Group items tagged

I see evidence of this now when I'm on hiring committees and we are drawn to folks that can provide a portfolio of evidence of learning. Its not enough to list your college and grade point average, we want to see that you are agile in your learning process and willing to explore new concepts.

Hannah - I completely agree. It's crucial for candidates to demonstrate these skills, but for better or worse the system still requires the more tangible credentials like a degree. I don't know if we'll ever get to a point where most job interviews are "demonstrate what you know" rather than "tell me what you know," but I think seeing that portfolio of actual work is far more telling that a candidates GPA.

Regarding job interviews, I was just on a hiring committee and one of the important issues that was raised was related to continuing professional development and lifelong learning. I think it is important that a candidate can show that they want to continue learning even if they are not currently pursuing a degree.

I agree witht his point but I have found that person indicate and say so many lovely things during interviews but once they land the job then they seem to forget what is said. SI I think we need to go further and work professional development as a requirement for job security and pay increase. This is a big challenge in my country some teacher have the mentality once trained always trained,

These are all great points and I agree. I am involved in the badging movement at Penn State and I see badging as a viable new option that could and eventually will replace the way we learn and acquire knowledge.

This is definitely an issue at my school. Many of the teachers are quite set in their ways and refuse to try and add any kind of technology to their curriculum. They need to continue to seek out professional development, especially in Technology areas where they have no experience.

I would go a step further and point out that is not just teachers who are set in their ways, but also school policy and administration who prevent the modern application of many devices.

Although some of my colleagues have created Facebook course sites, I have been worried about requiring my students to use this as a tool. However, this semester, several of my students created their own study group on Facebook and used it to share helpful videos, websites, and tips with each other. I suppose I should take the giant leap if they are already doing it for themselves!

IMHO: I like teachers not worrying about requiring it, or not requiring it. I think a key take-away from Seely is that the students are doing it themselves, they're engaging in self-directed learning behaviors, rather than relying on the teacher as the sole source

This was a discussion today at work as we were deciding on a textbook for a course for the next academic year. Some instructors really like some of the tools used by a particular textbook and I was noting that sometimes certain tools might not help some types of learners so I don't like to require them to complete those tasks. I know some instructors utilize different assessments that a student can chose based on their own learning style--making a portfolio for instance instead of taking a traditional test.

I like that there are tools out there like Facebook that are more educationally organized to help facilitate this type of learning environment. One example that I was introduced to is Edmodo. This website mimic's Facebook but allows teacher's to take responsibility of their class page. Again, I like the idea of this tool but finding a way to implement this in the primary setting is frustrating. Hopefully throughout this course, I will be able to learn more about how to do that!

Engaging students in any matter is positive.  Whether it be social media or in the classroom, the more students continue to talk about what they learn, they more they actually learn.

This is an interesting thought. Education/knowledge is becoming immediately accessible to nearly anyone who wants it, but if we are entering a time where we "need" to acquire all this new knowledge quickly then we must come up with an infrastructure to support not just the distribution of that knowledge but also what to do with the educated masses. 

Good point. What kinds of new professions, occupations are being created by these new knowledge opportunities?

In relation to Jordan's comment, I'm not sure we've figured out what to do with the educated masses as there are plenty of people looking for jobs who have graduate degrees but can not gain employment.  Instead they find themselves working in wage payroll jobs to pay the bills.  Certainly within the library fields, new positions have been created or renamed (example: Emerging Technology Librarian) to stay ahead of technology use in the community.   

Web 2.0 resources are great for bringing people together, but how do they allow for exchanges of diverse ideas? If people are only connecting with others who have "common interests," are there limitations to how knowledge can be transformed, rather than simply perpetuated?

Yep, we can't let the algorithm-based social networks do all the work for us, or we indeed end up with nothing more than self-validating echo chambers. It can start by intentionally incorporating divergent perspectives into your social feeds (e.g., Twitter, Tumblr)

I love Web 2.0 for creation of projects. I'll be interested to see what we can do with exchanges of ideas.

I love the these Web 2.0 tools allow us to communicate. Fostering communication between peers is the best way to learn. Although I like the blogs and wikis for this collaborative purpose, I struggle with finding a way to make it manageable for primary grades. The value of collaboration on material covered can only enhance student learning but the hoops we need to jump through as primary educators is far more difficult then implementing the actual tool!

I am a huge fan of two-way/interactive web learning.But it is sometimes hard for me to keep up with class activities to organize contents we discuss and exchange. Web 2.0 is very active learning tool if I can find the way I organize all the thing I need to remember with my own file. For example, I read some interesting comments yesterday, and now I don't see and remember his or her comments..

I am new to the blogging/social learning way we are experiencing here.  As a result of that, I am so overwhelmed with trying to keep up.

A great virtual community that my class experimented with last semester was Google+ Hangouts. It provides a facebook feel yet has a "private group" where anyone in the group can post to the timeline. It keeps a running timeline of the class, which is pretty cool. I especially love Web 2.0 tools and social networking. In a sense, my generation grew up with it, so it almost feels second nature to me. I'm super curious and excited to see how learning and the world will look like in 10-15 years, when the generation in college and graduating high school starts overtaking the workforce in numbers.

People often knock Wikipedia, but it's an amazing (and I think wonderfully executed) example of knowledge sharing. Thinking about not only how easily it can be accessed to find information, but also how easily it can open pathways to explore other topics. I would never pick up an encyclopedia for one topic and then when I'm finished reading, flip the pages to another random topic to learn more. But on Wikipedia, I constantly click through to other articles to learn more about related (or even unrelated) topics. I'm not sure if it's just the novelty of the tool, but it makes it feel more like knowledge exploration than "learning."

It is true that this open environment invites readers to consider what information is reliable - I wonder if most people just grab the information they find and use it without checking if the content is accurate either due to ignorance or the pressure of time to submit a writing. This open environment should force us to be critical consumers of information.

I believe as educators, we fall short in seeing and expressing the good intentions of open sources. I know that when I was in high school, Wikipedia was deemed "bad!" We were to never use Wikipedia for information, references, etc. when doing research for papers. I think that this article allows us to think about Wikipedia in a new context. Being able to evaluate the credibility of information before relying on it is essential. But the real value is in the collaboration that can go into a Wikipedia page to provide accurate, advance, and up-to-date information. We need to start teaching how to properly use these tools instead of scaring people away!

I like my students to use wikipedia. Often, I will find an article that I know has a bit of misleading information just for the student's to use as an analytical piece. 

We construct knowledge as people. I use the same principle with my students. They appeal to me, albeit in vain, for the answer, but when using the Socrative method, I remind my students that they must come to a consensus on an answer.

Although I cannot find the reference at this moment, I recently read that Wikipedia was as statistically correct as most encyclopedias (maybe it was in my stats class).

There's been quite a bit of empirical research into the teams of people who contribute, edit, etc. Wikipedia entries. For example, one of my favorites looks at how some contributors become a "Wikipedian" http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~asb/papers/bryant_forte_bruckman_group05.html

I agree that the perception of the validity of Wikipedia has improved over time! When I was studying for my Master of Library and Information Science, we found that wikipedia was more accurate than encyclopedias in some cases. However, when working with K-12 students who are looking for the fastest 'information grab'. I still encourage teachers to only allow them to use the references at the end of the article as sources.

@kristiemcgarry +1

It's easy to see how the long tail concept can apply to Web 2.0 learning. As it provides more choices and ways to access information, it becomes easier for the learning to develop and take control of their own education.

Especially with different styles of learners, Web 2.0 tools can allow us to tap into all of the different ways that students learn.

This would illustrate a shift in how we view learning, and I think it'd be a great one. Most students view learning as a task, as a means to an end (like getting a job). But as information becomes more easily accessible and life-long learning can easily be done, learning can be viewed more positively.

I agree with you Jordan. When learning is viewed in a more positive light, it occurs more regularly and is not seen as simply a "task". My dad used to always tell me, "learning lasts a lifetime" and it has sort of turned into a family joke. He calls it our "family motto". We laugh about it since he says it so often, but it is quite true. Web 2.0 supports this and who knows how what we learn and how we do it will change and adapt within the coming years.

The problem is that business leaders and politicians are now constantly releasing statements and publishing articles talking about how learning anything that isn't directly related to employment is a waste of time and money.

Learning for its own sake is highly valuable. We should voraciously pursue it. As Shelby quoted her Dad, learning is one of the best investments you can make in yourself, especially because you will have it for pretty much your whole life.

It was only in Oct'12 that I heard of the term 'open education' which is made possible by internet Web 2.0 technologies and the power of volunteers such that education is no more accessible to those who can afford it. Indeed Coursera, Audacity, etc are platforms for global education - what do you think will happen to future higher ed after watching epic2020.org and witnessing the tsunami of open courses/education

Ivy League schools opening their doors to the world through their open online courses is a very bid deal. I don't really have an answer to your question at all. I just think it is an interesting experiment in democratic education. Some scientific journals are going all-access electronically as well in an effort to improve communication between researchers in the field, and I think one R&D researcher's question (when discussing it on FB) is valid... how is all this being funded, and will it impact the scholarly validity of the research?

This is interesting statement in light of the recent debate over net neutrality.  Currently, users gain access to all search results, but if the FCC has their way then it would be more of a pay per view Internet.  This would drastically impact schools and libraries.   

@kmlambert - yes, this is definitely something to keep an eye on. One would hope that at the very least libraries would be given some kind of special "public interest" exemption if some type of tiered pricing model comes about

I engage in social learning everyday, but most of the time it id done through formal or informal meetings. It is a beautifl tool to utilise when engaging in problem solving, the ability to bounce ideas off of another colleague or here another perspective. Web 2.0 tool magnify the opportunities for social learning as it removes the barrier of persons having to be in the same location at the same time. It also allows for artifacts to be created that can be viewed over time.

This is a great point and a great example of this would be Google Docs. Google Docs has become a super powerful tool in my education as well as my personal and professional lives. I can create a document and share it with whoever I want, and that person can add or edit. This is great for distant learning where students can work on the same document at the same time, from different ends of the world.

I have tended to think that learning is a individual process.  Want to learn how to knit, to drive, to ski, or to solve math problems?  While each activity must be completed by an individual, it is usually only mastered through social learning.   

In my middle school language arts class, we use GoogleDrive/Docs all the time to share and collaborate on writing projects. The kids love to proofread each other's work and comment on how their peers can improve their writing. After implementing the writing process in two ways (traditional pencil/paper and using GoogleDrive) the students definitely put more time and effort into doing their work on the computer!

I feel that this statement on Social Learning best describes my learning style. Reading texts or listening to lectures does not always bring important information into context for me. Instead, I find myself learning more from my peers who are able to "teach" the information in new way/context with added commentary and reflection.

As a librarian, people expect me to slam Wikipedia and other such crowd sourced materials, but I don't. Use the references at the bottom of the page, people! Don't cite the Wikipedia article; click through to the actual source and use that. They are finding your research for you.

Many high school students are unsure of what to pursue in college. Many college students are unsure what to pursue as a major. Even when they graduate with a degree, they might do something completely unrelated to their area of training. Field-specific training is important, but generalizable learning such as critical thinking, communication, and interpersonal skills might prove more effective in raising the adaptability of today's workers as they navigator several careers.

I am definitely not doing what I originally thought I would do or what I did do immediately after graduation. I would also argue that some educational programs don't train you for what you typically end up doing. For instance, most Ph.D. programs in the sciences prepare students to do research in their field, although many end up being teachers with little to no training in teaching. This is beginning to change from what I have seen with some programs adding teaching options or doctoral programs becoming completely dedicated to teaching.

I wonder if the "respect level" or "prestige level" is different for professors who dedicate themselves to teaching when compared to those who dedicate themselves to research.

Last I heard, many people will change careers seven times over their working lifetime.  While there is some componenents that overlap, I am not in a field related to my undergraduate degree.  

I as well am not in a field related to my undergraduate degree. However, my undergrad degree is quite broad, Communications. My full time job is an Education Program Assistant at Penn State, but I do film weddings as a freelance videographer which coincides directly with my undergraduate degree. Filming weddings and videography is more of a hobby and passion of mine, which I probably would not have picked up if it was not for my undergrad degree. I think it is funny that my passion lies within my undergrad degree, but I can't make a solid income with that specific work just yet. Who knows what the future holds though!

iTunesU offers Ivy-league caliber courses free of charge. From worksheets to lesson videos and assignments, these courses are available to anyone with an iOS device and Internet connection.

Yes indeed Open Yale Courses, Harvard Open Courses, etc are sharing their resources freely however the videos are too long (recording lectures) - thus requiring deep linking to specific contents

OER are free, and widely available, but I'm curious about their measured impact on learning. Learning includes assessments, scope, sequencing, and other curricular and standards-based alignnments; the internet is overflowing with information resources but we don't always know how effectively they are being used for student learning.

An interesting side note, Centre County, PA is developing their own OER, called CrowdCourse.  Developed with local partners in collaboration with Centre County Libraries.  See: here: http://centrecounty.crowdcourse.com/

@kristin - good question. B/c this phenomenon is relatively new, there's not a whole lot out there to my knowledge. However, David Wiley is considered one of the leaders in researching this area. He also spoke at a Penn State Teaching Learning & Tech symposium several years ago. http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=M47HR7IAAAAJ

It seems as though some of the MOOCS are courses that used to be offered at a University but then became a free course for anyone to take. Does anyone know how this is decided? Is there a new version the universities are offering/charging for?

I enjoy the iTunes U courses also! :)

Our world has also flattened by our lack of knowledge depth.  We are expected to know a little about a lot and what we don't know be able to find by technological means.  Is it enough to have a knowledge base that is a mile wide and an inch deep?

This reminds me of the quote "To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge" -Copernicus Information being readily available provides us with opportunity to seek diverse as well as in depth knowledge and as a result connections can be made and we are able to grow holistically as individuals. When it comes to long term lasting development, I think it's important to weigh options with a broad perspective; however, I feel as though in depth knowledge that is trade specific aims to assure quality, safety, and efficiency by individuals who have practiced, observed, shared, and as a result improved on their trade which is also essential. Just like a formal learning environment, I feel as though there is a need for unique individuals that rely on each other as a key aspect of enrichment and success in the workforce alike.

I wonder how this though impacts enrollment in technological school.  I ask only because of a recent conversation with an electrician that came to install a new light fixture for me who commented that it is harder to find younger people interested in the vocational trades.  In fact, the average age for the company he worked for was around 38.

This also makes me question many of the technology based policies of school districts. Use of devices within my school is limited severely. Isn't this hindering our ability to prepare students to compete in the modern workforce?

Steve Case, of early AOL fame, was the commencement speaker for UNC's graduation where he tweeted a picture of the class standing after he finished his speech (cool use of social networking especially since he sent it to Duke).  Here he commented that people have multiple jobs and multiple careers so they should keep learning and be flexible. He also recently gave an interview about the internet and its future and offers interesting insight into the potential of Web 2.0 in education.  The article discusses that the only thing holding back the 2.0 revolution is issues with the infrastructure.  His interview can be found here: http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/05/29/2nd-great-internet-revolution-is-coming-aol-founder-says/  

When passion is injected into learning it no longer becomes a chore or a job but an experience.

I totally agree. One of my favorite quotes, which I have featured on every page of my digital portfolio is from William Butler Yeats. "Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire."

I like the idea of "passion-based learning" since this kind of internal exigency produces really strong work from students.

I do too! When anyone is passionate about something it makes it less of a chore and more enjoyable!

Last semester in Design Studio, we experimented with having a "virtual class" in Second Life. It was rather interesting. We all created avatars and met in a building. There was a screen in the building that could be used as a web browser, or to play videos or PowerPoints.This way, students could attend Design Studio in person in a real classroom (and join the virtual classroom) and students from a distance could join the virtual classroom and everyone could be in the same classroom. Having avatars gave a sense of personality to a person, which created a different online learning experience.

This sounds like an awesome course! You met in an actual building? Was this a resident course or is it offered online?

Another great tool not mentioned here is Twitter and the use of hash-tag conversations. I've participated in a number of these and have also found that I discovered other hash tag conversations and weighed in, not knowing the full context. This is a very cool concept because anyone who has a twitter account, which is a lot of people, can find your conversation and join by using the specified hash tag.

Penn State's " Certificate in Educational Technology Integration" is one such course which I wasn't available to in my physical environment.

Embracing challenge for continuous quality improvement/learning.

Scapegoating extrinsic motivation is hardly an excuse to close your mind to the possible benefits of badge systems. Traditional credentialing - high school diplomas or college degrees - are guilty of the same dangling of a carrot. All certification, badges included, acts the same way as stickers once motivated us when our teachers give them to us on our tests back in elementary school. The advantage of badges, however gimmicky to some, is that they are progressively earned and detail all varieties of learning. 

This part I see as valuable. It's like endorsements on LinkedIn. We have to find a way to utilize badge systems like this without insulting the people who want to use a more traditional system. Reformers have a tendency to act like their way is the best way, when really, it's just another way.

Since this system excites learners, why not incorporate it into traditional classroom settings. Using games in teaching motivates students and can be especially helpful for those students who are competitive. I don't think we need badges to see the usefulness of that.

This idea of Badges is an interesting concept. I like the idea of denoting specific skills based on earning badges in that field. I like that the badges can be earned for things such as listening. However, reading that it can be paired with standardized tests makes me question the true validity of the badges. I know that I personally do not test well. I have always done very well in school and on performance projects but when it comes to tests I "freak." Does that mean that in these situations I will be unable to earn a mastery badge because of my poor testing skills?

I think this line is very true. I know when I went to college as an undergraduate, they pushed the idea of being a well rounded student with every requirement that was listed in our degree report. Although it is good to be well rounded in your knowledge, I agree that the main focus should be on job specific skills. The badge system would allow learners to focus on the skills and knowledge they need in order to become the best candidate for the job they wish to do. This would almost turn into a "trade school" approach to learning and as the learner wants to expand their knowledge base, they can specifically focus in on a particular area of expertise.

I have a feeling that I wouldn't want to spend too much time socializing with people who only have the bare minimum of knowledge required to do a job. It would be a very boring cocktail party. If that makes me an elitist or snob, then so be it, but I would rather have interesting conversations. I'm just trying to look at the big picture of how these badge type programs would impact how we interact with each other. Would it further stratify the class system? If so, that's troubling.

The idea of being well-rounded elicits the thought of having the luxury of time to develop skills prior to entering the job market and finding the security of a job waiting.  Conversely, the statement, "they just want to find a job", changes the thought from having time to the imperative need that a job is necessary now.

Yes. I agree. I was in high school for a long time and when my students got a job, most of them told me that they were worried about what made their employer choose my students as employees. Also, most of the company spend lots of money for re-training their employees.(I advocate online badge.:) If we have well-developed badge systems, I think that there will be the change the way people think about badges and higher education.  

Excellent! Ha!

I can see why this is beneficial to employers for computer-programming jobs. Many different programs/courses/trainings are available for many occupations today.. the only real difference here is that you would earn a "badge" once complete. It would be hard to make this universal with the endless programs, certifications, etc. for so many different subjects/reasons/etc.

I agree with this statement. I guess it depends on the field you are looking to get a job in... but I have been told by professors that if a resume is over a page long, sometimes it is not even considered.

This is so true! Education as a whole is an entirely different entity then other professions when it comes to goals.

I love this statement. It sheds so much light on potentially why education is coming to a stagnant standstill. There is too much structure, too much policy, and too many rules.

In the world of English composition there has been some push back against the outcomes movement for some of the reasons mentioned by Siemens, but Chris Gallagher, a writing program administrator at Northeastern University, has written about how "outcomes" language limits what we expect from learners. Instead, he argues for "consequential assessment," which for him is more open to what we hope students will learn, but also what unforeseen positive things can occur. 

#Truth. Competency-based approaches can prove to be a very safe, and very dangerous place at the same time.

Exactly! So why do we think this is acceptable for education??

Agree

I agree also until I understand otherwise :)

Having no clear outcomes could create anarchic, or perhaps apathetic, learning environments. It reminds me of an actor asking the director, "What's my motivation?".

How do we meet our objectives?? With the new evaluations that we are required to submit, we still need objectives and outcomes. This needs to be addressed.

When I was in grad school, a professor explained that librarians were informational curators, especially in relation to the Internet.  With so much available information, librarians (curators) were the professionals that could organize, analyze and filter out the 'bad' information for the user.  

We make our way through the complex information by exploring. Unfortunately, most teachers do not have the time to explore how to access the technology available.

This is a great question and that is an even better rebuttal. Not having the time is so true. Teachers only have so many in-service days and thsoe are usually filled by meaningless information and boring presentations. Their nights are filled with correcting homework, checking tests, reading essays, making lession plans, etc. This is a radical idea but what if we would make our schools a 4-day week for the chilren and leave 1 day for the teachers to prep, explore, and create. I'm sure the kids would like that...

Today's web is very different. It is both more confusing and comples YET extremely easy to navigate. Confusing because of the unreal number of options for just about everything yet easier to navigate and search for what you need. The web Siemens is talking about is the rudimentary, dial-up internet that has changed tremendously since then. Now, anyone can blog, and you don't have to know any html or ftp.

Which can be a very daunting task to many of the "senior" teachers!

I as well have seen this be a stigma in the faculty world. A lot of teachers are accustomed to being "head" in their field and do not like sharing information or reaserach. We are approaching an age where the kids growing up literally share EVERYTHING.

The notion of not sharing information is foreign to me as a librarian.  Information is free and plentiful so why shouldn't it be shared.  Certainly if information was not shared through books, stories, etc where might humanity be without the knowledge of astronomy or medicine that we have today.  

Information is still a commodity, as long as money can be made off of something, we're going to have to keep pushing for full transparency.

This connects with our text Becoming a Networked Learner by Mancabelli and Richardson. It encourages us to seek information but also put it out in the field for others.

I find this interesting because up until this year, our school website did not have pictures of faculty nor did it have updated information. This was an issue that our union fought to correct.

Oh wow, that's crazy that your school website did not have that information up there!

My district still doesn't have pictures up of staff on our website. They have names, positions, and e-mails posted, but no friendly pictures of your child's teacher.

There are plenty of examples of how fast messages can get amplified on Twitter or Facebook, if a user posts a message "Can I get 1 Million likes, RTs for xyz?"  

This is absolutely true. More and more responsibility is falling on the learner/student in today's society, which poses more problmes. How do we engage a student that has no desire to learn or that was brought up in a discouraging environment?

This speaks highly to design, and the advancements in today's web. With site builders, template pages, and communities that do all the heavy technical lifting, learners can focus on progressing vs. traditional troubleshooting.  The gravity of click/fail/recoup seems to be diminished slightly, thus solidifying the importance of wayfinding.