A glorified soapbox. This is the blog.
Even Wikipedia says "A modern form of a soapbox is a blog: a website on which a user publishes one's thoughts to whoever reads the page."
But is it? There are some similarities - but the blog, being slave to computer technology, has limitations - yet increased possibilities too.
Traditionally the 'soapbox' referred to the small raised platform which would be used to stand on to make an impromptu speech. The speaker would be interacting with his audience, and would adjust his comments to the demographic around him. He would be vulnerable to his audience - with the heckler having as much say as the original speaker, and possibly the odd tomato being thrown. And he would need to think on his feet - no opportunity to delete and rewrite.
The master orators who would gather at Speakers Corner in Hyde Park, London, in the 19th century were proficient at thinking and speaking with the flow of the crowd, and became adept at working the emotional temperament to aid their cause.
Generally they had something to say, and were passionate about their cause.
A skill, an art - something now lost? Dare I say sacrificed under the advance of the digital age?
Blogs can access so many people. But who? What is the demographic you are reaching - or are we just speaking into the 'cloud'?
Where is the skill in adjusting to your audience, thinking impromptu? As you write your blog, you are mainly guided by your own perspective. And, how many times do you rethink, backspace, delete, rewrite? Yes, you can have followers - either likeminded, or antagonists. Not the general public, just passing by. People need to look for your blog - they are already wanting to hear something, before you ever get a word out.
The opportunistic nature of the soapbox orator really isn't there.
Freedom. Our historical orator often embraced controversial or politically dangerous topics. Think of the Suffragette movement lobying for the women's vote. Getting out and speaking your mind was risky, sometimes ending in a dingy gaol.
It's safer now - but do we speak our mind? The blog only goes out if the network is operating. And if the moderator approves. Who is the moderator - it depends on your country? So is the 'free speech' here limited to what is already approved within your country/government? Are we so caught up in political correctness that the blog has been reduced to endless words disappearing in the breeze? The internet is so accessible, blogs so easy, that we are flooded with words. But do we have something to say?
When I think of the soapbox predecessors, I am ashamed to compare their courage, passion, wit and oratory skill to our attempts at blogging.
Can we get some perspective here?
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Day 5
Learning styles – how do they interface with a Web2.0 approach to learning? Is the digital medium just a means of communication, an electronic replacement for the paper medium? If so, it facilitates our reading/writing learners, but the auditory & kinesthetic learners would be left frustrated.
Exploring the VARK Questionnaire brings us back to a recognition of at least 4 learning styles – Visual, Aural, Read/write, and Kinesthetic.
Traditional schooling relied heavily on aural skills, with a teacher lecturing from the front of the room, and read/write skills, with students being directed to print media to learn. So often the kinesthetic learner was left out. He/she was the ‘trouble maker’, the ‘restless child’.
Recognition of this has led to development of interactive, creative forms of teaching, with classrooms incorporating the environment, moving students into community as they learn.
Then we introduce computer technology and web2.0 as the key learning tool of the ‘digital natives’. Are we confining our kinesthetic learners to the desk? Are we limiting our aural learners to a digitally created imitation of sound? Are we confining the expressive writer to the repetitive restriction of a keyboard?
The VARK guide to learning styles advises those with a kinesthetic preference to use all senses – sight, touch, taste, smell, hearing; to use laboratories, field trips, real-life examples, hands-on approach, collections, exhibits, samples, solutions. The computer is an excellent tool to add in to this – but it at best will give incomplete learning if relied on as the key teaching medium.
I did the VARK questionnaire, and scored a multimodal learning preference – which, according to VARK, accounts for 60% of the population.
The majority of us need a variety of learning styles to capitalize on the varied learning preferences. Digital education may be innovative, but at the interface with the needs of a multimodal learning population, there are many gaps which, I would suggest, can never be adequately satisfied within the digital media. Web2.0 should rather been seen as the perfect adjunct to any good teaching program, to consolidate and add to the learning experienced through all other life means.
Are you also multimodal?
http://www.vark-learn.com/english/page.asp?p=questionnaire
Exploring the VARK Questionnaire brings us back to a recognition of at least 4 learning styles – Visual, Aural, Read/write, and Kinesthetic.
Traditional schooling relied heavily on aural skills, with a teacher lecturing from the front of the room, and read/write skills, with students being directed to print media to learn. So often the kinesthetic learner was left out. He/she was the ‘trouble maker’, the ‘restless child’.
Recognition of this has led to development of interactive, creative forms of teaching, with classrooms incorporating the environment, moving students into community as they learn.
Then we introduce computer technology and web2.0 as the key learning tool of the ‘digital natives’. Are we confining our kinesthetic learners to the desk? Are we limiting our aural learners to a digitally created imitation of sound? Are we confining the expressive writer to the repetitive restriction of a keyboard?
The VARK guide to learning styles advises those with a kinesthetic preference to use all senses – sight, touch, taste, smell, hearing; to use laboratories, field trips, real-life examples, hands-on approach, collections, exhibits, samples, solutions. The computer is an excellent tool to add in to this – but it at best will give incomplete learning if relied on as the key teaching medium.
I did the VARK questionnaire, and scored a multimodal learning preference – which, according to VARK, accounts for 60% of the population.
The majority of us need a variety of learning styles to capitalize on the varied learning preferences. Digital education may be innovative, but at the interface with the needs of a multimodal learning population, there are many gaps which, I would suggest, can never be adequately satisfied within the digital media. Web2.0 should rather been seen as the perfect adjunct to any good teaching program, to consolidate and add to the learning experienced through all other life means.
Are you also multimodal?
http://www.vark-learn.com/english/page.asp?p=questionnaire
Friday, July 9, 2010
Day 4
A short day to consolidate so much new learning.
The blackboard focus, although interesting, was irrelevant to those of us who have no input into the assessment side of our course. A pity that this wasn't identified before we strongly encouraged our staff to sacrifice a week of their break to participate in the course.
Nevertheless, the afternoon program held much promise: developing multimedia resources, including pod-vodcasts, wordle, delicious, animoto, photostory, xtranormal etc.
I was keen to practice with these new media. Instead, we found ourselves giving the tutor feedback for 2 hours, and then being given a quick drive through - these products exist - and then left to explore on our own. It all seems a bit inconsistent with the literature on how we learn computer skills. The doing is key, to be able to navigate these new concepts.
I would so have enjoyed being given mock projects, which required use of these new media.
Somehow, I suspect our tutor would have enjoyed this too.
I wonder if the lack of adequate planning, with a generic course being produced for a group which could hardly be described as generic, left it a little out of touch with the needs of the group. With such a vast array of information available now-a-days, accurate, concise information is essential in the planning stages, if appropriate learning is to be achieved. Hopefully this will be incorporated when the course is next run.
The blackboard focus, although interesting, was irrelevant to those of us who have no input into the assessment side of our course. A pity that this wasn't identified before we strongly encouraged our staff to sacrifice a week of their break to participate in the course.
Nevertheless, the afternoon program held much promise: developing multimedia resources, including pod-vodcasts, wordle, delicious, animoto, photostory, xtranormal etc.
I was keen to practice with these new media. Instead, we found ourselves giving the tutor feedback for 2 hours, and then being given a quick drive through - these products exist - and then left to explore on our own. It all seems a bit inconsistent with the literature on how we learn computer skills. The doing is key, to be able to navigate these new concepts.
I would so have enjoyed being given mock projects, which required use of these new media.
Somehow, I suspect our tutor would have enjoyed this too.
I wonder if the lack of adequate planning, with a generic course being produced for a group which could hardly be described as generic, left it a little out of touch with the needs of the group. With such a vast array of information available now-a-days, accurate, concise information is essential in the planning stages, if appropriate learning is to be achieved. Hopefully this will be incorporated when the course is next run.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Day 3
Authenticity.... does it exist in the e-world?
"E-learning struggles with high drop out rates"
(from Preparing Students for Elearning http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/Preparingstudents.htm )
How do we evaluate if an interaction is authentic, and therefore valuable?
There is the concept of whether it is relevant to our world. This is important - but this is a gatekeeper - this determines if we even pause to consider the process.
Authenticity is essential to facilitate uptake of the information or experience.
Is it possible to measure authenticity in a virtual reality? When claims can be made, identities created, emotions expressed - with no tangible evidence.
Social networking - a form of 'connection' - a substitute for relationship.
What are our yardsticks for authenticity?
Surely they are history, reliability, consistency.
There is the body language - the frank, direct, unashamed eye contact, the relaxed posture, the ease of speech and ability to allow laughter.
There is the recommendation - from others who have encountered you.
The story is powerful - your story is powerful - and adds authenticity to a learning experience. But in a world where the skills in film production allow almost anything to look real, having a story retold is not a measure of it's authenticity.
I would suggest that without the human element, without the physical, tangible interactions, then we cannot truly measure authenticity. This essential element is in the domain of the person, the teacher, the student, and their real relationship. We are not out of a job!
If we leave it to a machine, there will always be a large potential for doubt.
And, I believe, this opens the door for the high drop out rates.
"E-learning struggles with high drop out rates"
(from Preparing Students for Elearning http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/Preparingstudents.htm )
How do we evaluate if an interaction is authentic, and therefore valuable?
There is the concept of whether it is relevant to our world. This is important - but this is a gatekeeper - this determines if we even pause to consider the process.
Authenticity is essential to facilitate uptake of the information or experience.
Is it possible to measure authenticity in a virtual reality? When claims can be made, identities created, emotions expressed - with no tangible evidence.
Social networking - a form of 'connection' - a substitute for relationship.
What are our yardsticks for authenticity?
Surely they are history, reliability, consistency.
There is the body language - the frank, direct, unashamed eye contact, the relaxed posture, the ease of speech and ability to allow laughter.
There is the recommendation - from others who have encountered you.
The story is powerful - your story is powerful - and adds authenticity to a learning experience. But in a world where the skills in film production allow almost anything to look real, having a story retold is not a measure of it's authenticity.
I would suggest that without the human element, without the physical, tangible interactions, then we cannot truly measure authenticity. This essential element is in the domain of the person, the teacher, the student, and their real relationship. We are not out of a job!
If we leave it to a machine, there will always be a large potential for doubt.
And, I believe, this opens the door for the high drop out rates.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Day 2
Today has consolidated my thinking considerably.
The confusion of last night has settled, and the pathways are appearing a lot more logical.
The blackboard learning was wonderful. Many of the time-consuming methods I have been using can be simplified, just by knowing how to negotiate the blackboard. I am excited about the potential which is still to be utilised in the way that we are presenting our data on blackboard.
I see a need to be thinking at a few levels - the population of this group, although all adult learners and all post-grad, have varying prior experience with IT. We have much older students, who are returning to study after a period in the workforce (mainly gen X). We have students who have rolled on immediately from an undergraduate degree, many of which were science based (mainly gen Y). And soon, we will be enrolling our 'digital natives' - those who have incorporated computer technology throughout their entire education experience.
As the career requires people skills, and revolves around an ability to function effectively in a relational manner, we cannot capitulate to a totally e-interface in our teaching. But neither can we be offended by the ubiquitous laptop. Rather an intelligent approach, which enables students to develop healthy boundaries, healthy work ethics and healthy relational respect while aknowledging and accessing the benefits of social networking and immense resources, should enable the development of a more resilient junoir graduate, with capacity far beyond there predecessors.
Our challenge - to interpret what an 'intelligent approach' should look like!
The confusion of last night has settled, and the pathways are appearing a lot more logical.
The blackboard learning was wonderful. Many of the time-consuming methods I have been using can be simplified, just by knowing how to negotiate the blackboard. I am excited about the potential which is still to be utilised in the way that we are presenting our data on blackboard.
I see a need to be thinking at a few levels - the population of this group, although all adult learners and all post-grad, have varying prior experience with IT. We have much older students, who are returning to study after a period in the workforce (mainly gen X). We have students who have rolled on immediately from an undergraduate degree, many of which were science based (mainly gen Y). And soon, we will be enrolling our 'digital natives' - those who have incorporated computer technology throughout their entire education experience.
As the career requires people skills, and revolves around an ability to function effectively in a relational manner, we cannot capitulate to a totally e-interface in our teaching. But neither can we be offended by the ubiquitous laptop. Rather an intelligent approach, which enables students to develop healthy boundaries, healthy work ethics and healthy relational respect while aknowledging and accessing the benefits of social networking and immense resources, should enable the development of a more resilient junoir graduate, with capacity far beyond there predecessors.
Our challenge - to interpret what an 'intelligent approach' should look like!
Day 1
After an interseting day learning a few new things about computer technology, web 2.0, and current thinking relating this to higher education, I decided to try to create a blog.
Well, I may have finally got here - but what a frustrating process !!!! It has taken 45 minutes for me to figure out what was needed in each of the prompts! The problem is, that the FIRST page needs to be user friendly to the novice. If you have never seen a blogger page before, it should spell out in simple language what is being asked for. Now that I have succeeded, I know what to enter next time. But, if I wasn't doing this for an assignment, then I would have walked away in disgust. First impressions are important, particularly if you're wanting to market a product. And the internet is a product! Even in education, this is so. If we don't recognise that these e-tools need to marketed to make it easy for our students to learn to use them, and to successfully use them, then they will not persist. Especially the younger generation, who want instant gratification. Add to that the adult learners (& so much of our uni education is now post-grad) - these learners need to have success in their ventures, to reinforce that the investment of time is worthwhile. Otherwise they won't persist.
So, for everyone apart from the 'already hooked computer nerd' - the web designers need to stop, and think how their web page would be approached by a complet novice. The ones they want to hook. The ones like me.
How easy was it for you?
Well, I may have finally got here - but what a frustrating process !!!! It has taken 45 minutes for me to figure out what was needed in each of the prompts! The problem is, that the FIRST page needs to be user friendly to the novice. If you have never seen a blogger page before, it should spell out in simple language what is being asked for. Now that I have succeeded, I know what to enter next time. But, if I wasn't doing this for an assignment, then I would have walked away in disgust. First impressions are important, particularly if you're wanting to market a product. And the internet is a product! Even in education, this is so. If we don't recognise that these e-tools need to marketed to make it easy for our students to learn to use them, and to successfully use them, then they will not persist. Especially the younger generation, who want instant gratification. Add to that the adult learners (& so much of our uni education is now post-grad) - these learners need to have success in their ventures, to reinforce that the investment of time is worthwhile. Otherwise they won't persist.
So, for everyone apart from the 'already hooked computer nerd' - the web designers need to stop, and think how their web page would be approached by a complet novice. The ones they want to hook. The ones like me.
How easy was it for you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)