Epimetheus

It's the first HOT day of summer- well, nearly summer- today. It smells great! I've been working on this final assignment which is growing like topsy. I've changed the archiving function because I think I'll include links to the Blogger post in my assignment, and I thought I could probably target it better if the archives showed weekly rather than monthly. Hope I haven't lost the whole thing - AAAAAARGGHGHGH!!!!

Actually, I found a blog that someone is using as part of their PhD which is investigating writing styles in blogs. Quite interesting really. I'm looking forward to having the time to follow it up

It might say Sunday, but it's really Saturday

Doing the module 3 readings at last!

I’m a bit surprised by the notes’ dismissal of learning objects- although from Glen’s most recent comment I suspect that he’s rethinking that a bit. I might post that WA TAFE article from the green paper on learning objects which spoke of “glue”, which I think is a useful concept.

Then on to read Taylor. Gees, I really don’t think I like this guy. I don’t like the reductionism of his NOVEX analysis, and I certainly don’t like the sterility of his Fifth Generation Distance Education!! Does he think that people actually LIKE automated answering systems? I LOATHE “Press 1 for….., Press 2 for …..”. I HATE the automated White Pages, which never gives you the answer you want. I LAUGH at the options that the computer offers up to me when it can’t find what I asked for. Do I ever like it? Well, yes, if there’s a transaction that I want to make- something that I have no emotional investment in; something that I could do at an ATM just as easily.

But in response to a Discussion Board contribution? No way. As I wrote in the discussion about marking participation on discussion boards, there is (or should be) an intellectual act in making a stance, forming an opinion, and stating it. In his model, why not just type the one trigger word, and wait for it all to come flooding your way. It’s transmission at its worst- no emotional or intellectual investment on either side. Oh yuck.

Then on to McKendree and Mayes. He’s growing on me, the old Mayes. Perhaps I should have read this article before I dared to address him on the discussion board!! I like where he says that “dialogue is itself an action, but a special one in that it interacts not with external conceptions or objects but with internal ones.” He sees the basic unit of learning as “conceptualisation”- ah, there’s my interest!! Oh, lots of stuff here. Come back to it later, Janine.

Now on to Gunn. How fortuitous. I was thinking just this morning about whether the nature of knowledge has changed. If it was possible to transmit knowledge from one person to another, would that be enough? For example, if you took a surgeon, and channelled everything he knew into another person, would that be enough today, now? If it ever was (and I’m not sure that it was), what is it about now that makes things different?

Well, for a start, new technology would come along, and she’d have to adapt the way she did things to work with the new technology. And secondly, because alternative ways of doing things would be funded across the world in a range of research settings, and publicized more quickly and more widely. I think that there’s less weddedness to orthodoxy- for example, I think of how long Florence Nightingale had to fight to get surgeons to change their aprons and nurses to open the windows. I noticed in the paper the other day a picture of the “proper” way to put a baby in its cot- in a bare cot, on its back, with blankets, and feet at the bottom of the bed, and I think of just twenty years ago how everything was almost the opposite- quilts, babies on their stomachs, cot bumpers so that they wouldn’t get their heads stuck in the bars….how on earth did they survive???

She talks about the commodification of information- ownership, copyright etc. but then goes on to point out- important stuff! “only when relevant information interacts with prior knowledge, experience of application in meaningful contexts, exposure to multiple perspectives and guidance in some coherent form does it become useful as a learning resource.” YES!!! And “It is the process that is marketable”- that’s the product, that’s the value-adding.

She cites from Schon a list of reactions to instability and change (.e.g fear, disorientation, pointless non-compliance, selective inattention, denial of obvious obsolence etc). God, this sounds familiar. But then she goes on in the next paragraph to state “The double edged sword of being a mature thinker in the discipline of education is being able toaccept that the next person’s perspective may be equally valid, even though it is possible to produce a well-reasoned argument to the contrary.” P. 5 This picks up on the point I’ve been thinking about- is adherence to a transmission model a matter of choice any more? Or is it WRONG?

How ironic- or is it good design??- most of the readings in this final section are picking up on things that I was already thinking about doing for Assignment 3.

I really need to start writing the last assignment, but I would like to do the Module 3 reading before I do- if nothing else to make sure that I don’t miss out on anything!! So I’m going back to Hung and Chen, just to finish off the Module 2 stuff.

I know that I started commenting on this, but in re-reading, I’m struck again by how MARXIST it all is, and the influence of Russian writers in all this.

There’s a mention of Vygotsky’s emphasis on the history of a relationship between a child (learner) and an environment. I guess I’m still thinking about the legitimacy of peripheral participation!! Hung and Chen state on p.5 that Vygotsky’s “focus would be on the historical process as well as the product in assessment.” The distance ed aspect of e-learning is still present in a model of distance learning where you quietly read, then just hand in the assessment pieces. Distance ed has a real problem with process, because there is no central arena where the learners and expert (or whatever you want to call it) meet. Is it possible to assess process in distance ed? Perhaps with reflective writing- a journal, or a reflective analysis attached to the product. Perhaps by having the assessment product being handed in cumulatively?

Hung and Chen go on to examine www.experts-exchange.com which is a web based community of practice of computer programmers. There’s a lot of talk about what novices get from a community of practice, but what’s in it for the experts? Is that another reason for silence? Hung and Chen talk about the “star” rating that is given to commentators for their contributions, which is a form of reputation and recognition. As they say, some want answers and some want reputation. Does this explain a willingness to be silent on a discussion board- because you want answers. Is that, deep down, why others are willing to “talk”, because they want reputation? If I’m honest, then yes, that’s why I’m willing to talk.

“An identity is formed when he or she progresses from a peripheral participant to becoming a central participant of that community”. For those who justify lurking, does it matter if you remain identity-less? Mayes, I think, said something about that when he was talking about the relevance of reading other people’s conversations- you had to think that they were enough like you for them to be meaningful.

Oooh, this is interesting. In the www.experts-exchange.com site, you are given a set number of points. You are then awarded points for questions that you answer, so you just can’t keep taking and taking- you have to give to. No such thing as a free lunch!

“Learning is about dialoguing in matters that we need to understand or that trouble us; not just dialoging with anyone, but with those that can challenge us, those who can provide us with a difference.” P. 10

Just looking over the module notes for Module 2, another thing that I made a note to myself to pick up on is Kimball, and the emphasis in courses on introducing yourself. In my little notes on the side, I wrote “Is introduction enough for belonging? A bit like a party.”

Now I’m reading Ragan. I feel as if I have almost come full circle because there’s that comment that Steve made at a dinner party in one of my first entries to this blog “the desired student goal…a marked and measurable change in behaviour.”, which is the same for both online and face-to-face learning. But the rest of the article is pretty ordinary.