Monday 26 March 2012

Web 2.0

The remainder of the materials in the week looked at Web 2.0. A paper, a video (the machine is Us/ing us) and a lecture. Having read some stuff about this for the last module and seen the video before, I particularly liked the lecture. Why? Because it gave me Wesch as a person. Someone who is really interesting to listen to. Someone who is doing some fascinating work. It made me laugh and gave me a real life example as a metaphor for Web 2.0. We only had to watch teh first 15 minutes....

The medium is the message

 

Marshall Mcluhan is introduced to us briefly in the course notes. The famous phrase looks at the fact that media is an extension of humanity, is about understanding society. For example, in a 1977 discussion Mcluhan talks about TV promoting a new kind of awareness – maybe not one that it based on literacy as we know it. He defines literacy as objective, and the awareness that TV brings as subjective. He talks about reading as an activity of rapid guessing, as we decipher what the words mean in their context. He also talks about the search for identity, and this moving from being a search through violence, to a search through dialogue.
His understanding about innovation and invention probably echo the words of Naughtons laws of technology, in that we often don’t know the long term effects. It seems that much of McLuhans work was about challenging people’s perceptions – getting them to look beyond the obvious.

I wonder if this is echoed in the work I am doing at the moment. When designing an elearning module, we are asking for images that get progressively more challenging when the learner is asked how confident they feel, thus visually stimulating them to fell more confident along with the images. WE are making sure that when we are talking about negative messages we don’t use photos of young people, but when it is a positive message that we do – thus reinforcing the understanding that good and positive images are about getting things and doing things right. Is this not a way of enhancing the media that we are using?

For McLuhan, the message is about the change in the interpersonal dynamics – it’s a bit like activity theory. It is not the content or the use, but what happens in the wider circle. The medium, is the extension of ourselves, something from which change emerges.

One could delve into McLuhan, as it is incredibly fascinating, but the main gist is that technology can change our awareness and society, as well as the individual.

“You can never perceive the impact of any new technology directly, but it can be done in the manner of Perseus looking in the mirror at Medusa. It has to be done indirectly. You have to perceive the consequences of the new environment on the old environment before you know what the new environment is. You cannot tell what it is until you have seen it do things to the old one. The need, however, to understand the processes and changes brought about by new technology gets strong as the technology does.”

Federman, M. (2004, July 23). What is the Meaning of the Medium is the Message? http://individual.utoronto.ca/markfederman/article_mediumisthemessage.htm .

Week 5 Knowing, media and forms of representation.

This week, the heart of the topic is about method and media, and that our experiences and conditioning may change the ways we view them. Different media may be better for different people, places and topics. The accessibility of media and the constraints of the activity may also play a role. For example, we tell people a lot in training to have a number of methods prepared, as you may turn up to a drafty scout hall where there is no power – and so technology cannot be used.

Do I prefer different forms of representation over others?
After my initial statement, obviously my experience will be different from others. I think that I was lucky that in school we were taught a number of different ways. I remember in primary school when we covered a subject, we would do everything about it. So for Egypt, we had lessons, but we also did art, and plays and made Egyptian masks, did a number of trips to exhibitions, thus using a number of media to bring the subject alive. This was also true of secondary school, where many of our teachers used TV programmes and films (probably because in the 80s education film was big).

In the forum I recounted the story of catharsis. When being taught Classical Civilisation, we studied ancient greek dramas. We talked about catharsis, the purging of emotions that aims to make the audience feel what the actors feel. Well, we saw a live performance of Medea (with Diana Rigg – amazing). IN the scene where she kills her children I understood what catharsis was, I felt it, it made sense. Since then I have used the term often, especially when watching films or theatre. So I know how powerful different mediums can be for me.As an aside, I recently went to Athens for the first time, and it was truly amazing to see all the pottery and artefacts that I had seen pictures of when studying. It reprised my knowledge and fascination.

The course notes tell us that research has yet to prove that one medium is better than another – mostly because it is hasn’t conducted tests that are comparative enough. The ‘grocery truck analogy’ is used, to suggest that the media are just the vehicles that deliver the learning and don’t influence student achievement. I think I would disagree. Clearly, some students respond to some media better than others. Or maybe it’s about the learning activities that take place afterwards, that consolidate the ‘goods’.

Of mind and media

Saloman (1997) tells us that ‘technology’ has been employed as a metaphor to explain human nature throughout the ages. Saloman is an educational psychologist who specialises in research on cognition and instruction. From being the potters clay, to the watch, to the steam engine, now to the computer. He tells us that the blackboard and chalk is a good metaphor for the ‘absorbing’ nature of education currently and that instructional television fits well with the concept of learning as passive absorption of concrete information. Saloman pulls on the experiences of other writers to ask whether we should be using technology to support learning in new ways, rather than just using it to convey current kinds of learning in a more effective way.

“Different symbolic forms of representation address different aspects of the world around us and thus afford us the opportunity to learn something different about the world from each form of representation.”

How we perceive or take meaning from things, depends on the mental activity we engage in, the knowledge structures we possess and how we interpret these to form new meaning for ourselves. It’s a bit ‘expansive’, but how we view media will depend on our experience.

Going back to my childhood learning, with it’s variety of methods, maybe this is why I now like to have a variety of different media and activities to engage with. It gives me a breadth of knowledge across the subject in different ways, making me feel I have attained a more rounded understanding of a subject.  So different forms of representation can have an effect on what we know, as well as how we know it and understand it.
Well, the last few weeks have flown by with me working each weekend, developing a horrible cough and cold, which still haven't left, and completing my first assignment. 
Now for a quick catch up

Tuesday 6 March 2012

putting week 4 to bed

I really needed to put last week to bed, but activity theory is still bugging me. So I have off loaded on Dr Bones and will return at some point in the future to the temple of gloom!

authentic learning... a brief distraction!



What makes an activity Authentic?
Authentic learning is not about making or taking learning, necessarily to the real world. It's about providing students/learners with an experience which is meaningful for them, but also allows them to explore in a real life way. In particular I think that authentic learning lends itself to problem solving skills and the higher levels of learning (Blooms taxonomy again!).
This is why it sits nicely alongside cognitive apprenticeship. The idea of a master leading a student into a higher level of understanding. This is exactly like the activities I talked about in my own personal account of learning. The modeling, supporting and empowerment model - or scaffolding as it will come to be known.


What is the problem with making everything explicit in learning?
As Mr Bones says in my skit, taking things too literally would be extreme. If you make everything explicit, there is no room for the becoming - the using what you have acquired in a new situation or circumstance. Where is the exploration and discoovery? Where is the going wrong? The experience? I can easily see that some people could misinterpret authentic activity and focus too much on getting the context right, and thus forget the point of the activity in the first place. I have seen this a lot with First Aid training, where people get ingrossed in doing make up to make it as real as possible, rather than focusing on the signs and symptoms.


Do you think the divide between school and authentic activity can be bridged?
As I don't work in education, this is hard. My experience of education, was that there were a lot of authentic experiences to be had. But maybe I had good teachers. In one of the earlier papers I read, there was a point made about age and using concrete or abstract examples. There is part of me that still thinks that learners need to acquire the basics, through passive learning. Can this be contextualised to be authentic? Does this go back to the point about what learning is and what the aims of our schools are? Authentic activity happens all the time in life - because often we are experiencing as we are learning. In a formal context, there will be those for whom authentic activities are crucial - nurses, avionics, engineering....but making maths, english, history authentic is different.

So I guess the question is - in order to bridge the divide - we need to know what the divide consists of, and whether or not ther even is one. Maybe this is the reason why movements like TED exist.


Questions again...........
heres a good website on authentic activity.

Learning together and learning alone – the social dimensions of learning

1. Learning outside the head?


Wiki says……
Situated learning (Brown, Collins and Duguid, 1989) - takes place in the same context as which it is applied. Collins, Duguid, and Brown (1989) argue that cognitive apprenticeships are less effective when skills and concepts are taught independent of their real-world context and situation
Communities of practice (Wenger, 1998) -  It is through the process of sharing information and experiences with the group that the members learn from each other, and have an opportunity to develop themselves personally and professionally
The apprenticeship model (Brown, Collins and Duguid, 1989) Collins, Brown, and Newman developed six teaching methods rooted in cognitive apprenticeship theory and claim these methods help students attain cognitive and metacognitive strategies for "using, managing, and discovering knowledge" .The first three (modeling, coaching, scaffolding) are at the core of cognitive apprenticeship and help with cognitive and metacognitive development. The next two (articulation and reflection) are designed to help novices with awareness of problem-solving strategies and execution similar to that of an expert. The final step (exploration) intends to guide the novice towards independence and the ability to solve and identify problems within the domain on their own. The authors note, however, that this is not an exhaustive list of methods and that the successful execution of these methods is highly dependent on the domain.
Legitimate peripheral participation (Lave and Wenger, 1991) Legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) describes how newcomers become experienced members and eventually old timers of a community of practice or collaborative project (Lave & Wenger 1991). According to LPP, newcomers become members of a community initially by participating in simple and low-risk tasks that are nonetheless productive and necessary and further the goals of the community. Through peripheral activities, novices become acquainted with the tasks, vocabulary, and organizing principles of the community
Distributed cognition (Hutchins, 1995) Distributed cognition is a psychological theory developed in the mid 1980s by Edwin Hutchins. Using insights from sociology, cognitive science, and the psychology of Vygotsky (cf. cultural-historical psychology) it emphasizes the social aspects of cognition. It is a framework (not a method) that involves the coordination between individuals, artifacts and the environment. It has several key components:
  1. Embodiment of information that is embedded in representations of interaction
  2. Coordination of enaction among embodied agents
  3. Ecological contributions to a cognitive ecosystem
Distributed cognition as a theory of learning, i.e. one in which the development of knowledge is attributed to the system of thinking agents interacting dynamically with artifacts, has been widely applied in the field of distance learning, especially in relation to Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) and other computer-supported learning tools. Distributed cognition illustrates the process of interaction between people and technologies in order to determine how to best represent, store and provide access to digital resources and other artifacts.

Situated cognition – Brown et al


This paper is summarised well in the abstract:

“Drawing on recent research into cognition as it is manifest in everyday activity, the authors argue that knowledge is situated, being in part a product of the activity, context, and culture in which it is developed and used…The activity in which knowledge is developed and deployed, it is now argued, is not separable from or ancillary to learning and cognition. Nor is it neutral. Rather, it is an integral part of what is learned.”

Within the paper the authors used different terms to enable the reader to understand. Firstly we are told that all knowledge is like a language…. “Its constituent parts index the world and so are inextricably a product of the activity and situations in which they are produced.” We are then told that knowledge can be likened to a set of tools…. “They can only be fully understood through use, and using them entails both changing the user's view of the world and adopting the belief system of the culture in which they are used.”

It is interesting in this paper to compare the approach taken from both a work and an educational setting. It’s writers bring an interesting mix of background: Collins is a cognitive scientist, Duguid it seems is a adjunct professor researcher and we already know that Brown comes from an business innovation background. The idea of ‘cognitive apprenticeship’ is one that can readily be witnessed in the business world, whether through internship, juniors or general on the job progression, where one may learn from one more experienced. It is then interesting to see how this could be transposed in an educational context, and what that really means. We have already heard the arguments from Brown that education is too focused on acquisition. And the article makes a good point about the social context of education mostly being about the institute of education. But this argument then has to go back and ask what our definition of learning is and what we want education to do. Do we want education to prepare our young people for employment? I certainly know there are lots of theories out there and also lots different types of institution – not all tied in to a national curriculum.

Anyway….
The idea of an ‘authentic activity’ is presented as one in which they can act meaningfully and purposefully to hone their ‘tools’, and where activity and social interaction play vital roles. Cognitive apprenticeship therefore allows for the student to learn through modelling, support and empowerment (Collins, Brown, Newman 1987) from an expert.


Brown, J.S., Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989) ‘Situated cognition and the culture of learning’, Educational Researcher, vol.18, no.1, pp.32–42; also available online at http://www.jstor.org.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/ stable/ 1176008 (last accessed 29th February 2012).