Disorienting Dilemmas & Transformational Learning
In both distance learning and service learning pedagogies, the use of disorienting dilemmas is a practice of plunging students into an unfamiliar learning context (such as a MOO or a homeless shelter) that requires students to re-assess the nature and use of knowledge, power, and social relationships. Palloff and Pratt argue that the online classroom is so unfamiliar to most students that the environment itself becomes a disorienting dilemma and, as such, "fertile territory for transformative learning" (131).
           The authors liken their transformative approach to constructivist methodologies of researchers such as Jack Mezirow, who advocates integrating individual learning with interpersonal and social action. Mezirow's work is influential in adult learning circles–among distance learning and service learning practitioners alike–for it helps explain how disorienting dilemmas, collaborative learning, and reflection enable students to enrich their perspective on complex social problems.
          Within such learning contexts–local or virtual–students are encouraged to interact with others affected by the problem at hand and to position themselves within the problem-solving community. Their learning process takes them from observer to participant to reflective practitioner (131). Technology becomes a means of connecting students to those with whom they can make meaning, as well as a context and resource informing their new perspective.
          The technology fore-grounded by Palloff and Pratt is the asynchronous discussion-oriented course site. In Chapter 4, "Time and Group Size," the authors compare the asynchronous interaction of the discussion board, which allows members to contribute to a discussion at their own pace, to the synchronous interaction of the chat room, which requires everyone to participate simultaneously. They argue that asynchronous interaction is the most productive and flexible option of the two, warning instructors that synchronous interaction gives those with the fastest Internet connections and typing skills the "loudest voice" in a discussion. Additional reservations about synchronous interaction include the inconvenience of coordinating participation across multiple time zones and the overwhelming cacophony that can result when too many students attempt to interact in the same space. While Palloff and Pratt are careful to note that synchronous experiences can be very stimulating for students, they advise novice online instructors to concentrate on asynchronous methods.
          Because Palloff and Pratt specialize in online education for working adults, the emphasis on convenience is understandable. However, we were disappointed that the authors do not explore how the "possible chaos" of the chat room might lead to fruitful disorienting dilemmas. They also do not discuss MOO environments, a context with rich potential for transformational shifts in orientation.