Monthly Archives: November 2011

#Change11 How would a Shift of Framework help? A New Model for Understanding Time in Pedagogical Contexts

I enjoyed reading this Multidimensional Facets of Time in Online Learning by Pekka Ihanainen and John W. Moravec.

Ihanainen and Moravec provide a typology of Learning:

1. Temponormative Learning

2. Pointillist Learning

3. Cyclical Learning

4. Overlapping Learning

I am particularly interested in how they have elaborated on each category of  learning.  Here are my short notes.

Pointillist learning - Pointillist behavior and learning implies an ability to tolerate the insecure, uninterrupted, un anticipated and obvious absurdity of the “moment,” but at the same time it indicates a capacity to differentiate the essential from the unessential and to perceive the whole from fragments, almost as a fractal construction of personal experiences and understanding.  Such fractal construction of personal experiences and understanding also resonates with what I describe here, here and here.  I would like to expand this fractal construction in future research, where learning as conversation and social interaction could be viewed and conceptualised in a holistic perspective, under an ecology, or an experience in MOOC.

Pontillist pedagogy is the pedagogy of serendipity.  This sounds useful and I would like to relate to my experience here, here and Carmen’s post here where she reflected beautifully: Stepping out of a normal routine, finding novelty, being open to serendipity, enjoying the unexpected, embracing a little risk, and finding

In such a scenario, learning happens in instances and waves, independent of a definable pedagogical time.

In the overlapping Learning – “Pulsating waves of new knowledge generation within the learning group, beyond the learning group, and in the spaces between.”

I have conceived knowledge and learning as waves here, and so I would like to see if the Temponormative Learning, Pointillist Learning, Cyclical Learning, and Overlapping learning be metaphorically conceptualised as different waveforms, based on fractals and chaos patterns, where the different temponormative waves, pulsating waves and cyclical waves meet, causing interferrence and or resonance in the media, under sets, nets, groups, or collectives, and thus exhibiting different patterns under a Chaordic (chaos and order) ecology.  This requires further research and validation :)

 Picture: Google images

De-pedagogy means that as facilitators of learning, we have to give up our role as teachers and start working as colearners and peers within our own pointillist environments.  This sounds challenging to those facilitators who are accustomed to the instructivist paradigms – as sage on the stage, with lectures as the primary approach towards knowledge dissemination.

In reflection, I would like to dig deeper into our previous research here to see how the different learning pans out in CCK08, and subsequent MOOCs.

I would surely be excited if  Pekka Ihanainen and John W. Moravec include more empirical and grounded research findings and claims to their model.

It could be interesting to research into this learning typology with the Change11 MOOC.

I would surely like to respond to their challenge: “So in lieu of a conclusion, we leave educators—particularly online educators—with a challenge: Afforded the post-temponormative enabling of online environments, how can we best leverage these opportunities of pedagogical time to facilitate multidimensional learning and meaningful new knowledge production?”  How about you?

Reference:

Mak, Sui, Fai, J., Williams, R. & Mackness, J. (2010). Blogs and Forums as Communication and Learning Tools in a MOOC. In Networked Learning Conference, Aarlborg (pp. 275-284). Retrieved from http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/Mak.html

#Change11 A Pedagogy to Support Human Beings

What is a pedagogy that could support human beings?

That is the research topic that Rita, Hélène and I have been working on this year.

My sincere thanks to RitaHélène for their great research efforts and  support.

Rita Kop and Hélène Fournier
National Research Council of Canada

Here is the paper published in IRRODL: A Pedagogy of Abundance or a Pedagogy to Support Human Beings? Participant Support on Massive Open Online Courses.

Looking forward to your comments and discussion to our paper.  Everyone is welcome.

You will find all other papers published in this special issue - Emergent Learning, Connections, Design for Learning of IRRODL.

#Change11 Creativity, Constraints and Design

Quite a lot of fantastic ideas popped up, relating to constraints and creativity, as shared by Jenny.

I think the ChangeMOOC type of MOOC – if it wants the creation of artifacts – needs to look to MOOCs like ds106 and see what can be learned from them and I don’t think that the ‘constraints drives creativity argument stands up’. So where are the ChangeMOOC artifacts and what are the reasons for participants’ reluctance to produce them? Including me ☺

She has also posted here relating to getting the balance right  between soft and hard technologies.

I will respond to her questions in another post later, but now I have been thinking about “Repurposing ( creation – ‘we want you to create something of your own’)”

What would “we” want to create of our own?  If it is a wiki development, then some participants have already set up their own, and are working with others.  There are wikis built here (here (with pageflake)), developed for classes, and wikis in particular areas.  There are participants who created blog posts, and or the production of videos and podcasts (as in DS106), slideshare, flickr photos, or concept maps.

Stephen in his post on Engagement and Motivation says:

I find that many traditional measures – such as counting attendance or page views – do not account for the sort of engagement we’d like to see, and is demonstrated for example in ds106. In addition, provision of the ability to determine one’s own educational path or even to satisfy one’s other motivations, may be necessary, but are not sufficient, to support motivation in MOOCs. In the end I consider the example of how motivation is created in gaming environments, and wonder whether MOOCs need challenges and the possibility of failure in order to stimulate student engagement.

I like Stephen’s mention about “satisfying one’s other motivations, may be necessary, but are not sufficient, to support motivation in MOOCs”.

First, motivation to me could be very different from that motivation for others, and thus could be idiosyncratic in nature.  What makes it fascinating is that both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are essential factors towards success in MOOC.  There are however, network dynamics which accounted for such motivation to create artifacts, or posting and commenting on each others, as observed in past MOOCs.

Second, encouraging creativity is essential in Online Courses.  In this Encouraging Creativity in Online Courses by Stephenie A, Clemons: Giving students opportunities to be creative means allowing them to find and solve problems and communicate ideas in “novel” and “appropriate” ways (Starko, 1995).

As summarised in this post by edtech, a balance between hard and soft technology is necessary to create the learning environment for learning in MOOC.

I found Jenny’s claim resonating: Constraints are not enabling creativity, but definitely stifling it. Yes, I have similar experiences, due mainly to the power constraints. An example was the use of ConnectivismEducationLearning Ning. We had no choice but to leave it as we couldn’t afford to pay the fees. Haven’t we got the creativity to develop our network community?

How to respond to those issues and challenges relating to creativity?

“To appease the masses, we could water-down the extremity of our ideas to fit into the creative categories of ideas that just support incremental forward progress, to maintain more of the status quo. Society would probably be more accepting of less radical, mediocre ideas versus ones that shake up the current ideology. So in a sense, to be a “good, peaceable member of society”, one that teachers love and employers want, the best we should strive for is to reach the highest level of mediocrity possible.”

How to balance soft and hard technology? That is still a challenging problem in networked learning.  We still need people to “temper” the technology, and educators to fulfill the roles of ensuring and supporting an appropriate balancing act when navigating the networks and teaching and learning with the learners in such technology platforms or media.  What sort of examples do we have in such balancing acts?