Epimetheus

Oooh, a nice little quote:

"I have sometimes dreamt...that when the Day of Judgment dawns...the Almighty will turn to Peter and will say, not without a certain envy when he sees us coming with our books under our arms, 'Look, these need no reward. We have nothing to give them here. They have loved reading.'"

--Virginia Woolf, "How One Should Read a Book"

Working on the assignment. Received some really good feedback from Glen from my email, which confirmed most of my assumptions. I think he even wrote it that night- which while wonderful from my point of view, makes me question again the boundaries for an online teacher replying at 10.30 on a Sunday night.

Then went into the library, and bugger me if Steeples and Jones wasn’t sitting there on the shelf, as large as life and completely uncatalogued!! I’ve read the chapter that Glen quoted heavily from in his notes- I don’t know why he didn’t actually give us the section of the chapter which would barely violate CAL guidelines- no hold on, it would (7 pages out of 340). I also found the original report that this came from on the internet- surely he could have linked to the site. I’m reading through that at the moment.

Found lots of other stuff on problem based learning as well, and have found a myriad of resources on the internet, especially the ASCILITE site where the focus is on online manifestation of problem based learning. I’m hoping that I can just skim read these (hah! Famous last words).

Anyway- what follows is my observations from reading the Report

I’ll incorporate ideas that struck me when reading Steeples, Jones and Goodyear because they use the diagram and structure direct from the report.

A. The Educational setting

Makes the point that the educational setting is an artefact or constructed system rather than a naturally occuring phenomenon. Yes- RMIT is constructed- it has buildings, and some activity has to happen within those buildings for it to be RMIT (ie. if we had lost accreditation through the AMS debacle, the buildings would continue to exist but it wouldn’t be RMIT).

B. Learning environment

Makes the point that the learning enviornment should be as close as possible to the way that people naturally do things rather than impose its own requirements. “Understanding what learners actually do is a cornerstone of good design when it comes to environments for networked learning”.

What do I naturally do in a networked learning environment?br>

• print off key documents
• log in fairly regularly
• have to be “in the mood” for posting- sometimes I consciously log on “for writing”; other times when I’m too tired or rushed, I just log on for reading
• work through methodically looking for new things.

The report also makes the point that the learning environment constrains the activities and tasks. I.e. if there is no electronic copy of a text, don’t set it, or don’t expect multimedia conferencing if the bandwidth doesn’t support it. Part of choosing the online strategies to support a particular pedagogy involves exploring what sorts of task and activities the online learning environment DOES support well. For example, with PBL, what things does online learning do really well? (RMIT does not have a stated commitment to exclusively online delivery- it is seen as an enhancement, not delivery in its own right)

C. The Pedagogical Framework

At RMIT the philosophical position is pretty well articulated through the Teaching and Learning strategy and implemented through Program Renewal- although it seems to take a long time for Program Renewal to reach all courses! Why then am I still tearing my hair out at the “bloody academics”??? Part of it is when I hear them say “I’ve done (ie. written) this course as capabilities” without it having any impact at all on the tasks and learning outcomes- exams and “understand” this and “understand” that.

I think about all the seminars, workshops etc. that we’ve had about program renewal and capabilities and despair. But, as Steeples, Jones and Goodyear warn “it’s far from clear that participation in such rites necessitates a firm grounding in shared beliefs about learning, learners or teaching.” You can say that again.

Actually, this whole report is pretty good- must look at it again someday. (Yeah, sure). I’m finding all this really good stuff that I’d love to read- I’m sure that I’ll forget all about it by the time I finish this subject.

This assignment (groan.....)

I'm feeling completely lost. I don't even know where to start.

I've got the new Teaching and Learning Strategy- still at draft stage because it needs to be signed off by the council in November, but it's looking in "publishable" state and complete enough to work from.

It states a high level commitment to capability-based approach to teaching and learning. I'm not sure if this is a philosophy or a high-level pedagogy. I'm going to assume that it's a philosophy, because the document then goes on "Capability is most effectively developed through a wide variety of learning experiences matched by structured opportunities to reflect on that variety for themselves and others." It also mentions under "teaching" that "Learning and reflecting on learning as an interactive group process is a means of challenging the untested assumptions and values of group members." So, what pedagogies could spring from these type of statements? Variation suggests "problem-based learning"; opportunities to reflect suggests "reflective learning" and and "group reflection"?. Are these proper pedagogies? I know that problem based learning is; reflective learning probably is too.

Once I've narrowed this down, and worked out which pedagogy I'm going to concentrate on, I can then look to the literature for strategies, then work down thinking of the actual people I'm working with, and how I could lever these changes.

I know that the assignment states that we should be in a leadership position. I want to approach this from the position that I'm in at the moment which is a form of very very constrained leadership. (i.e. we don't have the authority to FORCE people to do things; we can provide a form of leadership in terms of advice, knowledge and expertise.

I wonder if this is right?

How am I feeling about my present state of unwillingness to do this assignment? Is it because I've fallen behind and just don't have the energy to do the hard yards to catch up? Is it just because it seems too big? Or is it because I'm thinking of the huge gap between this T&L strategy and the reality of the academics I end up working with? Is it because I feel I don't know enough about reflective learning (I think that might be part of it).

Part of me wants to use one of the pedagogical strategies that we did in the last assignment (e.g. collaborative learning) just because it would be easier. I can't be fagged going off and researching more into "reflection" or "problem based learning"? and extrapolating it into an online environment. But surely an important part of the assignment is congruence between the higher level philosophy and designated strategies, and then making it happen on the ground? Just because I might want to do "collaboration", if it doesn't fit into the strategic directions, then it misses the mark a bit.

What do I need from a tutor at the moment? Reassurance that I am on the right track (Message to self: EMAIL GLEN!!!) Space and an extension. Some way of finding my chronological grip in amongst the readings again. I need to choose my pedagogy, and either assure myself that I already know enough about it (which may well be the case), or do some extra reading if I don't.