This module should take around 45 mins to complete. 

Gravett (2022) in her article titled 'Different voices, different bodies: presence–absence in the digital university',  discusses the potentials of ‘privileging’ one space over another in a hybrid environment. She suggests that teacher in the learning process are often perceived as objects, yet in a post-digital age they are expected to be ‘visible in ways never seen before’ (Gravett, 2022, p. 11).  She is alluding towards new and innovative ways in which teachers as objects will be visible in the future, in which this future vision embraces. 

Hybrid learning is entangled with learning space design and is within its nature blurring the boundaries of what constitutes a learning space. Norgard (2021) rightly highlights that in the post-digital world professional and personal is becoming woven together, which could prove problematic for learners who prefer clear boundaries. These thoughts fit with what Mulcahy (2018) discusses, which is a shift in the term learning space to something we do, stage, perform or enact. This offers a useful perspective on learning spaces as a stage of performance, that's fluid, flexible and could be anywhere. Further research by Manciaracina (2022) suggests that the blurring of digital and physical realities will become a new phenomenon, which is exciting for the post-digital future vision. On the contrary, Gourlay (2021; 2022), Land (2004) and Gravett (2002) all suggest that caution should be taken with bodies and materials as they are often absent in the digital space,  ‘...as opposed to being grounded in material and embodied entanglements with devices and other artefacts…’ (Gravett, 2022, p. 3). 

As we have already read the article by Boddington (2021) who gave a clear perspective on the merging of virtual and physical worlds, concluding that our bodies have finally become an interface. Boddington (2021) does offer three key elements that need to be woven together simultaneously in order for a vision to succeed; technology, the body and content. It is important to remember that in this future vision the teacher will not become a ‘cyborg’ or robots, as proposed by Gourlay (2012). Below we will explore some motion capture technology that is currently in existence  which requires wearing of tracking suit, however, in this future vision the technology will have become seamless with no need for the tracking suit nor anything embedded into the skin itself.  In this future vision the live teacher will be transmitted into the students learning space of choice. This is a live recreation of the teacher, not altered or computer generated in any way. However, in 2024 this technology is still being developed and live transmitting is not currently possible, in this vision we hope by 2035 that technology will have developed to allow for live capture of a teacher and transmitted into a students learning space of choice.  

Gourlay (2012) implies that genuine innovation within post-digital higher education can only commence once thinkers venture beyond conventional boundaries. Shah (2017) presents the body as an interface, suggesting that, amidst the prevalence of the Internet of Things and big data, the human body may be deemed obsolete. Nevertheless, envisioning the body as an interface opens up possibilities for the future. In a related context, Kenderdine's (2021) article illustrates instances where human avatars are created to revive historical narratives, akin to the Abba Voyage concerts presently captivating millions in London (Petridis, 2022).

There are many potential risk of teleporting teaching staff into the learning space of a student, one of the larger concerns will be the possible data yield relating to teacher avatars being projected across the world. On the other hand, higher education institutions and other educational establishments are being asked to make efficiencies, yet increase scale and to innovate through technology (Manciaracina, 2022). Norgard (2021) and Manciaracina (2022) state that an innovative learning experience is flexible, has digital ubiquity, learner interactions are active, meaningful and collaborative and where physical and virtual are enmeshed. ‘We must [be] open to random acts of pedagogy’ (Norgard, 2021, p. 1713). Gourlay (2012) argues that only once thinkers have started to think outside of the box, can we then truly begin to innovate within the posthuman higher education. It is clear to see the need for a shift and openness of education delivery in order to meet the demands of the economic, technological and next generation of learners. 

In 2035 we will witness the emergence of revolutionary hybrid learning, where choice is paramount, engagement is high and teachers have a greater connection with learners. Boddington (2021) proposes that the blending of virtual and physical bodies will ‘...enable collective embodiment to work holistically with collective intelligence, towards positive sensory enhancement.’ (Boddington, 2021, p. 1912).  Speculating that they can exist ‘physically in collaboration with their virtual avatar self, transmitting my presence and expanding my identity, across time and space—now blended into a hypersensory self.’ (Boddington, 2021, p. 1912).  

Exploring the teacher avatar should have sparked some of your imaginations as to how possible this future vision could be. We have highlighted some of the concerns and challenges that the future vision might be entangled within. 

The future vision of hybrid teaching will enable more personalised learning, support learners who have mental health concerns, enable higher engagement, allow more choice of learning space, in addition, enhancing wider reach and more students for the institution. 

Within the final module you will have an opportunity to contribute towards a collaborative vision board of the future and consolidate your thoughts of the vision. 

Reference List

Boddington, G. (2021) The Internet of Bodies—alive, connected and collective: the virtual physical future of our bodies and our senses. AI & society. [Online] 38 (5), 1897–1913. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-020-01137-1 

Gourlay, L (2012) Cyborg Ontologies And The Lecturer's Voice: A Posthuman Reading Of The ‘face-To-Face’. Learning, Media and Technology, 37:2, 198-211, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2012.671773 

Gourlay, L. (2021) There Is No ’Virtual Learning’: The Materiality of Digital Education. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research 10 (1): 57–66. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7821/naer.2021.1.649 

Gourlay, L. (2022) Presence, Absence, and Alterity: Fire Space and Goffman’s Selves in Postdigital Education. Postdigital Science and Education 4: 57–69. DOI: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs42438-021-00265-1 

Gravett, K (2022): Different voices, different bodies: presence–absence in the digital university, Learning, Media and Technology, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2150637 

Kenderdine, S. (2021). Experimental museology: Immersive visualisation and cultural (big) data. In Experimental Museology. Routledge. [Online]  Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9780367808433-1-3/experimental-museology-immersive-visualisation-cultural-big-data-sarah-kenderdine 

Land, R. (2004) Embodiment and Risk in Cyberspace Education. Education in Cyberspace. 149–164. London: Routledge. Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780203391068-20/embodiment-risk-cyberspace-education-ray-land-ray-land 

Manciaracina, A. (2022) Designing Hybrid Learning Environments And Processes : Interactive Communication Tools For Active Learning. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Available at: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-95274-7 

Mulcahy, D. (2018) Assembling Spaces of Learning ‘In’ Museums and Schools: A Practice-Based Sociomaterial Perspective. Spaces of Teaching and Learning, pp 13–29. Singapore: Springer. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7155-3_2 

Norgard, R. T. (2021) Theorising Hybrid Lifelong Learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. [Online] 52 (4), 1709–1723. Available at: https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bjet.13121 

Petridis, A. (2022) ABBA voyage review: Jaw-dropping avatar act that’s destined to be copied, The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/may/26/abba-voyage-review-jaw-dropping-avatar-act-thats-destined-to-be-copied 

Shah, N. (2017) From GUI to No-UI: Locating the interface for the Internet of Things. In: G. Koch & G. Koch (eds.). Digitisation. 1st edition. ABINGDON, Routledge. pp. 179–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315627731-10