Monday, April 4, 2011
Monday, September 20, 2010
Growing on barren rock
Among the readings for this week, I really enjoyed Martin Weller's article, The Centralization Dilemma in Educational IT
Weller provides a nicely balanced view from a practitioner's perspective within an institution. What really resonates for me is the excellent analogy for explaining the evolution and acceptance of more complex technologies within institutions:
I think the barren rock analogy does a good job describing the reality in many institutions where any form of online learning is highly suspect. In these institutions the small lichen life-forms of CMS, LMS or VLE systems need to be constantly defended and nurtured in order to prepare the ground to accept more diverse and specialized tools.
In the #PLENK2010 Moodle discussion I saw a reference to the conflict between PLE and LMS. I think for many, especially in institutional settings, the context should be continuum rather than conflict.
Weller provides a nicely balanced view from a practitioner's perspective within an institution. What really resonates for me is the excellent analogy for explaining the evolution and acceptance of more complex technologies within institutions:
There is an analogy with the process of plant
succession here. When there is a new environment,
for example barren rock, a few pioneer
species, such as lichens begin to grow. The acid
from these decomposes some rock particles, and
their own death creates a coarse soil. This is suitable
for mosses, which require little soil, and in
turn these decompose to enrich and deepen the
soil, until it is suitable for some grasses to grow. The process ends with the establishment of a stable, climax community.
I think the barren rock analogy does a good job describing the reality in many institutions where any form of online learning is highly suspect. In these institutions the small lichen life-forms of CMS, LMS or VLE systems need to be constantly defended and nurtured in order to prepare the ground to accept more diverse and specialized tools.
In the #PLENK2010 Moodle discussion I saw a reference to the conflict between PLE and LMS. I think for many, especially in institutional settings, the context should be continuum rather than conflict.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Either/Or
"All comparisons are odious." That expression came from the old French, or so Google tells me, but I first saw it in a novel by Jack Kerouac. Over the weekend I have been thinking about the dynamics of personal learning and I can't really improve on Stephen's four cornerstones of: Aggregate, Remix, Repurpose and Feedforward. ARRF, if you like acronyms and don't mind making dog sounds. Of those, it seems to me that at least the first three call for inclusion and synthesis. Within that context I think that an inclusive view is appropriate, at least for my thinking. Both/And rather than Either/Or. We're in a digital age, but that doesn't mean we have to be limited with binary thought.
On another note, I saw a casual reference in CogDogBlog to the classic essay by Vannevar Bush "As We May Think" which was first published in 1945 Atlantic Monthly.
Vannevar Bush, Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development had for five years during the war been directing scientists toward the goals of warfare. The war had ended, and in an article titled "As We May Think," Dr. Bush asked the readers of Atlantic Monthly: "What are the scientists to do next?"
In this article Bush proposed an agenda for invention that would augment human capacity for storing, retrieving and creating knowledge. He anticipated a future where artificial systems of indexing would be replaced by tools that would allow and amplify the natural human mode of associative thought. I first came across this essay in 1999 and found it inspiring. I think it's still worth reading.
On another note, I saw a casual reference in CogDogBlog to the classic essay by Vannevar Bush "As We May Think" which was first published in 1945 Atlantic Monthly.
Vannevar Bush, Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development had for five years during the war been directing scientists toward the goals of warfare. The war had ended, and in an article titled "As We May Think," Dr. Bush asked the readers of Atlantic Monthly: "What are the scientists to do next?"
In this article Bush proposed an agenda for invention that would augment human capacity for storing, retrieving and creating knowledge. He anticipated a future where artificial systems of indexing would be replaced by tools that would allow and amplify the natural human mode of associative thought. I first came across this essay in 1999 and found it inspiring. I think it's still worth reading.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Tilting, NL
This is testing the flickr blog upload function.
This photo was taken in Tiliting Newfoundland last month.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
#PLENK2010-- Personal Learning Environments, Networks and Knowledge has begun this week with more than 1,000 people registered and more than 130 RSS feeds set up with the course feed aggregator. Many participants have already placed their location pins on the Google map that Heli Nurmi from Finland set up. The course discussion forum in Moodle is showing very lively activity as are the many interesting blog posts.
With so much activity occurring in so many places, I am grateful to have the Moodle system for this course. The course tools can be configured to indicate new posts and I think there is a lot of value to having threaded central discussion areas.
This form of communication, discussion and learning has its roots in the earliest Bulletin Board days of online communication. Howard Rheingold's book Virtual Communities chronicles some of that history in the San Francisco area's Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link (WELL) system. Those same principles continue in many online communities through special interest public and private forums today. Forum discussions are sometimes at a hobby chat level, but often there is knowledge being shared and created. Wikipedia hosts discussions in tabbed areas behind the principle article, for example this discussion among scholars about a relatively minor article in philosophy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mary%27s_room
My other interests in fly fishing, photography, acoustic guitar etc. have also benefited from the online learning I have done through discussion forums. In all of these areas, I have noticed that my learning seems to broadly occur in the zones of: Forming (learning the fundamentals) / Norming (learning what the established experts have to say) and then Exploring- learning what I want to say or do.
All of this is just to underline the value that I continue to see in online communities using old-fashioned discussion forums for my personal learning. There are many more valuable tools, to be sure, and I like to use as many as I can manage. This PLENK2010 course is one way that I hope to become comfortable with utilizing more valuable tools and methods.
With so much activity occurring in so many places, I am grateful to have the Moodle system for this course. The course tools can be configured to indicate new posts and I think there is a lot of value to having threaded central discussion areas.
This form of communication, discussion and learning has its roots in the earliest Bulletin Board days of online communication. Howard Rheingold's book Virtual Communities chronicles some of that history in the San Francisco area's Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link (WELL) system. Those same principles continue in many online communities through special interest public and private forums today. Forum discussions are sometimes at a hobby chat level, but often there is knowledge being shared and created. Wikipedia hosts discussions in tabbed areas behind the principle article, for example this discussion among scholars about a relatively minor article in philosophy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mary%27s_room
My other interests in fly fishing, photography, acoustic guitar etc. have also benefited from the online learning I have done through discussion forums. In all of these areas, I have noticed that my learning seems to broadly occur in the zones of: Forming (learning the fundamentals) / Norming (learning what the established experts have to say) and then Exploring- learning what I want to say or do.
All of this is just to underline the value that I continue to see in online communities using old-fashioned discussion forums for my personal learning. There are many more valuable tools, to be sure, and I like to use as many as I can manage. This PLENK2010 course is one way that I hope to become comfortable with utilizing more valuable tools and methods.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
#CritLit2010 Reflections
It's been a few weeks now since the Critical Literacies 2010 course concluded. I responded to the course surveys and continue to reflect on my own learning during the course. My participation during the six weeks was somewhat fragmented in that I was away from the course for two weeks with one week of planned holiday and an unplanned trip to help my father move to a nursing home. Upon my return to the final week of the course I had a bit of difficulty catching up and becoming fully re-engaged.
The initial participant survey asked what our personal expectations were. My response at that time was that I wanted to engage in the critical literacies course content and just as importantly, experience the process and the dynamics of learning within the context of the Personal Learning Environment that the course facilitators were exploring. Those expectations were accomplished to the extent that I was able to participate. This is a personal learning environment, therefore I think most of the learning success rests with the learner.
Perhaps in the context of personal learning we need to find a good alternative to the term "course". I think courses are often about destination. A race course is a defined pathway from A to B, start to finish. When illnesses run their course from A through B and C, the destination is absence of illness or regained health. Rivers course their way from headwaters to the ocean. And our formal education courses operate successfully when the graduate can demonstrate behaviours that are consistent with the formulated learning goals or outcomes. It seems to me that a valid learning experience can also be open-ended and, by that definition, elude most traditional quantification or behavioural analysis.
CritLit2010 was for me at least, open-ended. It was more about direction than destination, experience rather than outcome. I didn't expect to achieve an end-state, just an enhanced state. Perhaps this is not a perfect analogy, but prescription drugs are valuable if they produce an outcome, say to cure an illness or affliction; vitamins are valuable if they enhance the everyday experience of health. I think of my experience of CritLit2010 as a vitamin for my own thinking and thought processes which were (and continue to be) stimulated by the suggested readings, the weekly speakers and importantly, the thinking and writing of course participants.
One major challenge for me was to adequately digest all the participants' various improvisations on the central and weekly themes of CritLit2010. I had my own improvisation going on-- questions and topic areas that I wanted to think about and explore more fully. I was not able to comfortably respond to as many blog or discussion postings as I might have. It's possible that others had the same experience with the result that interaction between participants may not have achieved its fullest potential. Perhaps attempting to work with six themes in six weeks was somewhat ambitious. Each weekly topic was rich enough to stand on its own for six weeks or longer.
What can be said of the course tools, the content and facilitation? There were technical challenges with some open source software. An alternative to the open meeting software was quickly found and we carried on. The ability to recover from error is a vital skill. There was quick and efficient response to user error as well. Some participants had trouble setting up their blogs and Stephen posted a clear and useful training video to address this.
The content in the weekly suggested readings was fine. There was never any suggestion that these readings were the definitive pieces on the weekly theme; these were simply suggestions and starting points. Many participants found and shared additional readings or other valuable resources. This activity could be reviewed by the researchers and considered as another indicator of participants' learning.
I am guessing that because this was a research project Stephen and Rita may have intentionally muted some of their own possible direct engagement during the course. This is properly in line with the concept of open-ended personal learning rather than instruction. There was a lot of work required to set up the course tools, locate suggested readings, contact and schedule weekly speakers and monitor the blogs and other discussion postings of participants. In addition, Stephen wrote some thoughtful pieces for the course.
I don't know if this course was successful, or which standards of assessment we should use to make that determination. From my own personal perspective I can say that I had a very positive personal learning experience that continues to enhance my everyday experience. I think that CritLit2010 has been an important and possibly necessary catalyst. I am grateful that Canada's National Research Council permits senior researchers the time and scope to explore expanded approaches to learning. Our formal education institutions speak of the importance of lifelong learning, almost without exception. And also without exception, these institutions provide only time-limited, closed learning events that are segregated from daily work and life. The kind of learning environment that is suggested by CritLit2010 points toward an important expansion of how learning can happen.
The initial participant survey asked what our personal expectations were. My response at that time was that I wanted to engage in the critical literacies course content and just as importantly, experience the process and the dynamics of learning within the context of the Personal Learning Environment that the course facilitators were exploring. Those expectations were accomplished to the extent that I was able to participate. This is a personal learning environment, therefore I think most of the learning success rests with the learner.
Perhaps in the context of personal learning we need to find a good alternative to the term "course". I think courses are often about destination. A race course is a defined pathway from A to B, start to finish. When illnesses run their course from A through B and C, the destination is absence of illness or regained health. Rivers course their way from headwaters to the ocean. And our formal education courses operate successfully when the graduate can demonstrate behaviours that are consistent with the formulated learning goals or outcomes. It seems to me that a valid learning experience can also be open-ended and, by that definition, elude most traditional quantification or behavioural analysis.
CritLit2010 was for me at least, open-ended. It was more about direction than destination, experience rather than outcome. I didn't expect to achieve an end-state, just an enhanced state. Perhaps this is not a perfect analogy, but prescription drugs are valuable if they produce an outcome, say to cure an illness or affliction; vitamins are valuable if they enhance the everyday experience of health. I think of my experience of CritLit2010 as a vitamin for my own thinking and thought processes which were (and continue to be) stimulated by the suggested readings, the weekly speakers and importantly, the thinking and writing of course participants.
One major challenge for me was to adequately digest all the participants' various improvisations on the central and weekly themes of CritLit2010. I had my own improvisation going on-- questions and topic areas that I wanted to think about and explore more fully. I was not able to comfortably respond to as many blog or discussion postings as I might have. It's possible that others had the same experience with the result that interaction between participants may not have achieved its fullest potential. Perhaps attempting to work with six themes in six weeks was somewhat ambitious. Each weekly topic was rich enough to stand on its own for six weeks or longer.
What can be said of the course tools, the content and facilitation? There were technical challenges with some open source software. An alternative to the open meeting software was quickly found and we carried on. The ability to recover from error is a vital skill. There was quick and efficient response to user error as well. Some participants had trouble setting up their blogs and Stephen posted a clear and useful training video to address this.
The content in the weekly suggested readings was fine. There was never any suggestion that these readings were the definitive pieces on the weekly theme; these were simply suggestions and starting points. Many participants found and shared additional readings or other valuable resources. This activity could be reviewed by the researchers and considered as another indicator of participants' learning.
I am guessing that because this was a research project Stephen and Rita may have intentionally muted some of their own possible direct engagement during the course. This is properly in line with the concept of open-ended personal learning rather than instruction. There was a lot of work required to set up the course tools, locate suggested readings, contact and schedule weekly speakers and monitor the blogs and other discussion postings of participants. In addition, Stephen wrote some thoughtful pieces for the course.
I don't know if this course was successful, or which standards of assessment we should use to make that determination. From my own personal perspective I can say that I had a very positive personal learning experience that continues to enhance my everyday experience. I think that CritLit2010 has been an important and possibly necessary catalyst. I am grateful that Canada's National Research Council permits senior researchers the time and scope to explore expanded approaches to learning. Our formal education institutions speak of the importance of lifelong learning, almost without exception. And also without exception, these institutions provide only time-limited, closed learning events that are segregated from daily work and life. The kind of learning environment that is suggested by CritLit2010 points toward an important expansion of how learning can happen.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Gone Fishing
The CritLit2010 course so far has been excellent. The readings, the weekly speakers, participant blogs and other contributions are stimulating much thought in a variety of areas.
Tomorrow my thoughts will be on the rivers of western Newfoundland where I will be without an internet connection. I look forward to re-joining the course in a week. I think the old term "playing hooky" may have referred to skipping school to go fishing.
Tomorrow my thoughts will be on the rivers of western Newfoundland where I will be without an internet connection. I look forward to re-joining the course in a week. I think the old term "playing hooky" may have referred to skipping school to go fishing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
