Am I a digital scholar?

For a pragmatic reflector, I am spending a lot of time this week thinking. Not so much action. The first question I have been pondering is whether or not I am a scholar. I have struggled with this question throughout my master's journey, as a lot of online education, focuses on formal education.I guess I am an informal educator. I work with adults, and sometime young people, outside of academic institutions. I need to get over this, as although a great many of the approaches and the research are about 'academics', they are not the only 'scholars' inhabiting the network In fact some might say they were the minority.

A Digital scholar according to the great wiki is someone who uses "digital evidence, methods of inquiry, research, publication and preservation to achieve scholarly and research goals"

Martin Weller http://www.slideshare.net/mweller/ten-lessons-in-digital-scholarship

So. I spend a lot of time online. Connecting with others. Researching. Reading. 'Discovering' new things.There isn't a lot of formal learning for my area of practice (or at least I haven't found it yet, but I am a bit of a hybrid) and therefore if I don't seek out new knowledge for myself, then there would be few other places to go. I then use that knowledge in my day to day work and in developing the resources for my organisation. So there you go. On almost a day to day basis I am learning online, integrating this into my current knowledge and experience in order to apply practically to my work and the training that I deliver. However the 'digital' part at the moment is mainly acquisition, and participation through networking with others. I haven't yet 'created'. I guess you could call this blog a creation, but really it's just a means to direct my reflections is an organised way.

Actually. I may have been tough on myself there. I am in factor a digital learner. My Masters has been completed through online methods, with very little face to face contact (I met my tutor four times on the last module - that was nice). So as a student I have been learning, researching, applying and creating in a digital environment. It seems therefore a good place to be, as I am undertaking my final masters module then, that I am pondering how I move from a digital learner to a digital trainer/teacher/scholar?

Nature versus nurture – exploring old school reports

The last few weeks I have been reminiscing quite a lot about the past and discussing how early experiences may have shaped me as a person. This is something you do a lot as you get older (so I am told) and maybe wiser (as you tend to reflect more as you have more stuff in your brain).

Watching the Horizon programme on Monday about male and female brains prompted all sorts of discussions regarding gender and the role of nurture in shaping our perceptions. Something that we talked about during my last Open University module ED841 – Understanding Children’s Development and Learning. We are also moving house soon, so I have been rummaging around my old boxes and finding schools reports that described qualities I still have.

I like people. There’s no debating that I am an ‘extrovert’ who draws their energy from other people (although, it should be noted that I do pretty good at the relaxing, quiet, mindfulness stuff too). But I am at my best with others. My father was a shop keeper in my early years, and we moved a lot. That is by the age of ten I think I had lived in about seven or eight different houses. Therefore, I grew up around lots of different people and had to move schools a few times during those early years. This had to have had some kind of impact on my social ability. Also, when I was very young (infant up to about 6 or 7), I was constantly going to see an ear specialist. They thought I might be partially deaf. Actually, looking back, I think that I just learned to switched off when people didn’t interest me, or chose to hear what I wanted for my own benefit. Or maybe, I just wanted to listen to what was happening and take it all in. Most people I know today wouldn’t call me a ‘quiet’ person. But when you look back at my school reports they often say quiet and thoughtful. I was obviously taking it all in ready for the future.

In the last three years I have been doing my Masters with the Open University. I started because after nearly ten years in the pub world, I had started a job where I needed to use my brain again. Best decision ever made, and I think I do better now than I did as an undergrad. However, when re-visiting my past reports, it was interesting to see that actually, I may have always had the potential, it just got lost along the way.

So here’s some of the highlights from year 2 and 3 (that year 8 and 9 in new money!). Oh – and pretty much every subject says ‘enthusiastic and hard-working’. I would like to think that I have carried that on into my adult life!

English year 2 – “Samantha appears to enjoy the subject and is always willing to participate in oral work. Her writing shows response to language and sensitivity of approach although at times she needs to be more methodical in sorting out her ideas.” It’s true. Sometimes I have so many ideas that it takes a while to ‘sort them out’. That still happens. If you could see my dining table when I write essays its pages of lists, to ty and decide what is relevant and what not. I like to think that I am better at this now.

English year 3 – “Samantha works with enthusiasm in both oral and written activities. I was particularly pleased with her first attempt at argumentative writing, a difficult concept to grasp.” Glad I learnt this early on. I like to be able to see all sides of the argument. It helps have a balanced approach.

RE year 3 – “ Samantha has a quiet but intelligent approach to her work. She always achieves a high standard.” My RE teacher was a definite role model. One of many women in my life who have exuded a positive a peaceful presence. I think that helped in developing my abilities.

Design and technology year 3 – “Samantha is a very able student who achieves a good deal of success in this subject.  She generates a range of intelligent solutions to a design problem and successfully realised them into three dimensional artefacts.” I really like this one. One thing that I am most definitely is pragmatic. My partner would probably not agree that I am logical, but that’s because he get the ‘home’ version of Sam. Also – I do the DIY at home, so this was obviously in the making.

Art and design – “Samantha works with imagination and enthusiasm. She has developed a strong and individual drawing style.” I like this one as it talks about my strong and individual style. Yep. That’s me. I am not prone to doing what people expect me to do, and remember my Math teacher once bemoaning the fact that I got the answers right, but didn’t do it in the way I was meant to!

English (end of year) – “Samantha has a very positive attitude towards all aspects of the course and her literary answers show depth of understanding of the text being studied. In oral activities samantha’s contributions illustrate her perception of the topics under discussion.” The repetition of strength in my oral approach is interesting I think. I need others to help me to formulate my ideas, and like talking to people. For introverts this is very frustrating, but there is something about the social aspect of learning that still resonates within.

Phys ed – “ Samantha always works with enthusiasm and is keen to learn new skills, which she masters quite well and then used actively. She is an effective trampoline coach, where she has the ability to point to the most relevant mistakes.” OK. I was rubbish at 

PE. Not a sporty person at all. I got a lot of enthusiasm in these reports. I particular like this one though, as I think it shows the start of my future career as a manager, or my ability to spot where there are areas that need development, or need to be tackled.

RE – “Samantha always does her best work. She expresses facts clearly and argues logically. She has shown a sensitive appreciation of the issue we have studies and has obviously thought about them at considerable depth. She is never content with a superficial answer.” You can see that I loved my RE teacher! I think the content that we engaged in, often about culture, beliefs and people, allowed me to explore the topic more. But particularly, I like the last line. I am still not content with a superficial answer, so be careful when you answer my ‘why’ questions. Life goes deeper than superficiality.

Students’ approaches to learning and teachers’ approaches to teaching

'In practice, particular approaches in educational research are often evaluated, not by whether they are ‘true’, but by whether they have interesting or useful applications.' (Richardson , 2012)

In fact Richardson is issuing us we a great challenge this week - to take some of his research papers and critically evaluate them. (A great form of alternative peer assessment maybe?!). I am sure we know that every author will chose the devices needed to convince an audience of their point of view, and I think that in the subject of 'debates', it's important for us to start thinking about the finer details of papers we may read.

(NB - definition of terms will be randomly dotted around!)

 

Definition 1: Paradigm-driven disciplines

A 'paradigm' is a philosophical or theoretic framework. Theories, laws, generalisations and experiments support them. Hence the sciences can be seen as paradigm -driven as ..'there is usually a broad consensus about what the problems are that need to be solved, what methods are appropriate for trying to solve them, and how the results of research should be interpreted. Shifting to a new paradigm happens only rarely, usually resulting from the work of an exceptional individual.' (Richardson, 2012)

Definition 2:Disciplines without paradigms

Basically, disciplines where there is less agreement or consensus - like social sciences and education. Here is the domain where the best argument wins (a broad overstatement I know.) 'Researchers get their work published by making a convincing case that they have formulated an interesting problem, chosen an appropriate method for investigating it, and provided a plausible interpretation of the results. So rhetoric – the art of effective speaking and writing – is important. ' (Richardson, 2012) And thus the debates begin. Sounds quite exciting really - if you like debating!

So this week is about thinking critically about the arguments we are presented with.

OVERLOAD!!!

This is my brain right now.

So I am parking weeks 10 and 11 and will come back to them.

This will include:

Week 10

• The role of 'experts'
• Wikipedia
• Social Bookmarking
• Blogging
• OERs

Week 11

• Debates in academia
• Global differences in educational opportunities
• The Iron Triangle
• Quality, cost and elearning
  
  On to Week 12..........
   

Designing for Learning.

A few weeks back we were asked about how we design for learning.

There are lots of different approaches, and depending on what you adopt, may depend on how you plan, and utilise technology.

Things to consider.......

Types of Learning.

This task asked us to think about how we use technology for, and map these onto a grid. The exercise makes you think about how digital media could be used for each of these things by drawing on our experiences.

·         thinking and reflection

·         experience and activity

·         conversation and interaction

·         evidence and demonstration

Mapping Tools to pedagogy (conole et al,2004)

This task looked at mapping activities, based on three dimensions:

·         individual–social: any learning activity can be located somewhere along a spectrum from being an individual, isolated experience to being essentially social in nature.

·         active–passive: some learning activities involve active engagement, whereas other aspects of learning may occur through some degree of passive immersion.

·         information–experience: learning activities vary in the degree to which they are information or experience based. 

The learning centred approach (Hybrid)

The model focuses on eight key characteristics of learning, from both the learner and the designer perspectives. The eight events are ‘creates’, ‘imitates’, ‘practices’, ‘explores’, ‘receives’, ‘debates’, ‘experiments’ and ‘meta-learns’. (This is my favourite model - because of the resources, but also because it mirrors much in the way that I plan and train others in designing learning.)

Comparing different Schema

Often people think design is difficult. All of these tools break down learning in different ways for practitioners. In my experience, we spend a lot of time with trainers getting then to understand the processes of designing learning from start to finish. Maybe other practitioners don't. Therefore all these tools give insight into breaking done the reasons as well as the activities, tools and technology that could be used in learning design. When you understand what it is that needs to be accomplished - it is much easier to determine whether technology can be used. So in answer to the question " Does it help teachers adopt a less technology driven approach" for me, no - as my trainers are not driven by technology in the first place. I am interested in why this is such key area within educational context, as the design of learning outside education seems to be focused much more on linking the designs to the outcomes. Is this because teachers are only involved in the final stages?

  In fact, activities like the ones we have undertaken, are similar to activities that I undertake in order to get people to understand how technology CAN be used. by understanding more about learning design, and what activities with learning are meant to enable, it helps to develop different approaches, and allows trainers to be more adaptive. Giving people simple structures and templates to do this -- simplifies the activity, and helps to empower them  to be more creative. Certainly in a face to face environment, I know that if one approach isn't working, then I can change the method to be more, or less engaging - to hit the learning outcome in a different way. I am not sure how this transfers across to a digital environment yet!

tools for planning

At the start of the weeks, Conole in the study material, expressed the need for there to be a better understanding of the design process. The activities over the last two weeks have all been about this. 'Learning design' is not just an OU approach. Each context has it's own approach and tools, ;language and pedagogy and the different tools we have looked at can be used in different ways by the different practitioners. Learning design is a "complex, messy and creative process" as Conole suggests, and the approach varies on a number of things, including where in the lifecycle of design you begin.

Yannis Dimitriadis in his interview with Pettit said that learning design should support practitioners in a real context, and that resources are about trying to capture the design process. He also points out that we need 'structure for success'. That, people really won't, on the whole, learn for themselves.

Compendium LD. A visual design tool. The activity we were given was for us to think about one of the activities we have already undertaken and to use the tool to design the activity. The software is fairly easy to use, although not necessarily initiative to start with. It would have been nice to see some designs to start with. Some interesting learning points to come out of this activity, besides the fact that half the group couldn't download the software. As already mentioned, different people came from different viewpoints in how to use this, and how to visually display things. A very useful tool for the 'visual' learners, and those who like mind maps (I hate mind maps, like tables!) This however, proves the point of learning design being messy!

Cloudworks. "Social networking for learning design". Another community based resource from the OU, built on the general principles of social media. Interestingly, most of us also found this quite messy. Although, like most things it takes time to move around and figure things out, we felt that it was not necessarily useful to everyone.  Personally I preferred educause.

With community based resources, you need to be a part of that community, otherwise you feel like you are nosing around someone else front room. I belong to a number of similar forums and closed communities, where resources and discussions are shared with like minded practitioners. So the learning point from this is , that there needs to be enough activity, but also that it needs to be relevant for the particular practitioner.

Pedagogy planners.  London Pedgaogy planner and phoebe. These are more tools for the micro planning. Both of these projects seem to have ended, but both again, give simple tools to enable teachers to plan their learning.

Beethams and me.

The issues

Authenticity of activity. For us this is making sure that there is an authentic context. Learners have for years been saying that it needs to be relevant to the role that they do - and this is also one of our training principles. Can we create activities that allow the learner to develop better skills or reasoning or to understand the issues they might come across better, and their role in problem solving? Can we give them a chance to rehearse? Therefore when writing materials we need to make sure the activities we are suggesting have this authentic context.

Formality and structure. As a volunteer movement we are incredibly flexible. we have principles and criteria for assessment, but this is in the form of other volunteers assessing the individual on how they have applied their learning to their role. The structure of learning has definition, but is not rigid. Trainers can deliver the objectives in the way they think best suits the learner. The danger of this is they design learning that best suits themselves rather than the learners. Certainly when I deliver learning it is very flexible and changed to suit the needs of the learners, even though the general pattern of activities is in place.

Retention/reproduction versus reflection/internationalisation. We do both of these, through role play and group work and through reflection and action planning, and also through the validation process itself. I would maybe add another layer to this which is about actualization - problem solving. Often learning is very group orientated, because the organisation is about team work. So maybe there needs to be some thought about how we design activities that also give the individual room for reflection.

The role and importance of other people. This is especially important in a volunteer organisation. Also because often the trainer won't have any contact with the learner's other support mechanisms. Therefore, it can't be assumed that the learners will experience the 'authentic' activity you have created in the sessions. We came up with some radical ideas about tailoring learning to individuals and having lots of methods. But this relies on the support structures available. More support to supporters is a key part that needs developing.

Locus of control. This a definite area of development and from a central point of view one that needs more guidance. As a volunteer led organisation, it takes about five years for information to be clearly communicated and actioned across the UK, up to the most important ground level people. Even though there may be clear guidance, volunteer managers often do not follow it, and insert their own rules and control. Often this is because of fear of the unknown. This is evident in the distrust that some training managers have in learners using elearning or workbooks to study at their own pace. Again, a better understanding from those supporting and managing the learner process is required for it to work better.

Different approaches

Our learning is a blend of different approaches - very much linked in with Blooms', knowledge, skills and behaviours.. We want people to take on the situative elements - build on their roles and be able to participate in the wider context of their role. We also though want to enable them to solve problems and action plan, as a people orientated organisation, this will be a key skill. And they also need to know the rules and regulations about what they do, as well as develop practical skills.

The learning outcome DOES need to be meaningful to our learners, as they are volunteers, and so the pressure on time is often of huge relevance. When Beetham talks about designing learning, the considerations about experience and motivation and accessibility and skills are ones that we teach our trainers, and is a personal mission of mine. However this is not always easy, as you don't always know who will be turning up to your training sessions. (especially when you are a national development officer for the UK).

Using technology.

So how do we currently use technology.? We do have the dreaded old fashioned instructional elearning programmes. I view these much the same as videos or web page sin content. There may be some exploration or reflection involved, but without any support structures in place during the learning, they are simply informational. Support has to come afterwards as people work through the validation process. We do however encourage exploration and reflection in the newly designed workbooks. It is still a rather simple learning process, but by asking learners to involve others or to explore resources on the website we are introducing a new dimension to the approach.

We use technology a lot in the processes that lead to learning development. Research, data processing, experimentation all play their part is understanding what the needs is, as well as assessing the approached to take. For instance, we know that learners want more group activities and tasks and less passive lecturing through feedback. We know which areas in the UK may not be completing learning and can offer more support and direct development work.

We are also using more conferencing technology and experimenting with one off activities to try things out and get a feel for whether it can work for us.

Beetham - An Approach to learning activity design

Digital tools and materials should not change the fact that designing learning is about the activities the learner does and the outcomes of that activity.

"learners need opportunities to make a newly acquired concept or skill their own: to draw on their own strengths and preferences, and to extend their repertoire of approaches to task requirements"

Tasks are required OF learners (like curriculum in education).Activities are engaged in BY learners in response to the task. Beetham tells us that theorists stress the need for integration across activities, and therefore despite the  fact that people learn in different ways, and that the outcomes may be different, there are issues that cross all learning design:

·         authenticity of activity

·         formality and structure

·         retention/reproduction versus reflection/internationalisation

·         the role and importance of other people

·         locus of control

Beetham tells us that when designing for learning outcomes the activity must be meaningful for the learner and its context, and also that there should be an "identifiable change that is anticipated in the learner". If the learning activity needs to be meaningful to the learner, then so does the learning outcome.

There are no surprises when it comes to designing for learners and the variants to consider, and how these can be co-dependent on each other:

·         experience, knowledge and competence in subject

·         accessibility

·         motivations and expectations

·         prior experience of learning and method

·         preferred approaches to learning

·         social and interpersonal skills

·         confidence and competence (if using ICT)

Beetham states that if we truly want to design learning that is relevant to each individual learner, then we need to provide a flexible approach. This is one in which the learner is allowed to make their own decisions on the tasks they undertake, and one that digital technology could support. Technology allows us to present a wider range of options, however, and this is a recurring theme, there is limited availability of skilled practitioners to provide the relevant feedback and support such a personalised approach takes. Beetham also remind us that most learning involves some form of interaction with another person, often someone who is more expert than the learner.

Beetham links the use of digital resources and technologies with the traditional approach to learning. In a face to face environment you think not only about the resources, but about the layout of the room, the environment within which learning is fostered. This is also true of the digital environment. Different artefacts have different affordances (Gibson 1979), but these affordances can have different meanings in different contexts. Saloman (1997) in week 6 already pointed out that we view different forms of representation in different ways. We know that some people like different things. Technology could allow us to give the learner a choice of medium, or an opportunity to experience different mediums, so that they get a variety of representations rather than just one approach - which may not be suitable for them.

Examples of how we can use technology:

·         Research - databases, evaluating online resources

·         Comprehension tasks - note taking, answering questions and mind mapping

·         Creating tasks - tools used create different representation could also be used by learners to create their own representations, which could then be used as assessment.

·         Analysis tasks - diagnostics, informatics, analytical software

·         Experimentation and discovery tasks - models and simulations (eg.second life), digital environments

·         Communicative tasks - forums, conferencing

Associative learning, being about 'recall' and highly rule based where the learning outcome is about a new skill or concept. The learning involves a teacher who is both the subject matter expert and the guide through the activities.

Constructive learning, being about discovery and based on incidents and strategies where the learning outcome is about problem solving or developing new understandings. In this context teachers need to be facilitators - negotiating outcomes, supporting learner discussion and giving relevant feedback as well as the ability to respond to different learners needs.

Situative learning, being about developing new identities or roles and so the activities are more role based and the learning outcomes are about being able to participate in new situation or play a more expert role. These learners need a sympathetic mentor with insight into their context and ability to support their developing role.

In summary, Beethams remarks that we need to understand the design process if we want to evaluate it and share it with others.

Learning Design

The  activities over the next few weeks are focused on learning, and in particular to get us to look critically at it, get a better understanding of the processes and guidance that can help to create new learning activities. It would seem that we need to make the design process more explicit in order to better share our  knowledge, transfer good practice and help teachers to find tools that are relevant and useful to them in the activities that they are creating.

Learning design  is....

Conole, in the course materials notes that:

"Learning activities are those tasks that students undertake to achieve a set of intended outcomes.

Learning design refers to the range of actions associated with creating a learning activity and crucially provides a means of describing learning activities."

It would seem that this version of 'learning design' has sprung from the Open University and it's interesting that it is very much based on ways of sharing knowledge across faculties. It's about, "points to be aware of, how to do it better and how to share practice and results". A nod to the collaborative direction of learning? The point is, according to the resource materials, to help teachers understand the process better, to become more time and resource efficient (teachers and students) and to enhance the sharing practice.

So what does learning design mean to me?

It's interesting to reflect on this after sharing a few posts in the forums. This is where the 'depends on the context' comes in. All learning I design follows the same'ish' systematic planning cycles (we use NAOMIE), but I do design different kinds of learning - or more appropriately, get involved at different points of the cycle.

·         Topic (what's the overall aim of the piece of learning)

·         Learners(this effects greater the approach, methods and content)

·         Objectives(the effect this should have on the learners)

·         Method (getting into the details, the approach and the content)

·         Implementation (resources, support, doing it.)

In my role I design learning for written resources and elearning at a national level. In this instance, I am involved right at the start of identifying the needs in the first place and doing the research in order to develop objectives. I also deliver face to face training as well. This takes 2 forms. One in which the need has been identified, and I need to develop the learning. So this could be that staff members need to know more about writing learning materials. I will find out as much as I need to about who these people are, what they already know, and develop the key things that I think they need to make the learning successful for them. But I also deliver learning that already has the objectives written and identified, and so, similarly to most teachers, I have to find the best methods and approaches to suit the learner and make it an effective learning experience.

The interesting thing for me is that my learning is about changing people. It's about their knowledge, skills and behaviour in that it changes what they do and how they do it, or gives them a new approach or tool. I don't do assessment in the classic form. We don't have exams, I don't have exam board criteria. The only assessments that I really do are when I deliver First Aid, and those are done by watching people in action, and in a subtle way rather than explicit. (eg, they do a number of different real life scenarios in teams, rather than an individual being assessed on a one to one basis. It's more labour intensive for those running the training, but less daunting for the student).

Therefore, my approach to learning design may be more informal flexible because the reasons for the learning may be more informal.( Although we do have rules and regulations, guidance and principles.)

But - this does make it more o a challenge to have performance indicators, or to know if the learning has been successful. This is both the challenge and the fun of working in a voluntary organisation!

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

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.