Scaffolding for Student Generated Content?

The subject of student generated content seems to be in a state of dynamic flux at the moment, most notably due to the fact that access to media that lets users broadcast their points of view to the world is increasingly available. The fashion for blogging saw a massive uptake in the noughties with all and sundry blasting out opinions and advice. Platforms like Facebook and Twitter have simply served to fan the flames of this already highly combustible brush fire. 


So just how useful can this phenomenon be for educators? There are several issues that struck me as important if SGC was to be a useful tool for learning;

• Focus; I have found myself on many occasions in my elearning past being completely thrown off-course in my investigations. The sheer breadth and connectivity of the web is enticing, but can waste time and leave one feeling lost. My sense is that for SGC to be productive, we must find ways to give direction and guidance, without being restrictive.
• Scaffolding/ Pedagogies: The web 2.0 generation is likely to resist/reject the kind of guidance that declares absolute truths. However, I can think immediately of three ways to provide scaffolding that can keep students on the right track; 1. a variety sources of credible information, 2. tools to help with the interpretation and discussion of this information and 3. fora in which students can seek mentorship in the application of what is learned. 
• Student Motivation: the most promising aspect for the growth of SGC that I can see is that it lets the student follow their own interests. In the online arena, participation of students is voluntary, hence prompting students to create content that has meaning for them, albeit with support, challenge and input from others, seems the only way to generate widescale participation.
• Plagiarism: this was a topic I did not see covered in any of the articles that I read, but the move to e-portfolios and web 2.0 assessment seems to lay tutors/educators open to much greater plagiarism. The OU's methods of providing discussion fora and using the evidence of forum posts for assessment is one way of discouraging plagiarism. The tutor/student discussion around ECA submissions is another such method. I am sure that, in time, software that identifies authorship of material will progressively become commonplace and should, hopefully stamp out the abuses that are no doubt currently taking place.

Comments that resonated from my H807 readings included:

A wider content provider base means more areas of knowledge can be covered (Chin 2006)

The challenge for educators is to define emerging pedagogies in terms of 21st

century skills where the ability to use new technologies and to shape social communication and interaction using a range of multimedia tools will define success in the future. (Johnson & Dyer, p2)

• Adaptive learning support is a type of learning support typically found in tutorial session or peer group informal learning.

• Computer-based adaptive learning support (Ljubojevic et al, 2005) has the goal of orchestrating the available reusable learning objects so as to meet a particular learner’s context and learning needs. (Cook and Light 2006, p56)

Although content provision can provide scaffolding for internet based learning it is community pull, characterised by social discourse and dialogue, which provides opportunities for critical reflection, problem solving and collaboration. (Johnson & Dyer, p2)

The most effective learning occurs where the learners’ interests are aroused and their self-defined pathway meets their needs, (Johnson and Dyer, p2) 

Since all users can become potential content providers, little is known about the credibility of the person and the content being posted (Chin, 2006)

in a corporate environment, there must be some measure of oversight to ensure the quality and accuracy of content (Chin, 2006)

Evidence from the study shows that participants are not driven exclusively by vocational objectives, being motivated by a variety of personal goals, which include, but do not rest upon, keeping up to date. (Cook and Light 2006, p59)

Chin, P. (2006) The Value of User-Generated Content, Intranet Journal, http://www.intranetjournal.com/articles/200603/ij_03_07_06a.html (Accessed 8th June 2011).

Johnson, J. and Dyer, J. (2006) ‘User-defined content in a constructivist learning environment’ [online], elearning papers, http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=8404&doclng=6 (Accessed 9^th June 2011).