As we have not shared our roles in group it is difficult to read something concrete from theoretical material. So I write here just few short comments/thought about reading materials.
• One main question in elearning is probably: what supports intrinsic motivation? And there is no concrete answer. At one point while reading theoretical material I felt that this material is about everything and nothing at the same time. Although materials write that this is important I did not find good answer how to support intrinsic motivation.
• The importance of attention can not be underestimated. Learners participation supports this attention needed. The content and the way the content is reflected or brought into experience and the environment where it is happening are very important to get the students attention.
• HOTS-model I did not like. Don’t even know why, seemed kind of not finished.
• Fischer compared human and technology-based learning and this shows that technology is great enabler, but the question is how to use these possibilities what technology offers. At one point Fischers model seemed not objective and a bit favour of technology based learning. But this was still good reading.
• Online learning is still in its early infancy (Fahy, P. J). - and so is the theory behind it. This is very important to keep in mind.
• Garrison, Anderson, and Archer model about "community of learning" I found brilliant.
• Getting the mix right between opportunities for synchronous and asynchronous interaction, and group and independent study activities remains a challenge (Daniel & Marquis, 1988; Anderson, 2002) - this is also good to keep in mind. But again: from theoretical point it is good to know, but how to bring this into good practice?
Very often small (practical) tricks (behind the theory) will do the game. Sometimes if everything seems so complicated and "challenging" some small tricks / activities (without any deeper theory behind it) can help. I was looking from materials something similar. But probably my expectations are too high and I need to remember that "Online learning is still in its early infancy".
• Most online students are practical adults with much competition for their time; thus they are unlikely to participate in activities that are marginalized or viewed as supplemental to the course goals and assessment schema (Anderson) - goes together with learner participation and attention.
• … how these instructions guide students on both the quantity (“two substantive postings” per discussion question) and the quality of contributions expected - Levines assessment framework) - this was one practical thing I read (so 10 points for that) and this goes together with Terjes reflection. I not sure whether I like the quantity part - learning must always be qualitative change. I'm not sure whether quantitative measures are the best way to reach/create qualitative change. Assessment is always very complicated.
• In learning process rapid feedback is important - so there must be somebody who will give you the feedback (and has some authority) and it means that teacher/facilitator can not be equal as students (they never can because of the power)! Power-issue has followed me for a long time. As like very much the idea that facilitator is part of learning group (equal member of the group), but I'm not sure whether this can happen in real life. Only if facilitators delegate their power, but I'm not sure that this is a good idea. With power there is always a question of responsibility and competence. So this is a tricky one!
• Formalising reflective learning outcomes takes time. It is good, but if you want to do it in qualitative way, you have to take into consideration that this takes a lot of time! If you just write something quickly then this formalisation does not justify itself.
How far away is theory from practice…
2 comments:
Interesting reflection...I want to say something about power-issue. I think we are moving towards the situation, where the roles (student, facilitator) are not very clearly defined anymore. I personally don't like the idea that the reason lies behind power..this refers very much to "old-school" approach...
Everybody talks about growing information and the inability to know everything and I think this is inevitable that facilitator knows everything....so from my point of view we can talk about more learning in communities, where the central power and responsibilities are distributed...
Well, i agree and disagree at the same time :). I don't have answers, just some thought to continue this dialogue.
If we take the institutional part also into game :).
Institutions (universities) will give students some certifications (diplomas) what "proves" some skills, knowledge and attitudes. They need to be sure that the learning quality in communities remain the same or get higher. They can not in the competing world allow themselves to loose that. If in learning community is distributed responsibilities and central power then how can institutions guarantee the quality of their certification?
There are many reasons why people learn - one of them is getting some certification, other to gain some new knowledge. If I want to gain some certain new knowledge I will look for a good teacher of facilitator with whom I can learn together. But I still want to have a teacher who has more knowledge and/or experiences (who is more competent) than I do. I don't expect from this teacher to be an expert in everything nor to be the only source of the truth, but I still wait form him/her to have something extra as I do, to guarantee the quality of learning. And this gives to the teacher the kind of power over me. Not old-school power, but this is the role I as a student (want to) give to the teacher. This does not mean that we shouldn't plan our learning together or discuss different things (theory around elearning offers more questions than answers) or that the teacher can underestimate me.
I like one translation of "competence" in estonian langue: pädevus. 'Pädevus' has two different meanings - first: persons knowledge skills and attitudes (what we can observe form behaviour); second: power - some rights (are given to somebody to perform certain things). In ideal world these two go.
Of course the information is available to almost everybody - but the core question is how to handle/understand the information.
Sry, kind of hectic thought, but still ...
Post a Comment