ZML Didaktik / Innovative Learning Scenarios

Hannah R. Gerber (Sam Houston State University, US) moderated the Symposium “Gaming and Literacy: Intersecting the Landscape of Learning In-and-Out of School” which was an inspiring experience for me.

The symposium started with the following quotation:

We fail to build on the literacies that students already have – and we fail to learn about these literacies or why they seem so important to many students. … (Hawisher&Selfe)

Dodie J. Niemeyer (Sam Houston State University, US) was the first speaker. She described metagaming and paratext creation around the “Maker Spaces of Minecraft”. She is a gamer herself, and observes her son and other students in their gaming activities. The students tell her that they love to watch videos about the gaming strategies of other gamers, because they are fun and because they learn something new. (By the way: it was the same with my son…)

Kade Wells (Sam Houston State University, US) spoke about his love for dragons and dungeons. He shares his experience how he supports motivation and engagement in his reading class, where the students create avatars and collaboratively build a story for their avatars.

Jason YJ Lee (Kookimin University, KR) supported a Corean student to acquire English as second language by playing World of Warcraft. He describes the development of the learner by analyzing how his chat contributions changed over time.

Jennifer Roswell (Brock University) summarized the session and acknowledged that all presentations were funny and that they addressed interpersonal and ideational interaction. Video games are used as backdoor to skill development and stimulate ludic-based story-telling.

Unfortunately I’m no gamer and I don’t like video games (old-fashioned, I know). But I loved the enthusiasm of the speakers about their use of video games for learning. And I’m convinced everybody could learn a lot by gaming!

Conference website

Tweets protocol of the session

Hawisher Gail E. & Selfe Cynthia L. (2004) Becoming literate in the information age: Cultural ecologies and literacies of technology. College Composition and Communication, 55(4) 642-692, p676

About three weeks ago our cope15 MOOC was finished successfully.

cope15-logo

First let’s speak about numbers:

  • 460 learners from 32 countries were registered in our MOOC, 302 (66%) were at least once active.
  • Mostly they were students from our university but some of them came from other universities as well and a small group were lifelong learners.
  • All together there were 48,738 views at the cope15 website, in April on average 1304 views a day, in May 699.
  • The learners wrote more than 4100 comments at the cope15 website mostly as answer to the assignments. There was no interaction in the Google+ community and few activities in the Facebook group.
  • 126 learners (27,4% of the registered learners, 42% of the learners who were at least one time active) got a badge – 102 business students, but as well students from social work, information design, communication design and construction. 6 lifelong learners got a badge.

The topics of the week were about online learning, global collaboration, business and communication. This was the distribution of interaction during the cope15 weeks:

As usual in MOOCs there were many activities during the first two weeks. In the following 4 weeks about 25% of the registered learners were active. 37 (8%) contributed to all weeks, and 49/50 (10%) to four respectively five weeks.

There were some differences to last year’s cope14 MOOC. This year nearly all the activities were conducted on the website via comments. The business students were the drivers of the common learning process and the exchange. Last year in cope14 there were more learners without sound knowledge of business topics. Therefore they posted their questions to be discussed in the weekly videoconference. This year there were only a few or no questions at all which made the exchange with the experts of the week not that exciting.

The update of the content worked well. Whereas last year there was too much content in one week this year all weeks worked really well. In the reflection of week six the learners stated that they were satisfied with the MOOC and that they learned a lot.

We used the footprints of emergence again to evaluate the learning process. 49 learners created their footprint, especially interesting is the work of Alex who was a learner in the cope14 and the cope15 MOOC. I plan to write a post about footprints soon.

alex-cope14-cope15

Footprints of Alex, left: reflection of cope14, right: reflection of cope15

In cope14 and cope15 there were two moderators who monitored all activities and supported the learners and experts. On large A3 sheets I tried to document all the comments and interaction. In this way I had the feeling to get to know a rather large number of learners. I believe that bonding facilitates learning and I like to care for my online groups.

mod-cope15

Rahel Anne Bailie from Intentional Design speaks about content strategy at DigitasLBi in London – the cos14-students and I are listening with eagerness.

She tells us some great stuff – and she persuades me to reflect my approach to content strategy (I started to think about it nearly 5 years ago when Heinz Wittenbrink started to include content stratgey into our web-literacy project.)

Glimpses of Rachel’s input

  • Content = the stuff between tags – and: there are people who read the content and people who read the tags (I liked that)
  • Content strategy = Repeatable system that governs the management of content throughout the entire lifecycle – content strategy comes from management consulting
  • Content life cycle: analyze, collect, manage, publish = stragegy, tactical, tactical, tactical (I liked this as well)
  • Methodology: assess current state – ascertain ideal state – calculate the gap – create a roadmap
  • and then – the really scary list of deliverables

deliverables

Deliverables as requirements summary, … user research, personas, … editorial calender, content audit, …. metadata strategy, writing templates – now I remember why I never started really with a content strategy!

Glimpses of my thoughts

– with respect to the activties of my institute ZML-Innovative Lerning Scenarios

  • We have an implicit requirement catalog used as basis for our monthly meetings (our web-designer and I) with focus to our website, and the announcements for our training courses and conference as well, but there’s no process model and no gap analysis. We identify gaps on the fly and respond to them.
  • We never did an user analysis or personas. We think and speak about our users, they are university teachers, and sometimes school teachers and persons from training units of companies. But we didn’t invest time to think about them in a structured and strategic way.
  • The content audit is quickly done during the monthly meetings and we take care of our most important pages (but we are ignoring other parts of our website for years…). We have a good editorial calender with respect to our yearly conference, and an ok-calender for the trainings, but there don’t exist any calender for everything. And – we act with respect to our calender if we find time (this mostly works, but not all the time).
  • We totally ignore metadata strategy, link strategy and so on. Our website is a small part of a larger website, therefore we don’t have control.
  • Writing content templates emerged – e.g. templates how to write news or announcements of events. We don’t have guidelines but some rules.

Fazit

Writing this post I realize that we work according to some aspects of content strategy but we never look at the whole picture. And – sincerely I don’t know if we ever will find to do it.

Follow up

While I was writing this post Rahel continued with her input and mentioned the customer engagement lifecycle with identify need, seek solution,  determine value, post assessment, long-term effect, renewal and retention. That was food for thoughts as my training designs often fulfill no actual, urgent users’ needs ….

Eine “unserer” Journalismus und PR-Studentinnen – Kathrin Rathmayer – verfasste 2014 eine interessant genderlect-Rathmayr-2014 (in Englisch) mit dem Titel “Genderlect – The verbal battle for female intimacy and male independence”. Schon länger wollten wir diese Arbeit im ZML-Leseclub diskutieren, gestern gelang es uns endlich.

In ihrer Arbeit leitet Rathmayer im ersten Kapitel zum Thema Language and Gender ein, wobei ich den Ausdruck Genderlect, geprägt von Deborah Tannen vorher gar nicht kannte. Tannen betrachtet den Unterschied in der Kommunikation von Frauen und Männern aus einer sprachwissenschaftlichen Perspektive. Im zweiten Kapitel beschäftigt sich Rathmayer mit Gender im elektronischen Diskurs und im dritten Kapitel analysiert sie Unterschiede in Weblogs von Autorinnen und Autoren.

Da der ZML-Leseclub rein weiblich besetzt ist, war unsere Diskussion auch von unseren Emotionen geprägt. Aus eigenen Beispielen konnten wir bestätigen, dass Frauen in der Kommunikation Beziehung und Beteiligung (involvement) ausdrücken während Männer nach Unabhängigkeit streben. In ihrer Sprache stellen Frauen Beziehung her, in dem sie unterstützen, nachfragen, einen Kontext herstellen, Emotionen sichtbar machen, ihre Aussagen relativieren (es könnte auch anders sein, gleichberechtigte/ symmetrische Sicht), während Männer sich eher auf den Inhalt konzentrieren, rasch zum Punkt kommen und ihren Status festlegen/verteidigen (hierarchische/ asymmetrische Sicht).

In der Computer-Mediated Communication bestand in den späten 80-er Jahren die Hoffnung, dass das Internet diese Unterscheide auflösen würde, und anfangs war durch die Möglichkeit anonymer Aktivitäten die Kategorie Gender kein großes Thema. Dies erweis sich allerdings genauso bald als unrealistisch wie die Erwartung, dass das Internet vor allem demokratische Prozesse stärken würde. 2007 hält Susan Herring fest, dass die Genderlect Theorie zu face-to-face Interaktionen auch für Online-Diskussionen gültig ist.

Struktur und Inhalte von Online-Postings unterscheiden sich je nach Geschlecht der AutorInnen (Rathmayr, S30). Frauen beginnen meist mit einer Einführung, die zu etwas anderem verlinkt (Beziehung herstellen – trifft z.B. für diesen Post zu, ohne dass das meine Absicht war!). Dann folgen Informationen gespickt mit Phrasen, die Höflichkeit, Emotion, Relativierung enthalten (ist in diesem Post auch sichtbar, siehe etwa Anfang des 3. Absatzes). Viele Frauen verfolgen einen harmonischen, beziehungsstiftenden Stil. Männer hingegen posten häufig mit dem Ziel ihren sozialen Status sichtbar zu machen, d.h. sie suchen nicht nach Harmonie sondern fordern andere heraus, kritisieren und verwenden einen konkurrenzbetonten Stil.

Nach Auseinandersetzung mit den Inhalten der Bachelorarbeit tauchten in unsrer Diskussion im ZML-Leseclub ganz unterschiedliche Aspekte auf. Uns gefiel Tannens Ausdruck “cross cultural communication” für Genderlect, also der Ansatz die Kommunikation über Geschlechter hinweg mit der Kommunikation über Kulturen hinweg zu vergleichen. Wir sprachen über unsere Kinder und wie sie dem Thema Sex online ausgesetzt sind, Natasa erzählte von dem Buch So Sexy So Soon, das sie sosehr berühtre, dass sie es nicht fertig lesen wollte. Wir rätselten, warum junge Männer sich in ihrer Ausbildung für Film entscheiden und junge Frauen für Fotografie (Klassenbelegung in der Grazer Ortwein-Schule). Und wir hatten viele Ideen, wo wir in unseren Online-Lernszenarien nach Gender-Differenzen Ausschau halten könnten.

Facial-gender-by-PLoS-One-Creative-CommonsPhoto credit: Syed Zulqarnain Gilani, et al. (Creative Commons), PsyPost
Schlagwörter: , , ,

Assignment 1.2 in the cope15 MOOC invites the learners to plan their participation. Their answers (59 learners) cover a broad range of intentions.

How I will learn

Concrete ideas

  • decide level of participation as well as the form of it on a week to week basis.
  • Last year I mainly participated via the blog platform, using social networks from time to time – this turned out to be a working solution, so I keep it this way.
  • That is why my primary strategy will be a rather passive one at the beginning by only fulfilling the given assignments and then – when I have already become a little bit more familiar with the whole system – I am planning to actively participate and to contribute with valuable inputs
  • my plan is to get into the system and to get to know everything, and to make the assignments
  • fulfilment of assignments (as far as I can::)
  • Posting regularly (just comments, no blogs)
  • I love getting badges
  • I will do as many tasks as I have time to, because I think MOOC might be a good opportunity to learn effectively
  • to be honest – I don’t have plans for the next weeks yet.

The Newbies

  • Since this is new to me, I am a little bit unsure about how this will work
  • I do not really know on what to expect from the MOOC way of learning
  • I am not sure about what I should expect from this online course
  • Actually i do not know what i should expect
  • I absolutely do not know how it works, but i am quite excited about all this
  • I like to explore new environments, so I’m just curious
  • First of all, I would like to learn how MOOC works and afterwards I am ready to plan my activities and to get connected

The optimistic newbies

  • I think we will get into it soon
  • Right now it is a bit challenging for me to understand the whole system, but I’m sure I’ll figure it out pretty soon.
  • So I guess in general, I’m trying to figure out, ho this system is working.
  • I hope that during the weeks I’ll become a MOOC-expert :p
  • During this 6 weeks of course I will do my best
  • I also hope to get more accommodated and used to the website and the methods
  • I hope that I will soon be able to understand how MOOC works
  • I am sure it will be fun

Autonomous learners

  • It’s good to let anyone decide free to accomplish a task at any time.
  • Working at your own time sounds really great to a night owl like myself…

Where I will learn

  • For the beginning I try to follow on fb too
  • Maybe I will post some activities about my MOOC at google+
  • but rather stick to the comment section
  • Because of my full time table I will just stick to writing comments
  • look at hangouts

Expectation about the method

  • My expectations of MOOC is to get a better understanding of the new learning method.
  • to get to know something about MOOC and e-learning.
  • to get an overview of how Mooc works
  • I expect to get a better understanding of the online learning process

Interaction

  • I am curious about how all the different participants will interact and communicate in this medium
  • I am planning to get in touch with people from outside Austria to see how they think
  • to get in touch with many other people and to learn something about other cultures
  • I’m also very interested in the input from other participants here.
  • I hope to get to know some new and interesting people
  • meet new people and having fun
  • it would be also nice to get to know some new students.
  • I hope to get in touch with people i don’t know until now and maybe we became friends. It would be a pleasure for me to have friends all over the world.

Expectations about the content

  • I will learn some new things and topics
  • a more overall understanding of globalisation and communication between different cultures
  • I hope to learn a lot of new things
  • I hope that I will soon be able to understand how MOOC works
  • There are some really interesting topics we can work on.

After two days in cope15 I’m really excited how these people will proceed in their learning processes.

Das Thema Portfolio und insbesondere E-Portfolio boomte ja vor einigen Jahren. Im Rahmen des fnm-austria Netzwerks und finanziert vom damaligen Bundesministerium für Wissenschaft und Forschung wurden in einer Studie 2007 “Didaktische, organisatorische und technologische Grundlagen von E-Portfolios” erarbeitet und “Internationale Beispiele und Erfahrungen mit E-Portfolio Implementierungen an Hochschulen” analysiert. Ebenfalls 2007 berichteten wir über unseren kleinen, schrittweisen  “Implementation Process of ePortfolio at FH JOANNEUM” auf einer internationalen Konferenz. Dann wurde es ruhig um die Portfolios. Erst beim E-Learning Tag 2014 wurden das Thema Portfolios im Rahmen der Einreichung “Neues aus dem Europortfolio-Netzwerk: Workshop zu aktuellen Entwicklungen rund um E-Portfolios und Open Badges” (Tagungsband, S 127) und das Europortfolio-Projekt angesprochen.

Persönlich habe ich die Portfolios nie aus dem Auge verloren. Zu wertvoll erschien mir die Idee, Studierende während ihres Studiums den eigenen Lernzuwachs und ihre Produkte im Rahmen eines Reflexions&Produktportfolios reflektieren zu lassen. Doch ein Portfolio nur an eine Lehrveranstaltung zu binden oder den Portfolio-Ansatz ausschließlich während eines einzigen Semesters zu verfolgen, erwies sich als sinnlos.

Um so mehr freut es mich, dass es im Rahmen des berufsbegleitenden Studiengangs “Content Strategy” gelang das Thema Portfolio in der LV “Open Space und Portfolio”, die sich durch das Studium zieht, zu verankern. Die 24 Studierenden erwiesen sich – passend zum Thema des Studiengangs – als äußerst technik/online-affin heraus, trotzdem stellte sie die Erstellung eines öffentlichen Portfolios vor gewisse Herausforderungen. Die Auseinandersetzung mit dem Portfolio erfolgt schrittweise, im ersten Semester (WS 2014/15) arbeiteten die Studierenden an Konzepten zum Portfolio, in den letzten beiden Monaten wurden die Konzepte umgesetzt und erste Beiträge geschrieben. Die Portfolios der Studierenden sind bereits öffentlich zugänglich, sichtbar gemacht und beworben werden sie erst ab Ende des aktuellen Sommersemesters.

Über Ostern besuchte ich die 24 Portfolio-Plattformen und war von ihrer Vielfalt und den kreativen Titeln hingerissen. Viele Studierende sind excellente SchreiberInnen, was meinen Besuch kurzweilig gestaltete – so surfte ich oft viel länger durch die Beiträge als geplant. Als Plattformen für das Portfolio wählten die Studierenden WordPress, tumblr und blogger.com (Blog-Plattformen), bzw. Medium sowie Websites und öffentliche Googleplus-Beiträge.

Interessant ist für mich die Vielfalt der Herangehensweisen. Ich finde ein Portfolio ist etwas Persönliches, es soll den Studierenden dienen und erst in zweiter Linie den Lehrenden gefallen. Aus diesem Grund bemühe ich mich die Aufgabenstellung möglichst offen zu halten. Daher gibt es Studierende, deren Portfolio ein Teil ihres Blogs ist, der auch andere Themen beinhaltet. Dazu zählt etwa Daniela, deren Blog Studium, Arbeit und Privatleben beinhaltet, da sie sich mit dem Studium “in all ihren Lebensbereichen” befasst. Isabel startete mir ihrem “Denkarium”  vor Beginn des Studiums, Reflexionen und Produkte des Studiums finden sich bei ihr in einer eigenen Kategorie. Andere, wie etwa Steffen, stellen ausschließlich ihr Portfolio dar, Steffen verwendet dafür die Tags “Deliverables, Reflexion, Lernmethoden”.

Ich freue mich darauf die weitere Entwicklung der Portfolios beobachten und begleiten zu dürfen. Um die Auseinandersetzung mit dem Thema anzuregen und die Reflexionsprozesse zu stärken ist mein Feedback an die Studierenden transparent und für alle sichtbar. Auch sie selbst sind eingeladen die Portfolios der KollegInnen zu besuchen und ihre Wahrnehmung mitzuteilen. Die Vielfalt der Feedbacks soll den einzelnen und die einzelne in der Weiterentwicklung des Portfolios unterstützen.

Es stellt sich natürlich die Frage, wie so individuelle Leistungen mit einem einfachen Notenschema bewertet werden können. Ich arbeite gerade an einem Entwurf von Beurteilungskategorien, den ich ebenfalls in Diskussion mit den Studierenden weiterentwickeln möchte. Den wer könnte besser den Wert der Portfolios beurteilen, als sie selbst?

cos-student

https://i.imgur.com/to91Ah1.png

 

Schlagwörter: ,

After learning about Social Media Analysis (SNA) in the Social Network Analysis MOOC of Lada Adamic (8 weeks in November and December 2014) I started to visualize my online groups with gephi. In today’s workshop I presented some key concepts of SNA and shared my experience of using them for my online groups with my colleagues.

semana4-hydrogen-1986

After the introduction with a small story about my love of visualizations I started to define social networks, nodes and egdes and explained their relationship (directed and undirected edges, degrees and weights). I asked questions about nodes: are they well connected, what´s their function in the network? Or – are there any communities in the network? And I spoke about the Erdős-Rényi Graph and the Barabasi-Albert Model to simulate networks. I presented visualizations with netlogo explaining the appearance of the giant component in Erdős-Rényi Graphs and the apperance of hubs in the Barabasi-Albert Model.

The last part of theory included the explanations of degree centrality (1), betweenness centrality (2) and closeness (3) and a short overview how to detect a community.

centralities

After the coffee break we switched to “applied” SNA. I explained how to prepare data for gephi and presented two data sets.

Dataset 1: My first approach to get data from students’ interaction was via counting manually the interactivity of my students in our google+ community. I succeeded to count their activities during 4 days of November 2014 (and November wasn’t their most active month).

Dataset 2: In the next step I persuaded the administrator of our learning platform to automatically count how students communicate with each other in one of my courses. He provided me with two sets of data, one of the interaction during the first three weeks of their online socialization (October 2014) and one of the entire interaction during the winter semester 2014/15.

Visualization of the first dataset: Gephi created the network of the students in Google+, the size of the node shows the degree (how connected the person is). In gephi it is possible to click on one node and emphasize the interaction of this node with the other nodes.

c-students-googleplus-nov14

Visualization of the second dataset – the phase of online socialization: In this visualization the size of the node ist connected with its degree, and the color with its betweenness.

stud-online-soz-oct14In this graph I’m the blue node in the middle of the network. My node has the highest betweenness, it is in a “broker” situation between two groups of students. Stud21 has a high closeness centrality.

During the phase of online socialization it is ok for the teacher to occupy such an important position. But during the semester the students should gain more independence, so let’s take a look at the social network analysis after the end of the semester.

Visualization of the second dataset – at the end of the semester: In this visualization the blue node has lost its broker position. The students started to interact intensively with each other,  e.g. the green ones are now important players of the network as well.

stud-ws1415

At the end of the workshop we discussed my conclusions of the study of SNA and the application of SNA for my online groups:

  • Using SNA I’m getting nice graphs and some insights – but there’s a lot I still don’t understand.
  • SNA has big potential but is rather complex.
  • I want to learn how to better use gephi.
  • In future I would like to generate other data for visualization (e.g. twitter data).

Slides (jn German)

Folgen

Erhalte jeden neuen Beitrag in deinen Posteingang.

Schließe dich 26 Followern an