Skip to main content

Home/ change11/ Group items tagged reasons

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Tai Arnold

change11 position paper | littlebylittlejohn.com - 6 views

littlebylittlejohn.com/change11-position-paper

collective learing #change11 Littlejohn

shared by Tai Arnold on 06 Oct 11 - No Cached
  • we don’t have a good understanding of the ‘binding force’ that connects people while they are learning and building knowledge.
    • tatiluna
      tatiluna on 06 Oct 11
       
      Why would this "binding force" be that different from what binds people together in different kinds of relationships outside of collective learning?  Everyone has their own personal reasons for learning from and sharing with the collective, and these reasons are pretty similar to the reasons people learn and share in "real world" or more traditional situations.
  • Becoming competent could be viewed as the ability to perceive the links between these loosely related knowledge fragments
    • tatiluna
      tatiluna on 06 Oct 11
       
      The way one navigates the knowledge on the internet expertly could be a metaphor for or, perhaps, a reflection of, how the brain creates a network of knowledge  to become an expert in any environment or domain.
  • how social technology tools can impact learning
    • Tai Arnold
      Tai Arnold on 15 Oct 11
       
      Is this not the point of the whole business?
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Perhaps more importantly, if learning is to become more self-regulated, rather than teacher-regulated, what sorts of mindsets do learners require to take control and self regulate their own learning (Zimmermann & Schunk, 2001).
Rob Parsons

Openness in Education : The Digital Scholar: How Technology Is Transforming Scholarly P... - 3 views

www.bloomsburyacademic.com/...-9781849666275-chapter-009.xml

scholarship

shared by Rob Parsons on 09 Oct 11 - No Cached
  • Anderson (2009) suggests a number of activities that characterise the open scholars, including that they create, use and contribute open educational resources, self-archive,
  • From my own experience I would propose the following set of characteristics and suggest that open scholars are likely to adopt these.
  • Leslie (2008) comments on the ease of this everyday sharing, compared with the complexity inherent in many institutional approaches:
  • ...6 more annotations...
  • citation levels of articles that are published online versus those that are in closed access journals. Hajjem, Harnad and Gingras (2005) compared 1,307,038 articles across a range of disciplines and found that open access articles have a higher citation impact of between 36 and 172 per cent. So publishing in an online, open manner aids in the traditional measures of citation.
    • Rob Parsons
      Rob Parsons on 09 Oct 11
       
      Openness as a working method, and openness as a movement, with a definable set of values.
  • This section will look at the most concrete realisation of the open education movement, namely that of open education resources. In particular I want to revisit the notion of granularity and how changes in this, afforded by new technologies, are changing scholarly behaviour.
  • Zittrain (2008) terms ‘generativity’, which he defines as ‘a system's capacity to produce unanticipated change through unfiltered contributions from broad and varied audiences’. Little OERs are high in generativity because they can easily be used in different contexts, whereas the context is embedded within big OERs, which in turn means they are better at meeting a specific learning aim.
  • Big OER projects have a variety of models of funding, and Wiley highlights three of these demonstrating a range of centralisation: a centralised team funded by donors and grants (such as MIT), linking it into teaching responsibilities (as practised at Utah State University) and a decentralised collaborative authoring approach (e.g. Rice Connexions, http://cnx.org).
  • The reasons for this are varied, including technical complexity and motivation. One other reason which the OpenLearn team suggest is that the ‘content provided on the site was of high quality and so discouraged alteration’.
    • Rob Parsons
      Rob Parsons on 09 Oct 11
       
      I wonder how much of a barrier the final integration of the material is - in a well structured object internal integration is high so the cost rises of extracting part or repurposing even the whole.
tim mcnamara

1.1. Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaph... - 9 views

reusability.org/...wiley.doc

learningobjects delicious-1011 #change11

shared by tim mcnamara on 12 Oct 11 - No Cached
  • The purpose of this chapter is to introduce an instructional technology concept known commonly as the “learning object.” First a review of the literature is presented as groundwork for a working definition of the term “learning object.” A brief discussion of instructional design theory is followed by an attempt to connect the learning objects approach to existing instructional design theory, and the general lack of such connective efforts is contrasted with the financial and technical activity generated by the learning objects notion.
  • What is a learning object?
  • An instructional technology called “learning objects” (LTSC, 2000a) currently leads other candidates for the position of technology of choice in the next generation of instructional design, development, and delivery, due to its potential for reusability, generativity, adaptability, and scalability (Hodgins, 2000; Urdan & Weggen, 2000; Gibbons, Nelson, & Richards, 2000).
  • ...48 more annotations...
  • grounded in the object-oriented paradigm of computer science.
  • build small (relative to the size of an entire course) instructional components that can be reused a number of times in different learning contexts
  • Moreover, those who incorporate learning objects can collaborate on and benefit immediately from new versions. These are significant differences between learning objects and other instructional media that have existed previously.
  • Supporting the notion of small, reusable chunks of instructional media, Reigeluth and Nelson (1997) suggest that when teachers first gain access to instructional materials, they often break the materials down into their constituent parts.
  • if instructors received instructional resources as individual components, this initial step of decomposition could be bypassed
  • The Learning Technology Standards Committee chose the term “learning objects” (possibly from Wayne Hodgins’ 1994 use of the term in the title of the CedMA working group called “Learning Architectures, API’s, and Learning Objects”)
  • provided a working definition
  • Learning Objects are defined here as any entity, digital or non-digital, which can be used, re-used or referenced during technology supported learning. Examples of technology-supported learning include computer-based training systems, interactive learning environments, intelligent computer-aided instruction systems, distance learning systems, and collaborative learning environments. Examples of Learning Objects include multimedia content, instructional content, learning objectives, instructional software and software tools, and persons, organizations, or events referenced during technology supported learning (LOM, 2000).
  • The proliferation of definitions for the term “learning object” makes communication confusing and difficult.
  • It would seem that there are almost as many definitions of the term as there are people employing it.
  • In addition to the various definitions of the term “learning object,” other terms that imply the general intention to take an object-oriented approach to computer-assisted instruction confuse the issue further.
  • Depressingly, while each of these is something different, they all conform to the Learning Technology Standards Committee’s  “learning object” definition. An in depth discussion of the precise meanings of each of these terms would not add to the main point of this discussion: the field is still struggling to come to grips with the question, “What is a learning object?”
  • At the same time, the creation of yet another term only seems to add to the confusion. While the creation of a satisfactory definition of the term learning object will probably consume the better part of the author’s career, a working definition must be presented before the discussion can proceed.
  • Therefore, this chapter will define a learning object as “any digital resource that can be reused to support learning.”
  • This definition includes anything that can be delivered across the network on demand, be it large or small.
  • This definition of learning object, “any digital resource that can be reused to support learning,” is proposed for two reasons.
  • First, the definition is sufficiently narrow to define a reasonably homogeneous set of things: reusable digital resources. At the same time, the definition is broad enough to include the estimated 15 terabytes of information available on the publicly accessible Internet (Internet Newsroom, 1999).
  • Second, the proposed definition is based on the LTSC definition (and defines a proper subset of learning objects as defined by the LTSC), making issues of compatibility of learning object as defined within this chapter and learning object as defined by the LTSC explicit
  • With that compatibility made explicit, the proposed definition differs from the LTSC definition in two important ways.
  • First, the definition explicitly rejects non-digital
  • The definition also drops the phrase "technology supported" which is now implicit, because all learning objects are digital.
  • Second, the phrase "to support" has been substituted in place of "during" in the LTSC definition. Use of an object "during" learning doesn't connect its use to learning
  • The definition adopted for this chapter emphasizes the purposeful use (by either an instructional designer, an instructor, or a student) of these objects to support learning
  • Armed with a working definition of the term learning object, the discussion of the instructional use of learning objects can proceed.
  • Instructional design theory and learning objects
  • Reigeluth
  • [I]nstructional design theories are design oriented, they describe methods of instruction and the situations in which those methods should be used, the methods can be broken into simpler component methods, and the methods are probabilistic. (p. 7).s11 {margin-left:0; line-height:2.400000; text-indent:36;}
  • Because the very definition of “theory” in some fields is “descriptive,” design theories are commonly confused with other types of theories that they are not, including learning theory and curriculum theory (Reigeluth, 1999a).
  • The following discussion takes a step in this direction, by recasting two of the largest issues in the learning objects area – combination and granularity – in instructional design terms
  • Combination
  • there is astonishingly little conversation around the instructional design implications of learning objects.
  • item (d) in the Learning Objects Metadata Working Group’s PAR (LOM, 2000) reads as follows:
  • To enable computer agents to automatically and dynamically compose personalized lessons for an individual learner
  • at this point a brief discussion of metadata, the focus of the Learning Object Metadata Working Group’s efforts, is necessary.
  • Metadata, literally “data about data,” is descriptive information about a resource
  • he Learning Objects Metadata Working Group is working to create metadata for learning objects (such as Title, Author, Version, Format, etc.) so that people and computers will be able to find objects by searching
  • ​The problem with 7(d) arose when people began to actually consider what it meant for a computer to “automatically and dynamically compose personalized lessons.”
  • his meant taking individual learning objects and combining them in a way that made instructional sense, or in instructional design terminology, “sequencing” the learning objects.
  • The problem was that no instructional design information was included in the metadata specified by the current version of the Learning Objects Metadata Working Group standard.
  • ​The lack of instructional design discussion at this standards-setting level of conversation about learning objects is disturbing, because it might indicate a trend.
  • Once technology or software that does not support an instructionally-grounded approach to learning object sequencing is completed and shipped to the average teacher, why would he or she respond any differently
  • Wiley (1999) called this “the new CAI – ‘Clip Art Instruction’” (p. 6).
  • Discussion of the problem of combining learning objects in terms of “sequencing” leads to another connection between learning objects and instructional design theory.
  • Granularity
  • The most difficult problem facing the designers of learning objects is that of “granularity” (Wiley, et al., 1999).
  • How big should a learning object be?
  • Reuse is the core of the learning object notion, as generativity, adaptivity, and other –ivities are all facilitated by the property of reuse.
  • designating every individual graphic and paragraph of text within a curriculum a “learning object” can be prohibitively expensive
  • tim mcnamara on 12 Oct 11
     
    Chapter 1
Allan Quartly

Five critiques of the Open Educational Resources movement | jeremyknox.net - 5 views

jeremyknox.net/...-oer-highered-elearning-edtech

connectivism education OER MOOC social learning

shared by Allan Quartly on 09 Apr 12 - No Cached
  • One of the most noticeable effects of the privileging of learning in the OER movement is the lack of consideration with regards to pedagogy and the place of the teacher.
  • Given that movements such as OER are not advocates of chaotic, unpredictable learning, but in fact appear to desire similar outcomes to those achieved by organised education, we might contend that reasoned thinking must play some part the structuring of the OER project.  Therefore, it is not the concept of negative liberty itself that is problematic, but rather the premise that its realisation will achieve predefined goals; that an expected order will somehow emerge from unrestrained action.
Tai Arnold

digital digs: Welcome to badge world - 5 views

www.alex-reid.net/...welcome-to-badge-world.html

badges assessment credentialing #change11

shared by Tai Arnold on 19 Sep 11 - No Cached
  • Colleges are filled with students who could give a damn about learning but desperately need that credential.
  • Then it's all about the badges. My kids can just give up on ever having a single moment of joy in their lives. Even if they were going to enjoy something, how can they when they've already committed to this transactional experience instead?
  • The commodification of learning was already quite clear in the Reagan era when we stopped thinking of higher education as a social good and instead defined it as an individual's investment in his/her human capital. 
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Anyone can open their own diploma mill, err I mean badge-selling operation? Of course not. Badges would have to be accredited by someone.
  • If you want to get a badge though, that's going to cost.
  • I think the presence of a badge could actually be a detriment to an otherwise genuine learning experience.
  • ]The whole point of education organisations adopting elearning is to cut costs. They are not doing it to improve education standards. They say it's to educate more. But we know this is a smoke screen. Bean-counters run universities and colleges just like they run commercial companies.For example, The Briish Council is planning to move into distance learning big time. 10,000s of new students. Their reasons (am I #cynic) won't be to improve educational outcomes (mostly English language teaching) but to get more qualifed teachers for for their bucks.
  • lrcruz2 on 19 Sep 11
     
    Thank you for compiling this info and posting for us all. I believe this is an interesting way to engage the learner and increase their extrinsic motivation to learn. I don't see elearning as a way to cut costs but rather a way to expand the reach of learning. Learning on line is different from face to fact and therefore it's possible that this commodification of learning is necessary as a result of these changing times.
tatiluna

A Language Learning MOOC #EFL #ESL « A Point of Contact - 4 views

apointofcontact.wordpress.com/...language-learning-mooc-efl-esl

shared by tatiluna on 21 Sep 11 - No Cached
  • One important aspect of such a context is that often non-Western, and thus non-English speaking cultures do not have as much or the same experience with Distance Learning and Autonomous Learning. A MOOC structure seems to assume a certain level of familiarity with both, so this is one reason why more activity and guidance are a must in an LMOOC.
    • tatiluna
      tatiluna on 26 Sep 11
       
      This is an important point that also should be emphasized more in the current Change11 MOOC, and also in the future with any other MOOCs if other kinds of students are going to participate.  In talking about education in other parts of the world, such as we have already hearing Zoraini Wati-Abas speak, we have to first understand the difference in structure or approach in that country.  OUM and the SMS strategy are more interesting when placed in the context of a country that has never seen such widespread distance learning before.  From my time spent in China, I think distance education would work well and be very appealing for many young people, but it may not be adopted for its inherent openness and difficulty to control.
  • wayupnorth on 21 Sep 11
     
    great thoughts about flexibility and self-directed potential of LMOOC
1 - 8 of 8
Showing 20▼ items per page