Skip to main content

Home/ CCK2011/ Group items tagged research

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Keith Hamon

Connectivism Technology Web 2.0 Education Learning and Research - Connectivism, Technol... - 0 views

  •  
    To share & discuss education, learning and research in Connectivism, Technology, Web2.0, e-Learning, PLE, K-12, Higher and Open Education
Mohsen Saadatmand

danah boyd | apophenia Blog - 1 views

  •  
    Blog of Danah Boyd, a researcher at Microsoft Research New England and a Fellow at the Harvard Berkman Center for Internet and Society
Chris Jobling

elearnspace › Social and connective lock-in - 1 views

  •  
    "Social lock-in - where we are reluctant to move to new social networks because all of our friends/colleagues are part of our current social network service. When Twitter was experiencing downtime issues a few years ago, some individuals moved to Plurk, Identi.ca, or other services. But, in the end, the social lock-in of Twitter was sufficient to pull many back. We're experiencing this to some degree in our work/research building a social learning network at Athabasca University - The Landing. If learners have a developed online identity and use proprietary services like Facebook and Twitter, what's the motivation to create a separate social network within a learning context? Connective lock-in - where we have lost control of our ability to define and shape connections because the proprietary connection tools ((Like, Facebook Connect, Twitter) are so ubiquitous and services (Delicious, EverNote, DropBox) are so easy to use."
Keith Hamon

Learning or Management Systems? « Connectivism - 0 views

  • Two broad approaches exist for learning technology implementation: The adoption of a centralized learning management approach. This may include development of a central learning support lab where new courses are developed in a team-based approach—consisting of subject matter expert, graphic designers, instructional designer, and programmers. This model can be effective for creation of new courses and programs receiving large sources of funding. Most likely, however, enterprise-wide adoption (standardizing on a single LMS) requires individual departments and faculty members to move courses online by themselves. Support may be provided for learning how to use the LMS, but moving content online is largely the responsibility of faculty. This model works well for environments where faculty have a high degree of autonomy, though it does cause varying levels of quality in online courses. Personal learning environments (PLEs) are a recent trend addressing the limitations of an LMS. Instead of a centralized model of design and deployment, individual departments select from a collage of tools—each intending to serve a particular function in the learning process. Instead of limited functionality, with highly centralized control and sequential delivery of learning, a PLE provides a more contextually appropriate toolset. The greater adaptability to differing learning approaches and environments afforded by PLEs is offset by the challenge of reduced structure in management and implementation of learning. This can present a significant challenge when organizations value traditional lecture learning models.
  • Self-organised learning networks provide a base for the establishment of a form of education that goes beyond course and curriculum centric models, and envisions a learner-centred and learner controlled model of lifelong learning. In such learning contexts learners have the same possibilities to act that teachers and other staff members have in regular, less learner-centred educational approaches. In addition these networks are designed to operate without increasing the workload for learners or staff members.
  • Instead of learning housed in content management systems, learning is embedded in rich networks and conversational spaces. The onus, again, falls on the university to define its views of learning.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Two key areas are gaining substantial attention: (a) social software, and (b) personal learning environments (PLEs). Social software and PLEs have recently gained attention as alternatives to the structured model of an LMS. PLEs are defined as: “systems that help learners take control of and manage their own learning” (van Harmelen, 2006, ¶ 1). PLEs “are about articulating a conceptual shift that acknowledges the reality of distributed learning practices and the range of learner preference” (Fraser, 2006, ¶ 9). A variety of informal, socially-based tools comprise this space: (a) blogs, (b) wikis, (c) social bookmarking sites, (d) social networking sites (may be pure networking, or directed around an activity, 43 Things or flickr are examples), (e) content aggregation through RSS or Atom, (f) integrated tools, like elgg.net, (g) podcast and video cast tools, (h) search engines, (i) email, and (j) Voice over IP.
  • For an individual used to Skyping, blogging, tagging, creating podcasts, or collaboratively writing an online document, the transition to a learning management system is a step back in time (by several years).
  • LMS may well continue to play an important role in education—but not as a critical centre. Diverse tools, serving different functionality, adhering to open guidelines, inline with tools learners currently use, may be the best option forward.
  • As these learners enter higher education, they may not be content to sit and click through a series of online content pages with periodic contributions to a discussion forum.
  • Involve all stakeholders (beyond simple surveys). Define the university’s view of learning. Critically evaluate the role of an LMS in relation to university views of learning and needs of all stakeholders. Promote an understanding that different learning needs and context require different approaches. Perform small-scale research projects utilizing alternative methods of learning. Foster communities where faculty can dialogue about personal experiences teaching with technology. Actively promote different learning technologies to faculty, so their unique needs—not technology—drives tools selected.
  •  
    The initial intent of an LMS was to enable administrators and educators to manage the learning process. This mindset is reflected in the features typically promoted by vendors: ability to track student progress, manage content, roster students, and such. The learning experience takes a back seat to the management functions.
luisa dall'acqua

CCK11 - A survey - 0 views

Dear all, For my research, evaluating and extending PLEs, and connectivism I'm conducting a survey on the experience carried out in CCK11 courses. Please kindly cooperate in its implementation. The...

started by luisa dall'acqua on 05 Apr 11 no follow-up yet
1 - 8 of 8
Showing 20 items per page