Group items tagged

to shift the client from reliance on the change agent to self-reliance.

From this, I have learnt that it is perfectly fine to change your mind, as long as you have solid justification. This was also a useful reminder abot the importance of accurately matching the number of objectives with activities. A designer needs to avoid creating an objective that has no activity, and an activity with no objective, as can sometimes happen through oversight.

“You need to rethink lots of things, to be open to possibilities, opportunities to options, then you’re more likely to be successful,” says Alex. This kind of openness does not happen as a matter of course. It has to begin with an awareness. This attitude of being open to possibilities, opportunities and options has to be actively worked upon. I failed to understand this at first. So I found it perplexing that Alex would pursue what I thought was a trivial line of discussion. What do you think is not possible to teach and learn online? I volunteered several bright contributions. I was still unaware of the purpose of this apparently innocuous discussion. Of course now I know better. That discussion was supposed to challenge a closed mind. Because with a closed mind, we render ourselves unable to be open to possibilities, opportunities to options. A closed mind works against innovation, progress, improvement, expansion. This is a new frontier, and therefore the stance which can reap untold benefits and leanings should be “Let’s explore!” So the question we should be asking isn’t “What cannot be done?” but rather “How do I make this possible?”

I was therefore quite relieved Alex confirmed what I had feared. I was packing in too much. Even before even before Alex provided her completely justified feedback that my course was too packed (“for you Joy, less is more!”)

An online environment is different from a f2f setting. Being able to state it in a theoretical way is not the same as understanding it and translating it into practice. Of course I knew the theory. But when the time came for application in the design of the online course, my knowledge did not transfer well into practical application. This is one of the main problems when there is a failure of the student to  successfully transfer learning, which is basically one of great challenges of teaching.  So basically, what I did initially did was to replicate my f2f activities directly into my online classroom.

As I feared, and Alex confirmed, this large amount of group work puts a strain on the students and also poses too many logistic difficulties. Perhaps one or two group work activities might work, but not several in each module. It is unrealistic. So I have learnt, in a very concrete and hands-on way, that designing for my online classroom in this instance is different from designing for my face-to face classroom.

Once again, I am reminded that theory and practice need mutual reinforcement. Understanding the theory is one thing. Transferring the theoretical knowledge into action requires experience, reflection, and feedback from others.

In short – let the students do the work. This is the best way to learn. This principle, I think, has been demonstrated in this course. And I intend to pursue it in my own course. I see the value of giving the students both structure and space.