This chapter addresses the possibilities of a pedagogical shift in higher education based upon a thoughtful integration of learning technologies and a rich pedagogical interaction. The lockdown provided the opportunity to deepen our understanding about the relationship between subjects and technology, bringing up classical utopian and dystopian views. At this point, we are living in a hybrid world, with a fusional relationship with digital devices. As for education, it is clear that remote and blended learning delivery modes were not a temporary fashion. The authors discuss a set of principles that seem relevant to current and future remote and blended methodologies: (1) technology means freedom not slavery and it can serve a slow pedagogy, (2) communication is no longer a pure anthropocentric concept, and (3) a symbiotic and dialogical relationship between student and lecturer is not a thing from the past. With such principles in mind, they share their personal vision applied to the redesign of a module of semiotics concerning creative writing.
TopPost-Pandemic Learning Scenarios
The post-pandemic context reintroduced the discussion on the role of technology in the human experience of living, working, and learning. Arguments, impressions, and perceptions about this topic will probably be felt and debated for years to come. Portraying the current moment and thinking about the future possibilities for Higher Education requires, therefore, the careful observation of a broader context.
There is now a tacit recognition of a disruption in the way of conceiving time, space, and interaction. A new relationship between technology, subjects and work is at stake.
In this way, discussing and reframing the possibilities of a pedagogical shift in Higher Education based upon a thoughtful integration of learning technologies and pedagogical interaction after the fully online pandemic experience implies a free and open-minded discussion of the role of technologies in educational environments, as well as the acknowledgement of societal values and trends, such as sustainability, digital nomadism, and slowness.
Most of us will agree that remote learning and blended learning delivery modes were not a temporary fashion but became truly important models. However, it is not that clear how to prepare the present and the future in order to deconstruct the dichotomized boundaries and to configure ways of conducting the learning process taking into account that our anthropocentric nature has changed. Understanding the growing fusional relationship between humans and digital devices is prior to redesigning learning approaches, as stated by Rushkoff (2021):
It’s hard for human beings to oppose the dominance of digital technology when we are becoming so highly digital ourselves. Whether by fetish or mere habit, we begin acting in ways that accommodate or imitate our machines, remaking our world and, eventually, ourselves in their image. (p. 172)
In this sense it is also not that clear how to integrate presence, technology, class work, and pre-class work. Despite so many years of research and empirical work and despite the intensive pandemic experience, remote and blended scenarios remain a major challenge for lecturers and instructional designers.
During the Pandemic, there were endless opportunities to explore unprecedented environments, and digital mediation has become abruptly mandatory and ubiquitous. Silva et al. (2022) remark there was a huge effort of immediate transformation, and a great number of lecturers managed to carry out, with remarkable contextual success, what we could call an improvised e-Teaching, since, in most cases, there was a direct conversion of face-to-face classes into lectures by videoconference:
Amidst the turmoil of the first lockdown, in a very short time, the pandemic set off the sharing of different perceptions concerning remote educational experiences. It is not easy to create a coherent picture of the diversity. However, it seems that though lecturers faced affordances and challenges brought by the lockdown scenario differently, there are common perceptions and a set of emotions that lead to similar judgements. Most of the surveys reveal feelings of satisfaction concerning the ability to cope with the abrupt transition, positive feelings related to the thrilling experience of trying new learning tools and methods. On the other hand, dissatisfaction associated with lack of real interaction with students is often reported. (p. 6062)
This is how Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) was born. The term was coined by Hodges et al. (2020), in March 2020, and the researchers immediately recognised the need for Higher Education Institutions not to confuse it with the concept of distance learning. ERT was a new and temporary educational space, created to meet minimum requirements; an improvised model, whose essential feature would be to ensure the continuity of the learning activities.