physics and English [the subjects of her research] did not appear to be a natural consequence of [...] knowledge structures, but of taken-for-granted social norms within each discipline (p. 659).So far, so compelling. But one 'taken-for-granted' social norm of the humanities is research autonomy: you research what YOU want to research, and your supervisor advises you. This brings me to the notion of 'autonomous apprenticeship': a model for creating group research projects in which students become 'research apprentices', but preserve a measure of autonomy not necessarily present in large science projects (this is a model that could be applied to the sciences as well as to the arts).
The 'Teaching the Talk' project that I run, which is a part of the Theatre Archive Project, is - I like to think - a good example of 'autonomous apprenticeship'. I'd love to hear about any other models that people would like to offer.
Posts
Interesting stuff, and I think you've opened a productive line of argument. The notion of "autonomous apprenticeship" certainly looks helpful in bridging (epistemological and/or social?) differences between disciplines, and could lead down many different routes.
ReplyDelete"Learner autonomy" is a big notion in language learning - and Sabine in CILASS knows far more about it than I do! The ways I've come into the literature are through David Little's 2001 article "Learning as dialogue: the dependence of learner autonomy on teacher autonomy" (System, 23:2) which argues for a sophisticated notion of autonomy that takes into account both the ability of learners to direct their own learning processes, and their ability to reproduce and further that learning (particualrly relevant in a language-learning context). Another way in here is the collection edited by Terry Lamb (of the Department of Educational Studies), called "Learner Autonomy, Teacher Autonomy".
One question I find particularly provoking in this literature is the extent to which "autonomy" equates with "individualism". The apprenticeship model you sketch out responds to this problem, and chimes with a line of argument about learning as a situated social process, where we are always learning in relationship with others - and there'd be something odd if we weren't. As Little puts it, "total independence is not autonomy, but autism". So the autonomy you've developed with your learners in the Theatre Archive Project is necessarily bound up with the exercise of your own autonomy as a tuotr, and the autonomy created in structures of collaboration between students. I wonder if the second aspect of this broadens slightly the notion of apprenticeship, and might be of wider interest within the LRT project?
Found you! :o)
ReplyDeleteAutonomous apprenticeship is an interesting concept - I don't know that much about your project, but thought I'd chip in, if you don't mind, about possibly unrelated experiences - ignore them if they don't apply.
I think there are two aspects to the idea of autonomous apprenticeship - one is that of modelling (also used by Wenger (1998) in his concept of community of practice apprenticeship), i.e. staff and other students model being autonomous - this would, in particular, make the case to bridge gaps between levels, so students can model themselves on each other (from the student ambassador network, this appears to be a far more productive and sensible way of modelling than to go via staff).
The other aspect that springs to mind is something to do with the 'granting' of autonomy - like the Greek (political) original of the term, referring to states being granted autonomy, they then had to take it up, too! I guess this is important at two levels: on the one hand, a constant reminder to me to check 'how much autonomy am I truly offering?', and on the other, remembering that autonomy is not a case of 'build it and they will come' - so again, the idea of scaffolded apprenticeship (rather than the 'autism', which the much more eloquent 'Little' mentions) seems to be valid here?