Digital Natives
The above is a little quiz I set up as part of an exercise in creating learning objects. Would be interested if anybody fancied having a go and giving me feedback! It's totally non-scientific... but may or may not be revealing!
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Saturday, March 15, 2008
RIP-ping on Learning Objects
iterating toward openness - RIP-ping on Learning Objects: "I’ve been saying that the idea of LEGO-like assembly of resources simply will not work from a learning perspective. The role of context is simply too great in learning, and the expectation that any educational resource could be reused without some contextual tweaking was either naive or stupid. I will here attribute learning objects’ inability to live up to the incredible hype and investment they received to the fact that the premise of the possibility of simple reuse was simply wrong."
My initial reaction to learning objects is the above. I have to say I'm not 100% keen on this idea of a lot of independent piecemeal learning. It seems to me to be about benefitting the provider of the material and not the student. Where's the scaffolding if you don't allow the learner a sense of building towards an understanding. Their own contextual, constructed understanding - sure - but still within the bounds of some kind of structure. How can we assume that we're all speaking the same language if we don't tread the same route at least to a degree?
I don't know. Learning objects do have a very 'Lego' feel about them....
My initial reaction to learning objects is the above. I have to say I'm not 100% keen on this idea of a lot of independent piecemeal learning. It seems to me to be about benefitting the provider of the material and not the student. Where's the scaffolding if you don't allow the learner a sense of building towards an understanding. Their own contextual, constructed understanding - sure - but still within the bounds of some kind of structure. How can we assume that we're all speaking the same language if we don't tread the same route at least to a degree?
I don't know. Learning objects do have a very 'Lego' feel about them....
Friday, March 7, 2008
What's del.icio.us today...
| Links for 2008-03-05 [del.icio.us] Posted: 06 Mar 2008 12:00 AM CST
|
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Twitter in plain English-ish
Twitter in Plain English:
Not sure what I make of this video to be honest. It does touch on some of the stuff Twitter can do, but it doesn't make it a 'killer app' (busily crosses self for using geek speak in public). There's nothing about sharing resources. Sharing news. Connecting with colleagues. Tagging of entries. Discovering others who have similar interests etc. Sounds mildly socially interesting... but a little bit sad from this description and it's probably the understanding I had of it about a year ago too. The 'why on earth would I want to tell everyone I was drinking tea, they know I've got to be drinking something' disbelief that it could be of any real use to anyone.
Anyhoo, worth a look for an introductory gambol around the delights of Twitter.
Not sure what I make of this video to be honest. It does touch on some of the stuff Twitter can do, but it doesn't make it a 'killer app' (busily crosses self for using geek speak in public). There's nothing about sharing resources. Sharing news. Connecting with colleagues. Tagging of entries. Discovering others who have similar interests etc. Sounds mildly socially interesting... but a little bit sad from this description and it's probably the understanding I had of it about a year ago too. The 'why on earth would I want to tell everyone I was drinking tea, they know I've got to be drinking something' disbelief that it could be of any real use to anyone.
Anyhoo, worth a look for an introductory gambol around the delights of Twitter.
The connected document
H806-08: The connected document [link to password protected site]:
Reflection
"Once you have produced your connected document, you should reflect upon the following questions:"
* Was the time allocated sufficient? Did you produce a completed document? If the time had been doubled, would you have been able to produce a document that was twice as good?
For me, I don't think the time allocated was sufficient, but I think that's due to my tendency to procrastinate and not use the time efficiently. I had too many questions to ask and I feel more comfortable writing about a subject if I have a proper understanding of it, rather than a superficial skim read of several links. I tried to have a systematic approach to finding links but I felt a bit panicked by the time limit imposed and ended up getting distracted and not being focussed enough.
I didn't produce a completed document, mainly because by just finding links I wasn't really engaging with the topic so by the end of it I just wasn't interested enough to maintain enthusiasm for it. I'd have preferred to have written my own version and included references at the end for people to follow up rather than not properly understanding it and padding with links throughout. It was an 'okay' experience, but doubling the time wouldn't have made it any more real or engaging for me. As a means of producing material for others - yes, it was alright. As a means of producing understanding in myself - pretty poor.
* Do you feel that you have gained a good understanding of the topic area? Do you feel as though you could converse about the area with some confidence, or do you think that you have only gained a superficial understanding?
I think I've got a good overview of the topic, but ask me anything of depth and I'd have to go back to the articles I sourced. I tried to skim as many 'good' sources as I could in the time allocated... but in trying to verify and gain reliable sources to connect to, I felt that I couldn't really read any of them properly. Less is more and a further step in which time was given to re-filtering the materials sourced and gaining a deeper understanding would have been better - for me at least.
* How does this way of working compare with a more traditional approach to information sources and documents?
I didn't particularly enjoy it. I can see it might save time if the aim was just to produce a briefing document for someone else and not to enhance your own understanding. But, it felt functional and not fun as far as I was concerned. I like to be able to relate what I'm reading to my life, my context. This didn't do that. Dull. Dull. Dull.
* Given your experience in this activity and in working with the internet in general, do you believe that overall connectivity increases time pressures or decreases them? Are there other working methods and approaches you can think of that might help reduce time pressures?
I think that overall, connectivity can increase time pressures if it isn't managed effectively. Too much information can be worse than too little. Trying to include too many links can make learning a shallow experience. It might reduce time pressures if this were a rushed piece of work - but for me, that's all it would do. It didn't work as an experience and I didn't really enjoy it.
Other working methods or approaches to reduce time pressures? Probably things like spray diagramming, brainstorming, asking myself a pertinent question, thinking about other experiences I've had and moulding my answer to them. At least those methods would make the writing process feel more natural than something as stilted as this. If time pressures are such that learning is compromised in this way, then I would have to question whether the time allocated was correct in the first place.
This experience goes on my 'could do if I had to, but wouldn't necessarily want to' pile.
Reflection
"Once you have produced your connected document, you should reflect upon the following questions:"
* Was the time allocated sufficient? Did you produce a completed document? If the time had been doubled, would you have been able to produce a document that was twice as good?
For me, I don't think the time allocated was sufficient, but I think that's due to my tendency to procrastinate and not use the time efficiently. I had too many questions to ask and I feel more comfortable writing about a subject if I have a proper understanding of it, rather than a superficial skim read of several links. I tried to have a systematic approach to finding links but I felt a bit panicked by the time limit imposed and ended up getting distracted and not being focussed enough.
I didn't produce a completed document, mainly because by just finding links I wasn't really engaging with the topic so by the end of it I just wasn't interested enough to maintain enthusiasm for it. I'd have preferred to have written my own version and included references at the end for people to follow up rather than not properly understanding it and padding with links throughout. It was an 'okay' experience, but doubling the time wouldn't have made it any more real or engaging for me. As a means of producing material for others - yes, it was alright. As a means of producing understanding in myself - pretty poor.
* Do you feel that you have gained a good understanding of the topic area? Do you feel as though you could converse about the area with some confidence, or do you think that you have only gained a superficial understanding?
I think I've got a good overview of the topic, but ask me anything of depth and I'd have to go back to the articles I sourced. I tried to skim as many 'good' sources as I could in the time allocated... but in trying to verify and gain reliable sources to connect to, I felt that I couldn't really read any of them properly. Less is more and a further step in which time was given to re-filtering the materials sourced and gaining a deeper understanding would have been better - for me at least.
* How does this way of working compare with a more traditional approach to information sources and documents?
I didn't particularly enjoy it. I can see it might save time if the aim was just to produce a briefing document for someone else and not to enhance your own understanding. But, it felt functional and not fun as far as I was concerned. I like to be able to relate what I'm reading to my life, my context. This didn't do that. Dull. Dull. Dull.
* Given your experience in this activity and in working with the internet in general, do you believe that overall connectivity increases time pressures or decreases them? Are there other working methods and approaches you can think of that might help reduce time pressures?
I think that overall, connectivity can increase time pressures if it isn't managed effectively. Too much information can be worse than too little. Trying to include too many links can make learning a shallow experience. It might reduce time pressures if this were a rushed piece of work - but for me, that's all it would do. It didn't work as an experience and I didn't really enjoy it.
Other working methods or approaches to reduce time pressures? Probably things like spray diagramming, brainstorming, asking myself a pertinent question, thinking about other experiences I've had and moulding my answer to them. At least those methods would make the writing process feel more natural than something as stilted as this. If time pressures are such that learning is compromised in this way, then I would have to question whether the time allocated was correct in the first place.
This experience goes on my 'could do if I had to, but wouldn't necessarily want to' pile.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
What's del.icio.us today...
| Links for 2008-03-03 [del.icio.us] Posted: 04 Mar 2008 12:00 AM CST
|
Saturday, March 1, 2008
What's del.icio.us today...
| Links for 2008-02-28 [del.icio.us] Posted: 29 Feb 2008 12:00 AM CST
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)