Taken from Kevin Hickey's Blog entry 13 March 2009
Here are a few quotes comparing web 0.1 and web 2.0
http://joedrumgoole.com/blog/2006/05/29/web-20-vs-web-10/Web 1.0 was about reading, Web 2.0 is about writing
Web 1.0 was about companies, Web 2.0 is about communities
Web 1.0 was about taxonomy, Web 2.0 is about tags
Web 1.0 was about owning, Web 2.0 is about sharingand from http://www.darrenbarefoot.com/archives/2006/05/web-10-vs-web-20.html
Web 1.0 was about lectures, Web 2.0 is about conversation
Web 1.0 was about advertising, Web 2.0 is about word of mouth
Web 1.0 was about services sold over the web, Web 2.0 is about web services
How does participation using the internet and the Web differ from broadcast media such as TV?
The web, in partciular web 2.o tools allow the audience to truly particpate in the creation of knowledge. Individuals contribute to blogs, wikis, social networking sharing information and knowledge to help others form their opinions. They are involved in the process and participate at all levels.
As Anthony posted what he felt to be the key differences.
. interactive - feedback is given to the user which should/could engage them more effectively;
. selective - the user decides what they want to see/hear (not being spoon fed);
. uncontrolled - a tv programme has a beginning and an end and no possibility of deviation; Web2 is anarchic;
. uncensored - the freedom of authorship encourages freedom of content
. immediate - Web2 is now, not scheduled for some time in the future (or past)
. choice - all of the above give the participant the freedom to do as they wish
Berry, A. (2009) H800 les6 09 Week 5 10 March 2009 11:19
And Sharon gave an example of how the internet really will make the audience into producers, unlike TV.
With the internet, there is the potential to create media and so become a producer....
it creates something that is far beyond what the original producer intended.
Obviously, web technology provides far more opportunity for dialogue, but I am
not sure what is really new here. People have been talking to each other for
millenia. The technology is very useful as we can now communicate across the
world rather than just face to face, but we are still cimmunicating in much the
same way (talking and writing) as we ever were.
Tanya McEvoy from another tutor group wroteInternet participation allows you to not only create the content but to also decide how to interact with it and with the others who are involved. And because the broadcast media offers limited ways to participate then the feedback will
generally be limited to those areas. Internet feedback can be more like a
dialogue without the limitations of topic or time.
The broadcast media offer the avenues of participation and you are limited to using them (vote for this participant or watch this match anytime) but the internet allows you to create the way you want to participate.Campbell, J. (2009) H800 les6 09 Week 5 11 March 2009 09:50
Update 15th March
Keith pointed out on the forums that "In week 5, Saloman argues "Different media...exert differential influence on learning" . This is in contradiction to the Grocery Truck analogy, right?" Aquilina, K. (2009) H800 les6 09 Week 5 14 March 2009 09.23
Very good point.
Activity 1
How do you think the grocery truck analogy might be an inappropriate conclusion?
The influence on achievement depends on other things, such as the status of the recipient, what they want to do with the delivery content, what other external factors may effect their application of the content.
Different media will create different reactions in people depending on their perception.
The comparative studies only tested factual recall, I don't think this is a valid way to test deep learning and ability to apply learning.
What about those students who are not in a controlled environment but who are in a conventional teaching environment - what if they seek additional media outside the classroom. The controlled conditions of these tests are not in fact a reflection of reality. You cannot assume that students only learn what happens in the classroom, but also all the other learning processes that happen outside it.
Implications to your own learning
1. Do you prefer certain forms of representation to a greater extent than others? If so, why do you think that is the case?Does this preference apply to everything you attempt to learn or does it vary from one type of learning task to another.
I believe I prefer a combination of representation. If I am learning from a lot of prose, I prefer to print the documents that read off the screen. I also learn from watching moving images (videos.) I learn particularly well from talking and doing. Web simulations, and audio/video conferencing tools help me with this. Web 2.0 tools such as blogs (although a simple diary would be enough) help me with the "talking" bit as I can talk to myself about it. I like diagrams where relevant and like orderly information - so process maps are good. I've recently experimented with mind maps and found this useful but it works better with effectively structured articles. When reading print I need to highlight words and make notes (as above). I cannot just read a document and let it sink in. I like to use Web 2.0 tools as I rarely use a pen anymore and my writing is atrocious.
When I learnt to read music and play instruments in my childhood I learnt from print. When I learnt languages I found I was able to interpret the printed word better than the spoken word however when I learn things now, like music and languages, I find it helps to listen and,, with languages, write out my own interpretation of how you pronounce the word, especially with languages such as Greek.
It depends on the subject, I hate to read about history and never read newspapers, but enjoy watching historical documentaries and sometimes the news.
Saloman rightly points out that it depends also on your schemata, or already possessed knowledge of the subject. I'm finding a lot of these papers on H800 hard to read because I don't know much about the subject and if I was in a lecture about the same subject, in real time, I'd like to think I could stop the lecturer and ask questions if I'm struggling to understand it. Also having had a break from formal learning I wonder if my capacity to interpret the academically written word has declined and needs to be practiced again - a bit like the piano. I can't just sit at the piano anymore like I used to. My fingers have lost the muscle memory of many of the notes and my ability to read music has declined when I play a piece that has a larger number of notes (I mean further up and down the keyboard) but I know that a little dedicated practice should bring it back.
Note any implications to you as somebody who supports learning of others.
My reflections above make me realise that we have to be aware of the representations people have become used to using and the "bad" habits their brains have got into. So we have to help them re-learn how to learn and immerse them back into learning carefully. (I support mature students, average age 35 with at least 10 years out of education, like me). We also need to be aware of the demands students have for new media tools. They keep asking for video because this is what they are used to using in their lives, but we have to be careful with this due to the fact that Saloman found that people don't engage as deeply in interpreting the knowledge with TV over the printed word.
Saloman's interpretation of how the interest will be using in learning, reflects the participation metaphor (cf Sfard) and although this was written in 1997, it is relevant to web 2.0 and how we perceive the potential of web 2.0 in education - nodes of interaction, knowledge, team work, self-motivated learners.
Because the DLMBA is a distance learning course assessment is difficult. Most modules are assessed by either 100% written assignment or 100% written examination. In particular the exam is in contradiction to the philosophy of the MBA in that it's about deep learning, learning from others, application of learning at work. An exam tests recall and to an extend application to a case study, but doesn't test the individuals ability at work. The examination is difficult for people who are writing in a second language, and as I found in a 3 hour exam I did in 2003, hand-writing for 3 hours was very difficult given that I never write anymore. The marker would have found it much easier to mark my work if it had been typed and I may have done better.
We are certainly following the grocery truck analogy on the MBA, in fact it is seen by potential students as an advantage of the 3 variants. "1 MBA, 3 modes of delivery". But this is due to the negative perspectives by employers around the world of a DL MBA over a FT MBA but we're certain this is changing so the market demands this generic approach. Potential and current students seem to worry a lot about what their certificate will say, and we have to be very reassuring that there is just one certificate that simply says the Warwick MBA, not how they achieved it. We are currently using wbsLive (virtual classroom software) to replicate exactly what the lecturers do at the induction day - this article disputes what we're doing. But I could defend we're doing it as part of our long term plan. At the moment we are doing this as part of the process of training and immersing the presenters in the resource for use for real T&L at a future point.
1. What were your experiences and feelings during the session?
As the tutorial only had 5 people it was a nice number of people to manage us all being able to say something and to keep up with the discussion. We did not use any formal “hands up” protocol and just spoke when we were ready. Somehow this worked despite us not being able to see each other.
I think the use of Elluminate for a discussion encouraged active listening. In face to face discussions most people are busy thinking about what they want to say and when they can say it rather than really listening to the person who is talking. I found last night that we were all listening to each other really closely and the following speaker was able to link to what previous speakers had said rather than just speaking their own mind.
The fact that no-one really understood the articles or the questions about them helped in that you didn’t have anyone ready with a predetermined answer who wanted to get their point across. The conversation developed organically from Lesley’s starting point and to Kathy’s first input.
I was positively surprised that we all engaged happily with the audio function and used it; there is something about listening to and concentrating on one person that I found really valuable.
Sometimes we were text chatting at the same time. The benefits of this were that – you could comment on what people were saying while they were talking or if you thought of something you could write it down in case your forgot it. Lesley said she prefers synchronous conversations by text and that it means she can scroll back up and re-read things as she needs. However, I would say that the disadvantage of the texting alongside someone speaking is that while you’re typing/reading you’re not really listening to the speaker. I would also say that you could end up with lots of people typing the same thing at the same time rather than letting one person speak/type one response, and then forming your response on the basis of that first response and so on.
I think the combination of both was good. The text gives those who were nervous of speaking or without a microphone chance to contribute.
One of the Simon’s, at the end, said how by the end he was much more comfortable at hitting the microphone key than he was at the start.
Lesley also said that she doesn’t like to impose any protocols on a group and likes to see it develop naturally. Does this mean that as a group we should set our own protocols? I wonder what everyone else thinks. The discussion last night flowed really smoothly, we even ran out of time, but we did not have a nominated or self-selected chair to keep things moving and keep us to the point, we did not have a speaking order until towards the end when we did start to raise hands to dictate the order of speaking. In f2f discussions body language tends to dictate the natural leaders unless a tutor delegates.
In one of her forum postings Lesley said that Lyceum was less democratic than Elluminate. I have no idea what this means, however by having no leader in yesterday’s discussion it did feel very democratic. We moved forward at a nice pace, we were able to gauge ourselves when to move on but I still think there is a role for a chair just to ensure we keep to the time limits and reach the desired outcomes.
I did notice that the person’s name appeared just above my microphone button when they were speaking so this is a good way of knowing who is speaking, the name goes when they switch their microphone off so you know they’ve finished as you don’t necessarily have the visual clues of someone pausing v. Someone finishing.
2. What did you learn about the Bayne chapter itself?
That everyone was confused by the high level of academic writing in the article and no one was sure how it fitted into e-learning or our roles. It was a very abstract article, with little way of understanding how the cyber identity issue was relevant. However, I was by the end of the discussion able to see how I had changed my cyber identity over the years and how I do have different identities in different forums. Interestingly I didn’t think I was different when we began the discussion. I realised that I used to use a nickname, e.g. for my eBay screen name, but when I started using formal social networking and learning forums I have since signed up to everything as Emma Nugent. After all that’s who I am.
However, in the online diet forums I partake in, I am Livia’smum and not Emma Nugent, this must say something about my need to be professional/formal in some contexts, and informal and “not me” in others. I am labelling myself by my associations with others/priorities in life and not by who I am. But then this has nothing to do with cyber space – I always think it’s strange that when we introduce ourselves and say a bit about ourselves it’s always what we do for a living that comes first, generally, and not WHO we really are.
Were some parts of the session more useful than others?
The discussion about cyber identity really helped me to realise how it applies to me over the years.
3. Can you come to any views about the pros and cons of using Elluminate for this task?
Pros – able to discuss it with others, find out how others think, get support, feel less isolated, help develop understanding through participation, will stimulate further discussion in the forums, whiteboards helped focus our attention and give us a visual stimulus to concentrate on, verbal and text chatting added to the participation, making you feel part of a community more than the forums, breaking down another barrier of distance.
Cons – not having everyone there, now the discussions in the forums are going to move forward at different paces and the session on Sunday will probably be quite different to the one last night. Time limited.
Compared to online forums – I think that these live sessions will add value to the forums, by having “met” people in real-time it breaks down the barriers and may make conversation in the forums more lucid. Hmmm, on our courses we are saying that there is no need for the f2f induction day for the DL MBA students – what does it really add. Perhaps I’m wrong at work, perhaps it does add a lot, if it gets the students more comfortable and confident at communicating online
6. How do you use these tools in your context?
We are already using a similar tool and my experiences as a student using Elluminate on this course certainly feed into me developing more types of sessions with our tool. We’ve only had our tool a year, and only used it for intro and revision sessions, I would not say that it’s been used for learning yet.
Having read about the Acquisition and Participation Metaphors and the Activity Theory I've got the following thoughts and key points
Sfard does not claim that AM and PM are muturally exclusive, in fact, PM rarely exists without some AM first. A combincation of AM and PM bring to forward the advantages of both and pushes back the limitations of each.
There should be more metaphors such as the knowledge-creation metaphor and to crudely categorise things as simply AM or PM was unsatisfactory.
Activity Theory - in elearning control is lost by the teacher to the student. In face to face practice teachers have control over their excellence in teaching. The outcome of the activity system is a change in the learner. In elearning technology the excellence in teaching is limited by the software, which is limited by the norms, skills, etc of the developers. The content developers become involved and have further norms and rules to follow.
However, this does not concur with the findings of Bayne where she found that students felt a lack of control and teachers felt more control over the learners from the perspective of cyber identities.
Activity Theory hlps us to understand how in elearning the activity control is lost by the teacher to the student. In face to face practice teachers have control over their excellence in teaching. The outcome of the activity system is a change in the learner. In elearning technology the excellence in teaching is limited by the software, which is limited by the norms, skills, etc of the developers. The content developers become involved and have further norms and rules to follow.
The author doesn't mention the influence of the students. I feel that in discussion forums a lot of the control over how stable the objective remains is down to the students and the route that their discussion take. In H808 discussions were given more freedom and time to develop and explore different avenues, so far on H800 this has been difficult due to the overloaded nature of the activities. There is no time for deep learning.
Comparing the metaphors to my own learning experiences (from wk 1)a) do all of my examples of learning refer to learning in terms of either acquisition or participation? Learning how to use captivate was acquisition because I just read the instructions, but it was participation in terms of action as in order to establish the learning I had to practice it. Most have a combination of both AM and PM. Surely, how can you learn through PM if you don't have the knowledge acquisition either before or during the Participatory period.
b) Any instances that do not fit into either AM or PM?No.
c) Is your learning process more oriented to you as an individual or to you within a social context? Social. I prefer to learn from doing, sharing and discussing than from reading/listening. It helps to reinforce my learning. Even blogging to me is PM, I'm participating with myself because I don't have a class to "talk" to about what we're learning. I've always learnt more from vocalising what I'm learning, eg explaining to others or simply discussing or sharing information.
Emma Nugent : Yesterday 15:07 Tags: Acquisition Activity Theory Bayne Metaphors My Thoughts Participation Sfard Week 3 Comments (0) Close comments Edit Write follow-up Report a problem
Please wait - comments are loading
Week 3b – further thoughts in the Activity Theory and AM and PM
I was having trouble grasping the concepts in the Sfard Articile and the Activity Theory that was introduced in the course notes and in preparation for the online tutorial we have tonight I've done some further research to try and develop my understanding better.
Articles found
James, M and Brown, S(2005)'Grasping the TLRP nettle: preliminary analysis and some enduring issues surrounding the improvement of learning outcomes',Curriculum Journal,16:1,7 — 30 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0958517042000336782
and
Robertson, I. (2007) "E-Learning Practices: Exploring the Potential of Pedagogic Space, Activity Theory and the Pedagogic Device," Learning and Socio-cultural Theory: Exploring Modern Vygotskian Perspectives International Workshop 2007: Vol. 1: Iss. 1, Article 5. Available at: http://ro.uow.edu.au/llrg/vol1/iss1/5
J&B state that it's important to think in terms of relationships between teaching input and learning output.
They state how metaphors are used in how people theorize about learning and learning processes. They explain Sfard's Acquisition and Participation metaphors more. Learning as acquisition is the dominant view. The PM is a "linguistic turn" where the dynamic activity of doing gives way to the static concept of having. Sfard suggests that "the learner should be viewed as a person interested in participation in activities" as opposed to just collecting possessions of knowledge.
Learning activities are "embedded in contexts" so learning is about "situatedness, cultural embeddedness and social mediation". The emphasis of PM is on discussion, activity, interaction and being part of a community.
In J&B's research, the AM was more prevalent that the PM metaphor, in most cases there were dual approaches and in only 1 was there PM only.
J&B suggest that there should be more metaphors such as the knowledge-creation metaphor and to crudely categorise things as simply AM or PM was unsatisfactory. The theoreiical perspectives that fitted into the AM were extremely varied - constructivist as well as social-constructivist views.
Part of Robertson's article looked at the Activity Theory in relation to elearning and compared how it can be used for F2F and e-teaching.
It has helped me to understand the Activity Theory (AT) better. "Activity is seen as dynamic, contextually bound and the based unit of analysis. Activities are distinguished from one another by the tangible or intangible objects achieved. If the object changes then so does the activity." Tools... mediate between the subject and object... such as physical tools, language and symbols which are created or transformed in the course of the activity" The tools and other factors in the AT are both enabling and limited.
Em's Comment: So we can use the AT to look at what parts of the learning process we need to do an assessment of when reviewing or writing elearning activities.
2nd generation Activity Theory diagram showing the different elements. This shows the theory at a collective level, rules may be explicit or implicit; division of labour refers to the explicit and implicit organisation of the community. Third generation Activity Theory brings in the concept of boundaries and where two of more activity systems come into contact there may be tensions.
In f2f teaching the teacher is mostly responsible for the development and delievery of the teaching programme and it is adapted to some extent based on the responses of the learners behaviours and is adapted by the teacher. The teaching is influenced by the text books used and the cultural norms of the institution and the discipline they work in.
F2F annotated AT diagram
In elearning activities control is shared by many groups involved in design and delivery of the teaching. The norms and behaviours of the software developers is influential and that of content developers. The division of labour in elearning activities is divided between many people. Here is the diagram annotated with the elearning activity.
Based on the elements of generation two Activity Theory Mwanza and Engestrom (2003) describe an eight step model to guide researchers using Activity Theory.
1. Activity: What sort of activity am I interested in?2. Object(ive): Why is the activity taking place?3. Subjects: Who is involved in carrying out the activity?4. Tools: By what means are the subjects performing the activity?5. Rules and regulations: Are there any cultural norms, rules or regulations governing the performance of the activity?6. Division of labour: Who are responsible for what, when carrying out activity and how are those roles organised?7. Community: What is the environment in which this activity is being carried out?8. Outcomes: What is the desired outcome from carrying out this activity? (Mwanza & Engestrom, 2003)
The author helps us to understand how in elearning the activity control is lost by the teacher to the student. In face to face practice teachers have control over their excellence in teaching. The outcome of the activity system is a change in the learner. In elearning technology the excellence in teaching is limited by the software, which is limited by the norms, skills, etc of the developers. The content developers become involved and have further norms and rules to follow.
Em's Comment: the author doesn't mention the influence of the students. I feel that in discussion forums a lot of the control over how stable the objective remains is down to the students and the route that their discussion take. In H808 discussions were given more freedom and time to develop and explore different avenues, so far on H800 this has been difficult due to the overloaded nature of the activities. There is no time for deep learning.
My thoughts on this activity
I have found these articles and theories very hard to understand. They are written in a very academic language which I do not understand. We are expected have an understanding of these theories in time for an online discussion on Wednesday night. I am hoping that the elluminate session will illuminate me.
----------
Research shown that students' conceptions of learning as they develop as students changes , and at the end of their studies they were different people to what they were at the start. Being more or being different."An activity is undertaken by a human agent (subject) who is motivated toward the solution of a problem or purpose (object), and mediated by tools (artifacts) in collaboration with others (community). The structure of the activity is shaped and constrained by cultural factors including conventions (rules) and social divisions (division of labor) within the context. Engeström emphasizes the mediational role of the community and that of social structures including the division of labor and established procedures.
All the elements of this system are continuously changing. The human beings not only use instruments, they also continuously adapt them, consciously or otherwise. They obey rules, but also transform them. They follow rules of division of labor but in doing so constantly help evolve them as well. Transformation is then crucial to this model – and the interplay between the various elements constantly leads to the various new outcomes being created. " Rajkumar, S (no date) Activity Theory http://mcs.open.ac.uk/yr258/act_theory/ accessed 24th February 2009
8. Would the different subject positions of teachers in the learning activity system help to explain their reactions and feelings of control? The teacher is part of the community or even one of the instruments in helping the subject get to their outcome so they can influence the other subjects.
9. Does a teacher's position in authority within the community mean that they feel more confidently able to exert a particular teacherly persona using online contributions?> Yes
| AM | PM | |
| Individual Enrichment | Goal of learning | Community building |
| Acquisition of something | Learning | Becoming a participant |
| Recipient | Student | Peripheral participant, apprentice |
| Provider, facilitator, mediator | Teacher | Expert participant, preserver of practice/discourse |
| Property, possession, commodity | Knowledge, concept | Aspect of practice/discourse/activity |
| Having, possessing | Knowing | Belonging, participating and communicating |
In Canada, the impetus came from a commercial drive for one Rail Company to make the experience of using their trains better to compete with another company providing the same service. It soon struck them that they had the potential to use the radio on the trains for educational purposes and it became a philanthropic motivation. The design was mainly passive, listening and writing into the broadcasters.
In South Africa, the impetus was purely educational and to help achieve the aims of universal education and universal literacy and numeracy. The Audio project was used to develop the teachers and the students. The design was active and interative, teachers facilitated the learning in the audio lessons with print, posters and activities.
Of course, different teachers/departments/institutions will see different uses for the same technology appropriate to the current circumstances.
Widening access to education
New technology for the time and place at the time
Lack of support
Keeping funding and engagement in the resources
Canada – competition
SA- Widening access to education, other ICTs were not readily available
Canada - unsure
SA – constructivist, mulitchannel
---In supporting academics to adopt technologies I have learnt that you need to make sure they have good support in implementing a new style of teaching – as in the SA case. Mulitchannel support to make it most effective.
I also liked the idea of the Interactive radio lesson design and I could see this working with podcasts and course materials on the DL MBA.
