Learning Conversations

The value of blogging is well discussed in the literature (e.g. see Rebecca’s recent post pointing to some of these sources and discussion from a prospective teacher perspctive). Indeed, it’s interesting to think about this ‘blogs in education’ matrix 6 years after it was flagged by Oehlert in a blog post in October, 2003.  I think the extreme right and left of this matrix needs major expansion. The possibilities for ‘the rest of the Net’ (in all four quadrants’) are significant. For example, the possibilities for students networking with experts and peers from around the world are extensive (see top left and bottom left sections of the matrix). It’s also interesting to think about ‘micro-blogging’ (e.g. using Twitter) and how it might ‘fit’ into this matrix.  Once again, the ‘connection’ affordance is important and the use of Twitter would feature in the left and right extremes of the matrix. However, this matrix probably needs a 3rd temporal dimension to fully capture the immediacy and convenience of micro-blogging. (Thanks to this Flickerer for above image)

Some colleagues and I have recently been discussing a possible framework for thinking about mobile learning environments. What are the distinctive features of these environments?
Here are three possible dimensions of such a framework:
1. Space or location. Mobile learning devices can be used in a range of ‘places’ ranging from classrooms in formal learning settings to home environments to more informal ‘3^rd spaces’.
2. Communication. Learners often communicate through a mobile device on a small scale (e.g. a phonecall or text message) or via a large network (such as Twitter). Conversations can be asynchronous, or more often leverage the convenience and immediacy of being synchronous or ‘real-time’. (Even new bloggers very quickly appreciate this sense of connection). Of course, mobile devices may be used on an individual, personal basis and may not involve any communication (although they may elicit face-face communications!).
3. Activity. This dimension could be informed by Hedberg’s ‘options for technology use’ in education (p. 176). It features (local or networked-based) activities ranging from accessing (or ‘pulling in’ content eg. listening to a podcast) to use of applications for presentational or representational purposes (such as some iPhone apps) to more generative activities (or ‘pushing’ content) such as capturing and sharing media with a community via the microblogosphere.

Hedberg, J. G. (2006). E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come. Studies in Continuing Education, 28(2), 171-183.

(Thanks to this Flickerer)

It’s interesting to think about potential possibilities that current and future technologies might bring to Education. For example, Annie points out exciting ‘hardware’ on the horizon while Miriam discusses a current Web2 technology. As educators, I think we have a ‘2nd sense’ for what technologies might support the active, constructive, cooperative and authentic nature of ‘meaningful learning’ (as defined by Jonassen, 2008). Web2 tools, for example, usually have an inherent collaborative nature & could easily be used to support authentic K-12 tasks (like Miriam, Voicethread also captured my attention, as did Thinkature.) Indeed, online communities soon build up to allow educators to discuss ideas and showcase examples of using these valuable tools (e.g. see here ). Educator polls can also be a useful way to stay in touch with current trends. E.g. see this top tools for learning poll.

Where might new technologies take us in the near future? Collaboration, communication and connection are usually amongst the key themes in discussions of what a ‘Web 3 world’ might look like (e.g. see Kelly’s interesting talk) and indeed, what new directions educational technologies might take (e.g. see The Horizon 2008 report ).

(Graphic by Jim Nuttle & displayed here with his approval. See full sized version)

However, as Maree concludes in her recent posting, teachers and pedagogical approaches will always be the crucial factor. Regardless of the symbol systems and capabilities of these exciting ‘horizon’ learning technologies, HOW learning technologies are used (by students & teachers), should determine their influence on learning outcomes.

Educause (2008). The 2008 Horizon report. Retrieved 3rd Nov., 2008 from
http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2008-Horizon-Report.pdf

Jonassen, D. et al (2008). What is meaningful learning? In D. Jonassen et al.(Eds).Meaningful learning with technology. 3rd Edtn. pp1-12. Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, N.J.

Made available under Creative Commons 2.0 Attribution Licence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Available here.

An exciting area of research and development at the moment is in the area of ‘learning designs’. Sites such as the Learning Design website have documented exemplary technology-mediated learning designs and more recently, organic communities such as the LAMS community have evolved into valuable places for both documenting, sharing (and quite easily enabling) learning designs. There has been some concern about the ‘practitioner-friendliness’ of some of these spaces (e.g. see Manuel’s recent posting) … two UK projects, the Phoebe project and the Cloudworks project , are exploring exciting solutions

Made available under Creative Commons 2.0 Attribution Licence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Available here

In the most influential edublog posting of 2007 (titiled: ‘Is It Okay To Be A Technologically Illiterate Teacher?’ ), Fisch mentions: “I think there’s a general feeling among teachers (not all teachers, but many) that it’s okay to be technologically illiterate.” Hmm … my guess is that other professions possibly have a similar attitude & this situation is possibly just a symptom of the ‘digital revolution’ we’re living in right now. No doubt it will change over time. Fisch does acknowledge that teachers are primarily pedagogical experts and usually very busy creating learning opportunities for their students. Perhaps a more pertinent questions therefore is: To what extent can technology support students’ learning? What creative (unique?) opportunities are available for students to use technology to mediate the important social & reflective processes involved in authentic learning? Perhaps it is less a matter of being technologically literate and more an issue of ‘awareness’ of how technology might influence the learning process itself

Made available under Creative Commons 2.0 Attribution Licence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Available here

Assoc. Prof. Sandy Schuck and I have had some input into 3 recent mass media items discussing technology in schools. Sandy was involved in a SMH article and amongst other valuable comments, mentioned two popular but in some ways contrasting current uses of technology in classrooms: the use of student-generated video and e-whiteboards. She also was involved in a discussion about laptops in schools on 2BL radio.

Made available under Creative Commons 2.0 Attribution Licence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Available here

I was involved in an article from last weekend’s Australian that discussed the influence of technology on schools. I mentioned the potential role of technology to support teacher learning and the wonderful opportunities available to extend the ‘professional development circle’ beyond traditional boundaries through online communities such as EdNa, Tapped In & the LAMS community and also less formal spaces such as TeacherTube, teacher podcasts and blogospheres. Teachers’ contributions to spaces like Merlot and TRE (UK) (especially contributions rated highly by peers!) may help develop professional identities & possibly carry ‘status’ when applying for jobs or promotions.