The Future Education Course

Here is my response to Future of Education Course led by George Siemens and Dave Cormier.

I have followed part of the conversation.
Using a course to discuss about education futures do require some consensus on the process to adopt. This is quite a challenge as some participants might have a “best practice” approach or experience in such education future research, whilst others might be figuring about how such “wisdom of the crowds” approach could work. The various suggestions of using Delphi, Drupal, etc. are examples of tools and techniques. However, would this way of discussion be confined to a networking approach where the discourse stays at the “theoretical level” if no consensus are made? It would be very difficult to form into groups to actually implement those suggested drupal research.

A course which is decentralised is great for brainstorming ideas, generating possible senarios of education, and sharing and debating different ideas and models, but could be difficult to come up with a pattern of education future which is reflective and evaluative, unless there are concrete adaptive evaluation tools which could be developed or emerged out of the network.

As every participant has his/her own views, perceptions, and experience about education, so such evaluations may only make sense if individuals are to formulate their visions of future. This could be achieved by individuals sharing such visions in their blogs, followed by further conversations in the forum to share and reflect on, so as to arrive to some common themes and pattern that networkers could recognise.

About the course:
I think it depends on what individuals want to achieve through such a course, based on negotiations amongst the participants, rather than the pre-determined outcomes of the course, which are highlighted as what is expected from the course, if the course designer and facilitator wishes to achieve an optimum outcome which is based on network principles. However, if you want to discuss the education future using a formal or “traditional” approach of defining the objectives first, then certain levels of facilitation and structure would be needed, in order to guide the participants through a Delphi or Drupal approach towards “best practice”. One could also relate to the Horizon Report which provides some framework on how technology enhanced education could be envisioned.

Would participants view these “framework” or “suggested best practice” as constraints or too limited in the sharing of views? Or would they value the suggestions as “expert” views towards best practice? We are aware that education future is both complicated and complex in nature due to the uncertainty future. Without considering the cultures, contexts, and local needs, it wouldn’t be easy to come up with any concrete ideas about what may be best about our education system. This is both a challenge and opportunity for participants and facilitator to share their “international perspectives” based on global network.

So, would it be important to reconsider what is important in the design of a course using a network structure first? This would enable each of us (facilitator and participants) to rethink what it means when discussing an important, though complex subject.

What are the needs and expectations of participants when engaged in such an open network structure? What motivate them to explore about education future? What are their utopian view of education future? Have they already got such visions? What are the context of such visions? What are the implications?

In summary, I don’t see it easy to share an open and complex topic on education future based on a network/course hybrid approach.
Further discussion and sharing may be based on (a) what an open course could offer in the discussion of education future, (b) how such discussion could be consolidated, and researched with the possibility of group research and research community, (c) the merits and demerits of using such approach in tackling complicated and complex topics.

I have written a post on future education.

John

What does Awareness, Social Presence and Connectedness mean?

Justin wrote an Interesting post on Awareness, Social Presence and Connectedness.

Is a blog successful if it draws many visitors? May be.

Would it depend on how one defines success?  Many visitors (bloggers or readers) may just visit a blog without any comments, despite its content and concepts wonderfully insightful.  Why?  Not all visitors would like to comment or evaluate a blog post.  Different visitors could relate to different blog posts, depending on the interests of the visitors. Also, many academic bloggers use blogging as a means of reflection, not necessarily for the sole means of attracting others to visit. So, a blogger may be very successful in achieving his/her learning goals by thinking out half-baked ideas aloud, and reflecting on such ideas with his/her experience in the blog posts.  This could indeed form part of the awareness that Justin mentioned.

My experience as a blogger hinted that it would be important to develop posts that could both reflect my thoughts and experience and connect with others.  It would be a bonus if some one is connected with me, and thus forming a sounding board which helps me to understand others’ perspectives and thus share further experience.

Such connections are normally weak initially (the weak tie), and the bonding could be strengthened when the nodes (the blogger and visitor) find some common interests, or resonance, leading to further exchange of views and insights.

Relating to the social presence, I think Dave White’s visitors and residents may be of interest.  Social presence would also relate to one’s identity with the network.

As computer-mediated communication has evolved a more relational view of social presence has emerged. Social presence has come to be viewed as the way individuals represents themselves in their online environment. ^[4] It’s a personal stamp that indicates that the individual is available and willing to engage and connect with other persons in their online community. Social presence is demonstrated by the way messages are posted and how those messages are interpreted by others. Social presence defines how participants relate to one another which in turn affects their ability to communicate effectively. ^{[5] (from wikipedia/social presence theory)}

As a blogger, I have found myself involved in a number of social media, like Facebook, Twitters, and YouTube, Pbworks, and Ning etc., apart from my presence in the typical emails, Google Readers, and Flickr and Slideshare.

I see my social presence as defined by my interests in that particular network or media space, and the significance of my learning as a result of interaction and communication with the networkers or artifacts that are left as traces.  Ones social presence is then a relative concept when relating to the media one is associated with, which to me is dependent on the degree of participation, interaction one is having at different stages of our life long learning journey.  It is also a dynamic concept as one morphs through the different media and communication channels, in response to ones’ needs and at times in response to other networkers’ needs. That is also my social identity, based on the social identity theory.

I like to refer to previous research findings, except that I would prefer to quote more recent researches that are based on Web 2.0 rather than those in the pre-internet era. Also, exploration and research to validate the principles and pedagogy that are often related to the  Web 2.0 interaction are crucial to success in understanding how the media has changed us, and how we have changed the media.

Connectedness based on social media is quite different from the face to face and traditional media, so do you think reference to more recent researches could help?

The Ecosystem (source flickr)

My 400th post – on changes

Here is learning to change, and changing to learn

This video was posted two years ago.  Have there been changes within the last few years?

What changes do you think are critical?

If you are to evaluate the changes in your institution:

Can you rate them from 1-5?  1 – no change, 2 – little change, 3 – moderate change, 4 – some major changes, 5 – big changes. What are the implications of each change?

1. Systemic changes 1 – 5  Your rating ___________

2. Changes in technology enhanced teaching/learning in/outside class: Learning Management Systems or Virtual Learning Environment: e.g. use of LMS (Moodle, Blackboard), Smartboard, connected classroom, Elluminate, UStream, Adobe Connect, emails, Institution based wiki, blogs etc.   1 – 5  Your rating ___________

3. Changes in teaching/assessment methods: lesson, tutorials, projects, elearning, e-assessments, e-portfolios.  1 – 5 Your rating _________

4. Changes in use of social media/immersive virtual environment/virtual games: e.g. Twiiter, Facebook, Youtube, Second Life. 1 – 5  Your rating ___________

5. Changes in personal learning.  e.g. using PLE (Personal Learning Environment) amongst students: Public Blogs, wikis, Google Doc,  Twiiter, Facebook, Youtube, Second Life, learning communities/networks.  1 – 5  Your rating ___________

You could respond with a video, a blog post, or a slideshow, or just a comment.  I would greatly appreciate that.

from a post

If you have scored 5 to all five questions, congratulations!  Please let me know the details.