It's all about control...

Who controls the learning environment?

Einstein's blackboard
Originally uploaded by Garrettc

I came across two posts today that seem connected. The first was from an ex-colleague - Now learners control their VLE/LMS. In this post, Naill argues that:

"Much of the criticism levelled at virtual learning environments / learning management systems relates to the control of the environment by the institution rather than the learner. The individual student has minimal ability to upload their own content or to set up collaborative tools unless this has been pre-ordained by the institution..."

I immediately thought of Strathclyde's VLE (currently Blackboard/WebCT) and of Glow.

It has always seemed to me that Blackboard/WebCT is very much about content delivery. I am the one with the knowledge. I'll post it on Blackboard/WebCT. You can access it and benefit from my wisdom. Perhaps a slightly unfair characterisation of our VLE but not entirely without foundation. Although we are currently using Blackboard/WebCT we are about to move to Moodle. Hopefully, when we move, we'll install the Shared Activities module that Naill describes.

Then there's Glow. It has the potential to be about more than a information delivery... but the limited customisation features available are frustrating. Also, it not clear yet how much of the Glow content will be pupil generated... And that brings me to the second post that caught my eye - Growing and Glowing:

"Glow will soon support user blogs and wikis, allowing pupils and classes to create web pages and online diaries to showcase their work to other schools across Scotland. Promoting individualised learning and collaboration, this will be the first time Scotland has had access to a national education blog and wiki service."

I'm not sure about the last bit of that quote but making it easier to get pupil generated content on Glow sounds promising. Of course, Local Authorities can opt out of bits of Glow, so it will be interesting to see how many adopt these new tools and what encouragement or obstacles will help or hinder pupil use.

What do you think? Who is in contol of the content on the VLE that you use?

ECER 2008 - Identification of barriers to Participation in a Practice-based Virtual learning

Live blog from a session at ECER 2008.

Presented by Anthony Michael Coles from Birmingham City University, United Kingdom.

Some of his university's modules have limited face-to-face contact so they rely on Moodle for continuity. Logs imply reasonable level of access but student behaviour suggests engagement is low.

Again, similar advantages and disadvantages as rehearsed in other seminars. (Referenced Joiner 2004.) However Joiner (2004), Kreijin et al (2004) and Frier (1983) suggest the "Nobody knows you are a dog" ideas are not strictly true.

Reasons given for non-participation were not always accurate. For example, students blamed technical difficulties and password problems but usage logs suggest this is not true. Of student's who did not use it, 50% thought they didn't need it. Despite induction training, 25% said they didn't know about it!

Participants who used it were fairly positive about its use for learning but less sure of its value for teaching.

The comment "I may try Facebook as that's how my friends communicate" was interpreted as a confidentiality issue. [Is that right? Is it just that they are doing it elsewhere already? - DM]

Again picking up previous comment, the students wanted to practise social interaction before doing "work". Have to see it as a social space not just a learning space - see Hall, R. (2006). Battery farming or free ranging: towards citizen participation in elearning environments. E Learning 3505-518.

Questions: The university did in fact discover that discussion was taking place between students ... But on their own Facebook sites. [See Creepy Treehouse! - DM] Could it also be the difference between formal and informal learning spaces?

ECER 2008 - VLE Use in Higher Education

Live blog from a session at ECER 2008.

Presentation by Monica Johannesen from Faculty of Education, Oslo University College, Norway.

Actor Network Theory - As inspiration for research questions. This is a theoretical lens that aims to preserve the "hybrid" character of reality - between the technology and the person. It looks at the technology ans societal domains as tightly intertwined. It considers both human and non-human actors and defines an actant as an entity that does things and that works in a network of entities doing the same things. Three key concepts. Inscription: the intended use of an artifact. Translation: when an artifact is put to a new use (e.g. mobile phone used as a torch). Users enrol artefacts for their own interest. Blackboxing - proces where truth is taken for granted and never questioned (but perhaps should be!).

Examined teachers attitudes to multiple choice assessment tools. Looked at the Enthusiast, the Sceptic and the Unorthodox. Looked at uses, attitudes and pedagogical discourses. Perspective on learning - Assumes a behaviourist, cognative and sociocultural perpectives.

Findings. Faculty of Engineering use multiple choice and know when it is not appropriate. The lecturers are clear about what it can do an dwhen to use it. However, the Faculty of Education is very reluctant to use it. Resistant to the idea and do not see it as "fitting" their teaching. See it as the teacher writing the answer for the students instead of making them think for temselves. However, in the Faculty of Nursing, the students are writing multiple choice questions for each uther and distributing them on the VLE. [Brilliant! Looks to me like they are subverting a minimally useful tool and making it extrodinarily useful. - DM] The written comments on each others questions are also included in an assessment portfolio. Students therefore have to know their subject to make good questions.

Engineering as using the multiple choice tool as inscribed and think they know the cntent of the blackbox. The education faculty disagree with the inscribed use and are not interested in the black box. But the Faculty of nursing have transformed the tool and have opened up the black box and are interested in exploring and questionning.

The use of the tool in Nursing happened by accident - the students discovered the tool for themselves and started using it. [Again, brilliant! - DM]

Perspective on VLE Use in Higher Education

Presenter has observed that making material and lecture notes available in advanced changes what happns in lectures. She thinks it allows more discusion and less talking at in lectures. [Not sure about this. I wonder if this has been studiesd at Jordanhill where that sort of thing has been done for a while. - DM] Student sharing of texts is also interesting and could improve learning.

Student sharing shifts responsibility from lecturer to student. Students take responsibility for their own learning.