Given the current state of the field, we would want at Futurelab to think of learners as active constructors of knowledge and understanding, and of learning as a process that is both individual and social. This means that we would not view the learner as a 'blank canvas' waiting to receive information, but instead recognise that learners already have existing knowledge and beliefs and that these are central to how and why learners develop understanding.

The process of learning could be seen as an active process of interaction between learners and the resources and means of communication around them. Learning could be seen to take place between and within groups of learners, between learners and technologies and between learners and the wider culture, contexts and resources that surround them.

Moreover, if learning is understood as taking place between the individual and the social world, the process of communicating understanding, rather than being seen as simply providing evidence that 'something has been learned', can be seen as something that actively contributes to the development of understanding. We also know that an awareness of, and attention to, what is being learned on the part of the learner contributes greatly to the learning process, which raises questions about the extent to which 'stealth' learning may or may not be effective.

Importantly, this view of learning does not in and of itself determine what sort of resources and tools should be used to support learning. If learners are active, then they will actively construct knowledge and understanding in interaction with any resource. However some tools may contribute more effectively than others in supporting that process by, for example, supporting reflection, encouraging articulation of what has been learned, or encouraging active construction of knowledge.

While we believe that attention to what is being learned is important and that this may impact on what and how we design resources, we can also see ourselves designing resources that may rely on external support (teachers/parents/peer group/further resources) to support learner reflection on learning, rather than in and of themselves necessarily generating this type of interaction. This is why we need to pay attention both to the types of tools we design and the levels of interaction they are likely to support AND to the contexts in which these tools may be used.


Where's all this from?

We could describe the general views presented here as deriving from the history of psychology of education. In particular, from the school of socio-cultural psychology, which attempts to explain how 'what happens inside the head' is connected with the social worlds we live in. Key authors in this field are Vygotsky, Bakhtin, Engestrom.

This field draws on the best from traditional psychology but also begins to explain ways in which this classic field is related to research in sociology of education, ie how 'brain functioning' operates in context. Accordingly, it allows us to have conversations with hard core neuroscience and with more socially oriented researchers. This is important because historically there has been an opposition between those who believe that all learning is intrinsically determined by social context and those who believe that all learning is determined by internal mental processes. The socio-cultural psychology approach allows us to begin to build bridges between these two disciplines.


'Tools' transform learning

So, if learning is thought to take place not only 'inside the head' of the individual, but in interaction with the resources that surround them, then the tools that are used by learners become significant. At Futurelab we are particularly concerned with specific sorts of tools, namely, those that are made available through emergent digital technologies.

However, we need to recognise that learners will not use these alone, but will use, for example, the tools of language, the existing tools of the classroom or workplace and the tools of social interactions. We also need to remain mindful of the fact that the tools we use also shape what it becomes possible to do and to know. When we study learning, then, we are not interested in the individual alone, but in learners acting with tools.


Learning takes place in context

If we believe that learning takes place not only 'inside the head', but in interaction between individual and social worlds, we also need to pay attention to the contexts in which learners learn. These contexts can be as wide as the culture and traditions of a specific country or as narrow as a classroom or bedroom. What is important is that the features of these environments shape what it is possible to learn by providing a framework for learners' beliefs and expectations, and by facilitating access to different sorts of resources and tools.

This is particularly important when we are interested in the emergent technologies such as computer games or the world wide web, as these resources may be used in a wide range of settings - from playgrounds to kitchens, on mobile phones in the street or in computer labs in schools and universities. When we study learning with these tools, then, we need to pay attention not only to the individual acting with tools, but also to the learner acting with tools in a specific setting.


Are there types of learning?

In the final analysis, learning is manifest by the actions of the learner. This changes from context to context. The answers to questions and the way we behave is not just a function of one way we have learned. However there may be some identifiable levels of quality of learning. At its simplest we might be able to recall facts or redo actions. This is easy to assess.

At another level we learn patterns of behaviour - learning why we do or say something in one context or why we do or say something different in a different context means we have begun to understand context, see patterns and have been able to make generalisations and we are able to read our culture. We have learned to learn. Clearly these kinds of learning are desirable outcomes of any educational process.

Assessing these outcomes require that we use more complex and sophisticated instruments - many of which we can only currently dream of because we have not undertaken much of this form of assessment. It may need to be more longitudinal, it may need to be much more situated in the actual practice and work of the learner rather than devising a separate test.

Finally, there may be the kind of learning where we learn how to change the way we learn - where we overcome some major perceptual contradiction that can only come from looking at the world differently. This does not happen that often, however this is clearly significant. In the words of Engestrom this is learning by expansion- expanding our possibilities in the world.


Learning in a changing world

At Futurelab we are aware, as are many others, that the tools to support learning are changing. Moreover, we are aware that there are new demands being made on learners because of changing social and technological environments around them.

It is increasingly considered essential that learning is seen not only as something that takes place in school, but as a process that extends through many phases of life; that learning is seen not simply as the acquisition of a body of knowledge, but as the development of the interest in and ability to learn when faced with new challenges.

We are beginning to ask questions, in collaboration with our partners in research, about what sorts of learning practices might be needed to support learners in a changing world. At the same time as we see changes in workplaces and in schools, it is becoming increasingly clear that individuals are developing new ways of learning in homes and non-traditional educational settings. Through playing computer games, through navigating complex digital environments, through experiencing increasingly rich media environments, individuals are increasingly demanding different approaches to learning. At Futurelab, then, we are interested in exploring a moving target - learning in and for a changing world.


How might we assess learning?

How, then, will we assess whether learners are learning anything with the prototypes we produce at Futurelab? To begin with we will recognise that there is not an agreed answer to this question. Rather, working with academic and practitioner partners we will begin to develop new approaches to assessing learning which take account of the factors that we have addressed above, namely, to recognise learning as a process of acting with tools in context.

Importantly, however, we need to be able to identify whether a given prototype may be successful in supporting learning, whether one design decision can facilitate learners' understanding compared with another, whether a particular way of using a prototype massively improves or impedes its potential to support learning.

A central aim of the Learning Team at Futurelab will be the attempt to map out, with partners, ways of answering these questions. It is possible that some of the answers may lead to a review of our current methods of assessment within formal education. We may begin asking whether our current examination and assessment systems continue to be appropriate as we increasingly use new tools to support learning. This too, will be part of the research agenda at Futurelab.