Weekly Reflection: Theories of Online Learning Revisited
The theories used to explain online learning often highlight interaction, knowledge building, and participation. Connectivism and the Community of Inquiry (CoI) are two of the most common frameworks discussed in this context. After reviewing the materials shared in this weekâs postâespecially Batesâ section on Connectivism and the introductions to CoI, Reevesâ âgrand challenges,â and Indigenous-centred course designâI realized that there is a significant gap between what these theories imagine and what actually happens in many online classrooms.
This reflection explores that gap and connects it to my own experiences with silence, surveillance, and unequal power dynamics in digital learning environments.
1. Connectivism: When âconnectionâ becomes pressure rather than opportunity
Connectivism argues that learning happens through networks and through the connections between many different ânodes.â According to Bates, this framework fits well with digital society because knowledge is no longer contained within one person but distributed across systems.
In theory, this sounds ideal. In practice, it does not always feel this way. Online platforms like Zoom or Teams do offer opportunities for connection, but the experience of âbeing connectedâ can easily shift into a feeling of being watched. When cameras must be on, and when every comment in chat is logged or when the lecture is being recorded, connection starts to feel less like openness and more like exposure. Instead of encouraging exploration, it can produce hesitation. In this sense, Connectivismâs core assumptionâthat more connections lead to more learningâdoes not fully make sense in real online classes. The issue is not the existence of connections but the power structures embedded inside those connections, which can turn them into a source of anxiety rather than learning.(https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/3-6-connectivism/)
2. Community of Inquiry: A strong model that struggles against real-world constraints
The Community of Inquiry model consists of three presences: social, cognitive, and teaching. Ideally, these presences support each other to create a meaningful learning environment. However, the online classroom often weakens each of them.
1) Weak social presence
Even when cameras are on, most students rarely respond or show any visible reaction. When cameras are off, students may feel like they barely exist in the space. This makes it extremely hard to feel part of a community.
2) Teaching presence as surveillance
In many online classes, the instructorâs presence becomes more like a broadcast than a dialogue. The design of digital platformsâscreen-sharing, muted mics, limited visual feedbackâleads to a one-directional flow of information. Students may feel they are being monitored rather than supported.
3) Reduced cognitive presence
When everything is recorded, students often avoid saying anything that could be perceived as wrong, risky, or incomplete. This discourages experimentation and authentic inquiry, both of which are supposed to be central to CoI. Because of these limitations, CoI becomes difficult to achieve even when instructors have good intentions. The theory expects a balanced interaction that the platform itself does not always make possible.
3. Reevesâ âGrand Challengesâ: When technology drives the class rather than supports it
Reeves identifies several major challenges in online learning: technology-driven design, lack of engagement, and inequities. His point about technology dominating pedagogy seems especially relevant. Features such as automated attendance tracking, participation analytics, and recording tools may appear helpful, but they also introduce forms of data-based surveillance. Instead of supporting learning, these tools can create new pressures, making students more cautious and less willing to speak. This again ties back to the structural issue: silence is not simply a matter of motivation but the result of how online systems are built.
4. Indigenous-Centred Online Learning: A reminder that relationships matter more than features
The Indigenous-centred approach introduced in this weekâs post emphasizes relationality, reciprocity, and community responsibility. This perspective highlights what is missing in many mainstream online courses. Where Connectivism focuses on technical âconnectedness,â Indigenous frameworks focus on human relationshipsâtrust, respect, and shared responsibility. Without these, online learning environments easily become isolated and impersonal. This helps explain why silence in online classes is not unusual. If the space does not support relational connection, participation feels risky rather than meaningful.
5. Personal reflection: Silence shaped by structure, not personality
In my own experience, speaking in Zoom classes has always been more stressful than speaking in person. I often feel uncomfortable turning on my camera in front of people I donât know, especially when I cannot see their reactions. Knowing that everything might be recorded or saved makes it even harder to speak freely.
In these moments, silence is not a choice but a response to the conditions of the environment. This aligns with the idea that online silence is structural, not personal. Theories that assume free participation overlook how power, surveillance, and interface design restrict the actual possibility of speaking.
Conclusion: Moving from âconnectedâ learning to relationship-centred learning
Overall, reviewing these theories helped me realize both their value and their limits. Connectivism and CoI provide helpful ways to think about online learning, but they do not fully address the tensions created by surveillance, platform design, and unequal visibility. If online learning is to support meaningful participation, it needs to move away from a purely technological understanding of âconnectionâ and toward a more relational and human-centred design. Only then can students feel safe enough to speakâand only then can online learning truly function as a space for shared inquiry.
