This subsection recalls and reflects on my engagement in the online communities interaction and collaboration, using Schön's reflection on action framework to provide an overview of my learning experience (Smith 2001, 2011). The following contains excerpts from my contributions to the online community by responding to peers that relate to the themes of interactivity, online environments and communities. However, the theories discussed relate to online social learning rather than a general approach to both social and individual eLearning opportunities.
Interactivity
According to Yacci's (2000) structural definition, interaction in instruction is defined as a message loop where utterances occur from the learner and back to the learner to complete the loop. Yacci further explained by stating that there are two distinct classes of outputs from interaction; content learning and affective benefits. However, each message in an interaction must be mutually coherent from and to individuals.
The following is a comment I made in an online discussion that was held on the topic, that was based on Kline's (1999) Thinking Circle where each participant is nominated to be present in contributing to the community;
October 28 at 3:42pm
"After briefly reading Yacci (2000) I was drawn to definition 3 (example 2); instructional interactivity has two outputs, a) content learning. In this current example I am purposefully achieving an instructional goal that was set by the tutor Cheryl Reynolds in participating in this topical discussion on a interactivity theory. According to this section, I am adding knowledge to an existing structure (the instructional activity - question) and modifying it (replying) by extending the structure with a prompt for the next peer (nomination)" (Scott, 2015c).
Online environments
The following are comments I responded to that are useful in facilitating and evaluating online communities. This conversation was about projecting a tutor role model into an online environment.
October 15 at 9:22am
"Firstly I just want to highlight what we mean by eLearning. Do we mean synchronous or asynchronous, self-directed or group activity?
To clarify both learning technology and eLearning, I once discussed this as they are two mediums;
"Learning Technologies is about the overall tools and systems that can manage learning, such as publishing software, social media and Virtual Learning Environments. Learning Technologies can be viewed as a toolkit in which they help you to design learning with technology in mind."
"eLearning is the pedagogy that can be used within the chosen Learning Technology. eLearning is a process that enables learning to be facilitated and supported appropriately within the chosen technology. eLearning provides the essential pedagogical foundations that is usually missing within the technology."
http://danielscott86.blogspot.com/2015/06/digital-move-meant.html
I think your question Adrian delves into the topic of eTutoring. When I studied online discussions I suggested ideas such as empathy, motivating, prompting, challenging, weaving and summarising (see attached, Salmon 2011) that could help increase interaction and collaboration in a synchronous or asynchronous digital learning environment. I also discussed the following as problematic areas;
Time in accessing and visiting contributions and interpreting them before responding
Lack of empathy and personal involvement
The expectation of ‘leaving learners to it’
Synchronous vs asynchronous
Garrison (2011) recommended that eTutors should be aware of:
Managing and monitoring discourse
Sustaining encouragement demands serious commitment
Quality contributions require discourse to be focussed and productive
Awareness of cognitive and social presence
Timing of responses to be carefully considered (timetabling and maintaining momentum)" (Scott, 2015d).
In relation to online environments, social and personal and professional identities can be problematic. Below is a discussion I introduced to the online community.
October 14 at 9:30am
Heya all,
I thought it would be good for me to share this as we will be bringing in social media at some point.
I am doing a session tomorrow with a group of students for a teacher on LinkedIn and the general do's and don'ts with using social media. I will be aiming to get over knowledge of how important social media can be when linked to employment. I'm just pulling some resources together for it.
One resource I do use a lot that seems to have a big impact on younger learners is this;
So I will definitely be including this and building a discussion around it.
But what do we think are the socio-cultural implications around the use of social media? I reckon Foucault's panopticism theory (1995) can be related to how social media may be perceived. We use it for social purposes such as collaborating and sharing with others, may it be family, friends and colleagues. However, given the open nature of the services and tools how much of your content is public without you being aware and who is accessing it and/or using without permission? (Scott, 2015i).
October 16 at 9:49am
"The consciousness of the gaze of others might conceivably, therefore, cause learners to self-regulate, constantly amending and editing their output on the basis of the imagined readers’ perspectives. Learners may do this regardless of whether or not they are being watched, particularly in the context of a taught course with links to assessment."
With regards to my personal blog, either talking about my life journey or career, I find that I write a post and return to it frequently over a few days to refine it. But I try not to change it too much as I aim to express not impress. However, I do feel my tone and language is different when talking about my job and career as my audience is primarily professional in the education sector. So I am conscious of my audience and what I put out there, which falls in the domain of online identities: http://jiscrsc.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2013/04/online-presence/.
Answering the questions posed on the article:
Is the person we project online the same all the time?
Yes, I hope so. I hope I can achieve this both online and offline with the content I express.
Do we have professional and personal personas?
I have created a brand for myself "A lifelong learning leader" due to my proactive passion for education. And as I mentioned above I aim to share both professional and personal content and keeping it true to myself. I do feel I share meaningful content, which are intrinsically motivated. However, can you achieve both of these, or would you really want to include both? I suppose my overall aim is to share my life journey as well as my professional practice. All of which I hope others find a connection with and helps them in some way. We all learn best from each other, so this is just another medium in which to convey my message.
I was also drawn to the notion of symbolic interactionism;
"People act toward things based on the meaning those things have for them, and these meanings are derived from social interaction and modified through interpretation".
Maybe this is what I have done; developed my online presence by making sense of my situation (aim) and defined myself (blog) and my relationships (readers) that may interact with this medium.
Also in your paper Cheryl, I particularly like the idea of the invisible pedagogy that you introduce Cheryl. This is something that I can refine in my own practice as I encourage my Level 3 and Level 4 apprentices to reflect on their learning experiences on their personal blog, as well as contribute to course work on there. (Scott, 2015j).
Online communities
The online Yammer community is built around a situative perspective, meaning that learning is acquired through social practice by developing learners identities through participation in specific communities of practice. This requires the learner to socially enquire in their learning goals but also to gain support in achieving these from their peers and also helping to facilitate other peers learning (Jisc, 2009). Furthermore, Garrison (undated) introduces his model that consists of social, cognitive and teaching presence that can be used to underpin a community of practice. Social presence is where a learner projects their identify and establishes relationships with peers. Cognitive presence is where individuals construct understanding through collaboration and reflection within the community. Teaching presence provides the community with further structure (design) and leadership (facilitation and direction) to support learning. However, when entering any environment whether face-to-face or online, individuals can be judged and assessed of what they bring into it. Below is a response I made on Bourdieu's Field Theory (Julien, 2014) that can be considered when entering an online environment and what others may bring or not bring into it.
October 13 at 2:06pm"
I'm still trying to make sense of Bourdieu's theory and asking myself the questions on the link above. Have I got this right?
What is meant by social, economic and cultural capital?
Capital is what someone brings into society through institutions, social groups and workplaces such as social and financial status and knowing cultural expectations and contexts.
What is meant by habitus, field and doxa?
Habitus is the amount of capital (economic, social and cultural) an individual has or brings. A field is what someone enters that has it's own rules (doxa) in which others evaluate their position in that field.
(Reynolds, 26 April 2013)" (Scott, 2015e).
The following is a reply back to the comment I made from the above.
October 29 at 10:05am
"“Do you have to have human agency for elearning to take place?”
No you don’t, but because as I once said “eLearning is really independent learning in disguise”.
https://twitter.com/_daniel_scott/status/287126629967360000
However, you ideally need a human to place content online for you to learn.
“Does the etutor have to have intentionality for elearning to happen?”
Yes, just as in within face-to-face learning environments a tutor is needed to guide and direct learners. However, a tutor should intervene when and where necessary. It’s far too easy for an eTutor (or learner) to dominate an online discussion (but so is face-to-face). I suppose I mean in a semiotically way where you leave a digital footprint with your name plastered all over a conversation. Which can not only be perceived in an egoistic way leads to cognitive overload too.
“What makes something a learning technology?”
Any digital tool or system that allows you to learn from, with or through it.
“Can elearners learn without either an etutor or a ;earning technology”
Yes. Without an eTutor a learner can achieve what they need or want to learn given that they are self-reliant to be able to coordinate themselves through learning objectives. I achieved this through the Open University many years ago.
Without learning technology, do you mean the internet or specific tools and systems? I’ll assume tools and systems. Learners can network with other professionals and subject enthusiasts and access online libraries and repositories. Which again come back to being self-reliant.
“What's the relationship between etutoring and emoderating in Gilly Salmon's model?”
In Salmon’s 5 Stage Model (2011, 2013) it provides a framework for e-moderators (groups of tutors and learners) in which to promote and manage participants in an online environment. The eTutor role is more closely related to e-tivities where online activities are constructed and facilitated by a tutor.
http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html
“Can elearning take place through participation in a virtual community of practice with no distinct etutor or curriculum?”
Yes. According to Wenger-Trayner (undated) you have the following:
Domain; an environment that has identification which is established by shared mutual interest.
Community; where members pursue their interests and others help them to do so through sharing and contributing to activities.
Practice; where members share experiences and ideas for improving skills and knowledge or solving problems.
http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/
“Give another useful framework to evaluate online pedagogies”
I’ll bring in Collis and Moonen’s Contributing Student model;
“In the contributing-student approach, the stress is on activities –sometimes called generative activities– that involve the learner as an active contributor to the learning experiences and resources” (Collis & Moonen, 2005 p 1).
This theory is particularly interesting at evaluating or devising activities around the learner in online environments. Reflecting on the characteristics of the model (p 17), here in the Yammer community we have started with an empty space and filled it by sharing and creating our own materials and knowledge through discussions, in which we can use or relate in our own contexts" (Scott, 2015f).
In the online community, a member shared their frustration of keeping up to date with the notifications of responses. I responded with the following and expressed my concerns I had.
October 20 at 7:33pm
"I too have been finding this environment frustrating in terms of engaging in conversation and keeping on track of it. I was getting lots of emails saying people were responding and I immediately felt left out and eager to contribute as I knew I would have lots of notifications to deal with.
Some other thoughts:
I am conscious about the assessment, have I contributed enough? Are my comments and resources strong enough for an online discussion? However, I also believe that assessment determines how much effort we put into posts rather than being too informal due to the word approximate word count. So could this be engaging learning through assessment?
However, I have been directing some conversations the way I want them to go in terms of what I want to know more about. If it was too passive I may not receive what I wanted to receive. So a certain amount of individual initiative and motivation is needed to acquire what you need as well. Could this be an element of Connectivism;
“The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical” (Siemens, undated). http://www.itdl.org/journal/jan_05/article01.htm
I also feel a bit out of depth at times as I may appear less knowledge as some peers due to their what I deem better responses or language. Perhaps this is where Bourdieu's theory of social capital (habitus) draws in is increasing in the online environment (field) and my capital is decreasing within the topics (doxa) (Julien, 2014)?
Furthermore, to write this I had to open up a Word document and make notes as I go along as there is too much to remember to reply to. Which takes the task longer and defeats an objective of Technology Enhanced Learning – creating tasks not reducing them? Could this be linking to cognitive overload (Mayer & Moreno, 2003)? (Scott, 2015g).
Theory in practice
There are many social and technological aspects to consider in online communities, however further to this video the following are additional thoughts I have had.
I felt that I needed to keep contributing to every comment that was being made. But is this down to engagement in technology rather than social interaction? Could be both but we tend to respond to the technology first of it's notifications rather than the desire to find out what others have to say. In terms of text comments, these can be misinterpreted as there is little human expression behind them. If the use of emoticons or emojis were more used this could possibly support body language and better expression of text communication. As mentioned in the video about ground rules, perhaps these should have been revisited to reinforce the expectations of the online community. But consider for a moment if there weren't any ground rules. The online community would carry on to be a free style environment with little structure. But if contributions are relevant, would this matter? You could say rules are there to be broken. Back to the start, is the medium the message? Perhaps not, as discussed online content is king but more importantly the relationships that need to be developed to support one and another. These relationships need to be maintained and encouraged to better the community.
Technology and people
The following are notes I took from watching a very thought provoking video on how technology has socio-cultural impact on people.
October 13 at 9:02pm
Interesting video! Here the notes I made while watching it:
Emerging and latest technology - here today gone tomorrow.
Technology can lead you into a false sense of security that it can resolve everything from engagement to achievement. Plus when technology corrupts it leaves you feeling like it was a pointless exercise.
If technology usage is not managed properly, it could destroy humanity.
The last note reminds me of a post I wrote two years ago:
http://danielscott86.blogspot.com/2013/09/evolutionary-not-revolutionary.html (Scott, 2015h).