Debat Digital Learning
Debates about digital learning, face-to-face learning
and blended learning often focus on their effectiveness in achieving a few core
educational outcomes. The cost or convenience of using different methods
to achieve certain outcomes have increasingly come into the educational
framework over the past two decades. However, only rarely do
educators or learners consider the climate footprint of their various
activities. This is an importantshortcoming, as all learning activities
can contribute to our overall climate footprint.
Providers of education should do their best to minimise the carbon footprint
associated with their learning. But learners also have responsibility to
ensure that how they access learning is also associated with minimal
environmental cost. Both providers and learners should focus on activities
that are likely to have the greatest impact. This is relevant both to
face-to-face education and digital learning.
Debates about digital learning, face-to-face learning, and blended
learning often focus on their effectiveness in achieving a few core educational
outcomes. 2 This is an important shortcoming, as all learning
activities can contribute to our overall climate footprint. The ongoing
climate crisis means that we should be doing all that we can – however large or
small – to reduce that footprint, especially given the wider global
healthcare implications. In the following perspective paper, we will
outline a number of considerations that should be taken into account when
linking together learning activities, learning outcomes, and carbon
footprint.
Face-to-face learning is the traditional means of delivering medical education
activities, and it has much to commend it. This will have its own
environmental effects – such as the use of detergents for laundry of beddings
and towels. This is not a comprehensive account of the carbon footprint of
face-to-face learning, but it should encapsulate most of the activities
that can contribute – namely travel, accommodation and
subsistence. Digital learning can also enable multiple useful learning
outcomes.
Technological advances mean that certain learning outcomes that until recently
would have only been possible with face-to-face learning are now
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fhj.2024.100156 2514-6645/ 2024 The
Author. Digital learning does have a carbon footprint, but it is
generally less than the carbon footprint involved in travel. 8 The carbon
footprint associated with digital learning involves electricity, hardware
and software – to create and access learning materials. Electronic devices
have varying degrees of climate-friendliness.
Some devices consume more electricity than others – generally, desktop
computers set up for advanced gaming or simulation activities consume the
most. There is a clear opportunity to get the best from digital and
face-to-face learning and to minimise carbon footprint at the same
time. It is possible to reduce the amount of face-to-face learning that is
required to achieve needed learning outcomes and to replace unnecessary face-to-face
learning with digital learning. Physical events providers should take all
means possible to reduce their carbon footprint, from avoiding single-use
plastics to providing environmentally friendly meals and staying in
accommodation close to the conference.
If digital learning is to be employed, learners should utilise devices
that are the most environmentally friendly. Another consideration is the
use of artificial intelligence in digital learning. Many artificial
intelligence programmes are based on machine learning, and this can have a
significant environmental impact. There are ways to reduce this carbon
footprint, such as by reducing the computational demands of machine
learning, using renewable energy sources and/or thinking through the
lifecycle of machine learning programmes from deployment to maintenance and
eventually to replacement.
AI programmes can enable more personalised learning, but it is a matter of
balancing this against increased carbon footprint. There is some evidence
that younger doctors have a greater preference for e-learning than older
generations, but there is not much evidence that concerns about climate
change are affecting their preferences. In summary, it is clear that
there are no right or wrong answers as to how to provide effective learning
with minimal environmental cost. Sometimes this might mean blending
face-to-face and digital learning – there is some evidence that this may help
with the transfer of learning to practice. 11 It would also be good
practice for providers of all forms of learning to publish the carbon footprint
of their programmes and efforts that they are making or have made to reduce
this.
Komentar
Posting Komentar