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).

Student Generated Content; F2F

I have read several of the recommended H807 articles on the subject of Student Generated Content; what I have been wondering is - what is the link between Student Generated Content and Social Constructivism? Here I will reflect on my recent use of Social Constructivism in a Face to Face setting, in which one of the outputs has been Student Generated Content. In particular I want to think about the kind of scaffolding and pedagogy that means that the learning objectives of the client and the student are met. I am hoping this will help me create some guidelines that can be applied in the online setting.

In a current face to face programme of mine we are making extensive use Social Constructivist pedagogies. The client has engaged us at a critical point in her company's growth to reinforce amongst all staff (new and experienced) the essential difference they are seeking to bring to the troubled banking sector. When it came to the session in which we were engaging with the subject of the principles that will guide the way employees act, the client was very anxious that we had failed to give her a slot in which she could explain these concepts to the audience. What we had done was to:

• encourage existing employees to bring their own examples of these principles in action today 
• encourage new employees to bring examples of treatment they had experienced from companies that they have appreciated/admired
• provide high level descriptions of the five principles
• organise employees into groups that have varying amounts of company experience

There is another structural benefit at play here, too, which is that the company is part of the Virgin group, which has a strong brand presence amongst consumers.

With all of these pieces in place, we set the mixed groups on a task of 'storytelling' and working out together how they would explain the company's principles to their mum or their pals in the pub! All I can say is that the results have been most impressive, and are being collected into a repository of stories that can be accessed by any employee. They have taken concepts that are more typically converted into 'corporate gobbledegook', and turned them into authentic and personal explanations. Having been initially concerned at the 'lack of structure' the client has agreed that the outcome was exactly what she was looking for, and is now happy with this pedagogy going forwards!

I have to say that the quality and credibility of the outputs does vary - but these sessions and the conversations they are generating back at work are a perfect way to inform and develop newcomers, and to iron out misunderstandings without declaring anyone right or wrong;-) When all is said and done, getting principles into action can only be done if people agree with them and are motivated to work out how to use them for themselves.

In the next blog I will attempt to draw out some principles of Student Generated Content that can be applied in the online setting.

Learner Support: Two Important Dimensions

Of the 10 dimensions that McLoughlin (2002) identifies as important for the scaffolding of learners, two seem very relevant to a course of mine; constructivism and learning orientation.

Constructivism scaffolding encourages the learners to make new meaning as opposed to conducting memorisation or rote learning.
Learning orientation scaffolding reduces the active contribution of the teacher as the learner gains more knowledge, skills and confidence.

In my situation, the learners have tended to remain in a passive role, accepting input from tutors, and offering critique or comments. The scaffolding to encourage them to create knowledge of their own and articulate it has been missing.

To encourage greater learning orientation, I envisage an individual task in which the learner must find their own case study examples that illustrate the theory they have been taught. An example can be provided, to model the way the case studies can be analysed and recommendations can be made about how and where to search for examples. If we were then to add the use of a shared workspace where the results of this research are logged, a further scaffold (collaboration) will be available.

Constructivism can be scaffolded by means of an activity that invites students to create a short presentation; this will articulate their learning to an audience of their choosing. A template which provides an outline structure for this presentation can be offered for those that a looking for greater guidance.

Yet again, I am finding that the subject of e-learning innovation is like the peeling of an onion. You think you've got the hang of a topic, and then another level is opened up into view. What strikes me about my previous efforts at e-learning is that I have overlooked the diversity of support needs and existing levels of knowledge of my students. I have assumed levels of knowledge, rather than looking for evidence of what that knowledge is and having a sense of what the next zone of development should be. Although the zones are likely to be different for each student, the more that the responsibility for that learning can be handed over to the student, the less crtical it is for the tutor to shoulder that burden.



Reference:
McLoughlin, C. (2002) ‘Learner support in distance and networked learning environments: ten dimensions for successful design’, Distance Education, vol.23, no.2, pp.149–62.

H807 Week 15: My approach to teaching and learning

My most recent learning programme contains several elements that are typical of my approach.

From what I have read so far, I think I incorporate a bit of all three associationist, cognitive and situative elements in my work.

Maybe it's because my business clients have a clear objective in what they want their people to learn, but I always need clear objectives/outcomes for an event. Having set these out, I then plot out a very clear route through the material that people need to learn. I think these are both associationist characteristics.

A firm bias of mine is to ask delegates to carry out pre work, which gets them thinking about the subject before they attend the event proper. This pre-work begins the process of how the learning is going to apply to the real world. This connects with another bias, which is to bring real examples/situations from the workplace into the classroom; customer feedback, well known work issues, well known objections are all examples of this.

When it comes to how I get the message across, I like to create a variety of activities; some will be informative, for example a video case study, a model or organising framework, an input with stories and examples, a worksheet with relevant information; others will be activities/mini projects/problem solving etc. I like to be able to vary the learning styles that are called on for these activities - eg. music, drawing, discussions, fun, physical activities.

Where possible, I like to get delegates to teach each other, and draw on each others' experience. In my most recent programme, mixed groups put together a description of the highlights of the company's growth and development to date drawing on each others' experience, and some background information provided by us.

I also favour groups discussing topics and coming up with their own version of the truth. This lets organisers assess the extent to which the message is being picked up.

Finally, I have a belief that for people truly to take on board a new message, they have to put themselves (physically, if possible) into the subject, and get a feel for its real meaning. I usually set this up with a collaborative activity in small groups, which most often has a light hearted dimension to it - performance is usually an important element.

The balance between the three theories of learning in my approach varies from project to project, and client to client, but I definitely don't prefer the lecturing/input approach. Some of my colleagues (especially the American ones!) are much more comfortable with being the subject matter expert, but I am less so.

Ref:
Mayes, T. and de Freitas, S. (2004) ‘Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models’ [online], Bristol, The Joint Information Systems Committee, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Learning%20Models%20%28Version%201%29.pdf (Accessed 24^th May 2011).

Addendum to "When Social Cues are Absent" Post

Having gone on to read Walther's (2006) paper on Non verbal dynamics in computer-mediated communication, I now realise that the dynamics I was describing in my previous post relate closely to the Hyperpersonal and Social information Processing Theories.

The important elements of Hyperpersonal theory to these sensitive exchanges are that the sender has been deciding precisely how much and what type of information they are sending to us. "Senders, in the process of message construction, engage in selective self presentation to a degree not afforded in FtF interaction." In situations, such as the example I gave, this gives a damaged person much more space, time and control in sharing their feelings with someone else. The anonymity of the electronic setting has, over time, led to what Walther describes as "greater self disclosure", which in a befriending situation such as this is precisely the intensity of communication we are seeking.

SIP throws more light on the subject: "it may take more messages, over a longer time, to imbue exchanges with sufficient information for participants to decode and aggregate in order to construct impressions and manage relationships." In this case, because the sender was providing very short, sharp, often pointed replies, it was possible over 45 or so emails to build up a picture of the hurt they were feeling. Capital letters, outbursts in reply to questions, emoticons and the use of other punctuation, all painted a vivid picture of the emotional state of the sender. 

All of which goes to show that "CMC users adapt affective meaning to their usage".

Although some colleagues find email a difficult medium for such sensitive 'conversations', I have heard from users of the service that the anonymity afforded by email has enabled them to share feelings they would never have been brave enough to share either in a face to face or a telephone setting. It's sad to hear that this is the case, but what a good thing it is that there is now an outlet for such extreme emotions.




Walther, J.B. (2006) ‘Nonverbal dynamics in computer-mediated communication, or :( and the net :( ’s with you, :) and you :) alone’ in Manusov, V. and Patterson, M.L. (eds) Handbook of Nonverbal Communication, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. (Accessed 24^th March 2011)

Darwin and the Demon: Connections with H807

Moore, Geoffrey A, (2004), Darwin and the Demon: Innovating Within Established Enterprises, Harvard Business Review; Jul/Aug 2004, VOl 82, Issue 7/8, p86-92, 7P, 1


This article was recommended background reading during week 3 of H807, where we were looking at who innovates and who follows. I have written some notes on the article on Google Docs.The author is a managing director of TCG Advisors, a strategy consultancy based in San Mateo California. The company declares; We specialize in a set of challenges common to technology companies and technology-related sectors, where rapid changes in market dynamics force frequent adjustments in corporate strategy.


The technology and consumer market focus of the article means that its relevance in the world of education is not wholesale. In educational circles, we are offering a professional service, and I question whether the consumer product model fits precisely. However, I can see that the article has a number of aspects that can be applied in H807 assignments, as well as in my own work.

1. The different types of innovation are a useful structure for reviewing the various case studies we are asked to study and report on in TMA1
2. When interviewing my innovator for TMA2, the innovation types and the market life cycle might offer a good basis on which to analyse the innovation, the innovator and the market life cycle position her company is in.
3. The 'overcoming inertia' guidelines will have relevance for educational organisations that are having difficulty in getting existing staff involved in adopting innovations. To some extent that is true in my own organisation where experienced staff are proving somewhat reluctant to participate in elearning
4. Deciding what type of innovation the redesign of our current elearning programme is will help me focus on the right activity for my H807 ECA.
5. The section on 'overcoming inertia' resonates with the change management work that my company undertakes