As a learner, participation in NGL was useful for me as it pushed me out of my comfort zone; a push that was necessary if I was to continue to meaningfully contribute to the learning process. I have two reasons for saying this: firstly, experiencing NGL as a learner is a valuable way of understanding the process from the learner’s point of view; secondly, this task provided an opportunity to reflect on the path I took as a learner and gain insight into my personal learning patterns, and how they can affect the way I negotiate, interact with and construct knowledge (Siemens, 2005; Downes, 2011). I chose to pursue the goal to become proficient in the use of Collaborate Ultra, an improved version of Blackboard Collaborate - a web conferencing tool that is a part of Blackboard Learning Management System (LMS)(Blackboard, 2016). The Higher Education institution that I work for is updating the conferencing tools available to staff; learning this skill would fulfill a dual purpose: acquisition of a relevant professional skill and provide the “as a learner” activity for this EDU8117. Some of the things that I learned about myself “as a learner”, included the fact that: I gain more value and satisfaction from learning that is constructed as part of a group or network; I make sense of my learning by using past experiences as a frame of reference; I find engaging in practical discovery learning, and sharing this learning, valuable and transforming (Siemens, 2005; Downes, 2011; ). Current education theory supports my preference for learning to be constructed through active participation and collaboration (Siemens, 2005; Downes 2012; Dunaway, 2011). The clustering and exchange of ideas, followed by the creative evolution of new ones is nurtured and shared in communities, groups and networks (Riel & Polin, 2004). This relates to the concept of a participatory pedagogy, where the curriculum content and activities are not determined entirely before the learning task begins. Learners are able to contribute to the content or the end result, making sense of the information in the process (Siemens, 2008). On my journey to becoming proficient in the use of Collaborate Ultra, I became more aware of the way I was moving through the learning process; partly because at the same time I was gaining an awareness of learning models such as Personal Knowledge Management (PKM) (Jarche, 2014) and Community Literature, Environment and Model (CLEM) (An experiment in Networked and Global Learning, 2014). The two areas of learning collided, and I realised that I had jumped into the process without using a framework; and as a result, experienced periods of confusion, disengagement and frustration. In pursuit of my learning task, I initially reached out to connect with members of my workplace community, who shared my goal. I suggested an installfest, to gain more confidence in using the technology prior to recording. The response was enthusiastic and a session was held in a Collaborate Ultra virtual classroom. This session was informal; there was no agenda; I took quick notes on some of the issues we discovered. But- reading these notes afterwards, the notes weren't clear; and it was difficult to remember what we had discussed. Nevertheless, I compiled a report in Googledocs and sent links to participants for comment. The report was posted into the relevant staff discussion forum. There was a response by the project head; however, the participation in this forum was limited. I recorded a session in Collaborate Ultra, which was more like a video presentation, rather than an interactive video conferencing session. However, I felt I needed a resolution for the EDU81117 learning task. On my course Blog, I mentioned that I would like to upload the recording to share. A fellow student, who is as an expert in online instructional design, shared advice on how to do this. Following her instructions, I was successful in completing the task. For me as a learner, I felt this last step was one of the most rewarding occurrences in the process, symbolising the value of the network learning process. A learner, with some existing knowledge, had shared and requested an extension of that knowledge through a network; an expert had been able to respond with relevant knowledge, to enable the learner to acquire a useful skill to complete the task. This highlights the usefulness of NGL to the learner. Reflecting on my learning process in general during the course, I realised that PKM is a seminal concept for sourcing and organising information, particularly prior to practical application (Jarche, 2016). When I outlined my PKM early in the course, it appeared a very orderly, logical process. In hindsight, it didn’t resemble the process that I applied to the learning task. My PKM at the beginning of the course My PKM during the course. I realised half way through the process that the CLEM model is a practical way of approaching networked learning. I did apply the model retrospectively, recognising then, that one stage – literature – was omitted from my process as a learner; this omission being partially responsible for my confusion and frustration. Informing your selection of learning tools with current research is imperative - and probably time-saving in the long run. Another insight gained was that networked learning can involve engagement with many participants, but it can sometimes be a solitary process. The networked learner may need to recognise that they could experience both situations at various times. PKM and CLEM can help in both situations; when there are many participants in a network, it can provide a common focus; similarly, PKM and CLEM can give the solitary learner direction in their pursuit of knowledge. In the end, I think I have gained a certain level of competency in Collaborate Ultra; although I am yet to use it with a class. My involvement with the project and the interaction with my work colleagues has inspired me to continue some form of community that supports NGL and the evaluation of possible software within my work area. However, the most significant revelation has been my behaviour as a learner. I found that you can learn to learn by learning, no matter how old you are or what your profession is. As teachers, we probably feel we have “learning” covered, but there is obviously a depth to learning that can never be exhausted. References BeeLearningBlog. (2016). A journey through learning. Retrieved from https://beelearningblog.wordpress.com/ Blackboard. (2016). Collaborating in Blackboard Collaborate with Ultra experience. [video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7EnawwzWOs Downes, S. (2012). Knowledge, Learning and Community. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/post/57737 Downes, S. (2011). “Connectivism” and Connective Knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-downes/connectivism-and- connecti_b_804653.html Dron, J. & Anderson, T. (2016). A typology of social forms for learning. In Teaching Crowds. Retrieved from http://teachingcrowds.ca/discuss- the-chapters/chapter-3-a-typology-of-social-forms-for-learning Dunaway, M. K. (2011). Connectivism: Learning theory and pedagogical practice for networked educational landscapes. Reference Services Review, 39(4), 675- 685. An experiment in Networked and Global learning. (2014). Week4: CLEM and the community. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://netgl.wordpress.com/study-schedule-2/week-4-clem-and-community/ Jarche, H. (2016) What is your PKM routine? [Blog posy]. Retrieved fromhttp://jarche.com/2014/03/what-is-your-pkm-routine/ Kirkwood, A. (2006). Getting networked learning in context: are on‐line students’ technical and information literacy skills adequate and appropriate? Learning, Media and Technology, 31(2), 117-131. DOI: 10.1080/17439880600756654 McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M.J. (2008). The three P’s of pedagogy for the networked society: personalisation, participate on, and productivity. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher education. 20(1). 10-27. Riel, M., & Polin, L. (2004). Online learning communities: Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling, & J. Gray (Eds.), Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (pp. 16–50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning Theory for the digital age. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm Siemens, G. (2008). New structures and spaces of learning: The systemic impact of connective knowledge, connectivism, and networked learning. Retrieved from http://elearnspace.org/Articles/systemic_impact.htm Socal, I. D. (2008). Considering universal design. Retrieved from http://speedchange.blogspot.com.au/2008/04/considering-universal- design.html
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives |