#Change11 A discussion on the Pedagogy to support Human Beings Part 2

This is Part 2 of the response  to the post on Daily Discussion.

How would we determine if a pedagogy is good or bad?  May be this requires further reflection on what is a good pedagogical approach, from different points of views.  The power game could make a good pedagogy losses its attraction and traction, and a weak pedagogy might alternatively stimulate people to learn differently, because when people are not satisfied with the teaching strategies or supporting structure, they may turn to other means of learning in order to compensate for those deficiencies as described in the paper, or they may leave the course, and that is also a choice for learners.  In response to Jenny’s post on Constraints and Change in Change11 MOOC, Brainy says:

“Isn’t each learner responsible for *choosing* or developing a level of structure in learning that works for him or her?

I believe that #change11 is well designed for considerable openness as well as some structure (The Daily, the live sessions, the speaker line up, etc.) To me, this is more than enough structure “to kick against”.

I agree that there is a lot going on in #change11. It may be too much for those who aren’t used to it, I guess, and they vote with their feet and leave. This is totally fine in my books, since I believe one can enter and exit gracefully from a learning experience at any time.”

So, I think it all depends on the needs and expectations of the participants.  To those who want to become beginning teachers or online educators, and are new to the MOOC, there are plenty of choices for them to consider.  Lisa’s approach towards pedagogy first may be excellent for them to pursue.

For advanced learners or veterans, the Do-it-yourself, self-directed and self- paced independent learning approach may be more appropriate, as I have summarised here.   Can you tinker with it? Yes, I think we can. What is most important is to explore the assumptions behind any tinkering, based on pedagogy, technology.  The not too hard, not too soft, just right approach in MOOC  and orchestration of phenomena for some use, where Jon says: “It can thus become many technologies. On reflection, and looking at the video, I realise that it was a mistake to describe the stick itself as a soft technology it is not. The stick is a part of a great many (probably an infinite number) of soft technologies.

I think that this cuts to the heart of a great many of the mistakes that we make when we talk about learning technologies. We often make the assumption that, because the same thing is involved from one context to the next – a learning management system, a discussion forum, email, a whiteboard, a classroom, a teaching method, etc – that we are talking about the same technology. We are not.”

To this end, I think it sounds similar to the Yin and Yang in the use of technology here and here. The affordance of technology is based principally on the evolving Yin and Yang, and how you “manipulate” technology to accomplish the task, solve the problem, or to connect to the nodes or networks, thus creating, navigating the networks (distributed knowledge and learning) both creatively and sustainably.

“The authors conclude that “meaningful learning occurs if social and teaching presence forms the basis of design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive processes for the realization of personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes,” reiterating the need for independent and motivated participants (who each play both teaching and learning roles) and that while such large networks have strong learning potential, the reality of its achievement depends on both the motivation and experience of the participants and the acceptance of a knowledge network as a legitimate learning space.”

It all depends on what we (you and the facilitators) want to achieve, and how our mission or goals would be achieved through a MOOC.  As our paper highlighted: “The challenge in a MOOC is whether the levels of support by facilitators and other learners and the affordances of a complex emerging learning environment will align and aid participants in such sense-making, and whether the openness, diversity, and interactivity of MOOCs aids participants on their personalized learning journey.”

Picture: Google Image


9 thoughts on “#Change11 A discussion on the Pedagogy to support Human Beings Part 2

  1. Pingback: #Change11 A discussion on the Pedagogy to support Human Beings Part 2 | Educación a Distancia (EaD) | Scoop.it

  2. Pingback: #Change11 A discussion on the Pedagogy to support Human Beings Part 2 | E-Learning-Inclusivo | Scoop.it

  3. Pingback: #Change11 A discussion on the Pedagogy to support Human Beings Part 2 « juandon. Innovación y conocimiento

  4. Pingback: #Change11 A discussion on the Pedagogy to support Human Beings Part 2 | UkrEL11 | Scoop.it

  5. Pingback: #Change11 The Yin and Yang in Life, Education and Learning | Learner Weblog

  6. Pingback: #Change11 #CCK12 Technology in Teaching and Learning Part 1 | Learner Weblog

  7. Pingback: Are adults naturally self-directed learners? Part 2 | Learner Weblog

  8. Pingback: #Change11 #CCK12 Technology and design in teaching | Learner Weblog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s