Complexity theory and learning: Less radical than it seems?

Abstract

In a spirit of collegial support, this paper argues that Beckett and Hager’s theoretical justification and empirical exemplifications do not do full justice to the complexity of group or team learning. We firstly reaffirm our support for the theoretical argument Becket and Hager make, though expressing some reservations about Complexity Theory, to explain the taken-for-granted assumptions that learning by an individual is the paradigm case of learning and that context plays a minimal role in this process. Drawing on our joint and separate work, we demonstrate that Becket and Hager’s argument is less radical than it may initially seem because it is predicated on: (i) cognitive-bounded rather than “distributed” or “extended” conception of mind; (ii) material rather than a “immaterial” conception of activity; and (iii) co-present rather than a “fractional” or “connective” conception of ontology. Despite making this critique, we conclude by making the case that we are adding further substance to Becket and Hager’s overarching argument and, in doing so, encouraging them to be more radical about how they conceptualise the complexity of learning.

Keywords:

• Distributed cognition
• immaterial activity
• situated judgement
• complexity learning
• complexity theory

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant number ES/JO19135/1).

Notes on contributors

David Guile

David Guile is Professor of Education and Work, Co-Director of UCL’s Centre for Engineering Education and the IOE UCL’s Faculty of Education and Society’s Centre for Post 14 Education and Work. His primary research interests are in professional, vocational and workplace learning, including apprenticeship, internship, and interprofessional activity.

Rachel J. Wilde

Rachel J. Wilde is an Associate Professor at the IOE UCL’s Faculty of Education and Society. She is a social anthropologist and her research focuses on transitions to work, employability and workplace learning. She is interested in the tools and relationship workers engage in to undertake their work, and how they developed and continue to develop their expertise and knowledge.