Alec Courous has been an open educator (on outcome/user of netgl) for quite some time. This post summarises how that experience has been abstracted into a framework (a set of principles/guidelines) for teaching an open course.
This has some significant connection to Assignment 2.
For netgl you won't be doing "full/real" DBR. It won't be iterative and you won't be doing the development and implementation stages. Just the analysis and design. Mainly due to time constraints.
One of the challenges you'll face is identifying the design principles that will underpin your intervention. It is important that these design principles be based on good "theory"
Identifying what your problem is and how other people have understood it and how they have attempted to solve it, is a very useful first step in the analysis phase.
Hence the peer review element in Assignment 2. Actively trying to encourage you to share your ideas and approaches with others, from both within and outside the course.
This is a week where you are meant to explore the areas of NGL that you need to explore before finalising how you're going to apply it to your learners
Whether DBR is the only research method/approach mentioned here, or even it is the one mentioned is still a little open. I do have a personal preference for this. But may be open to flexibility.
The idea is to require some form of peer feedback on your essay. Whether it's in the form of a writers' workshop is to be resolved. It's a great process, but the reality of how to implement it in this course is to be decided.
Short post focusing on the problem of "integrating" as the most dangerous word in education. Links to the S & A from SAMR and the R & A from the RAT framework
What this means from a network perspective is at least two-fold.
1) Take all these neat new netgl stuff and integrate it into current educational practice. Which is probably not going to be a great outcome. It's more about what you can fundamentally change.
2) From a network perspective you have to connect new knowledge into your current knowledge (current network). Isn't that a form of integration? If learning is network construction, can you do anything but integrate? Or does integrate suggest a form of network construction where you haven't really leveraged the new knowledge & your existing knowledge to produce something really unique?
In brief, the evolved form illustrates three kinds of aggregation of learners in either formal or informal learning: groups, networks, and sets. We originally conflated sets with a further emergent entity that is not a social form as such, which we have referred to as the collective
the tutor can respond directly to questions, adapt teaching to the learner’s stated or implied reactions, and the learner can choose whether to intervene in the course of his or her own tuition without contest with others (Dron, 2007
one-to-one dialogue represents an “ideal” form of guided learning, at least where there is a teacher who knows more than the learner and is able to apply methods and techniques to help that learner to learn
t continues to play an important role in network forms of sociality because of the essentially one-to-one edges between nodes that lead to what Rainie and Wellman (2012) refer to as “networked individualism”—
However, one of their defining characteristics is that their members are, in principle and often in practice, listable.
For me, this category is where all of Riel and Polin's (2004) types of community fit. The notion of community (as per Riel and Polin) doesn't capture the full set of possibilities that are observable on in netgl
People may be unaware that they are part of a set (e.g., people with a particular genetic marker), or they may identify with it (e.g., people who are fans of football or constructivist teaching methods).
In my context "as teacher" - helping other academics learn how to learn online - the Set may be one of the missing considerations in staff development.
i.e. all of those people teaching huge first year university courses could be said to belong to a set. Yet there is - at least at my institution - very little sharing/engagement/learning within this set. Most of it occurs within their group (e.g. the school of education) even though chances are that someone teaching a large first year education course has more to learn from someone teaching a large first year accounting course than from someone teaching a Master of Education course with 12 people in it.
Group-oriented systems tend to provide features like variable roles, restricted membership, and role-based permissions. Network-oriented systems tend to provide features like friending, linking, and commenting. Set-oriented systems tend to provide tools like topic- or location-based selections, tags, and categories.
The design of the technology you use can be very important. Trying to create network learning with a group learning tool (e.g. Moodle) can be difficult. One of the reasons why this course has moved to using an open blog, rather than Moodle.