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.

Mahara's Usability: 1. Potential issues

I decided to use the e-portfolio platform, Mahara, for the usability assessment.

In thinking about the kinds of usability issues that might arise, I would imagine the following:
Technical usability: since Mahara is an open source platform, I suspect that technical issues will be well handled and the site will be easily available. Ditto the general level: input from lots of developers ought to make the site relatively navigeable and well ordered.

I suspect any usability issues will kick in at the academic and context specific levels. During H808, I found the concept and practice of the e-portfolio very difficult to grasp, and I suspect trying to make the general and specific use of the e-portfolio clear to users will be tricky. The fact that an eportfolio is such an individual record of achievement, and is used for different purposes (reflection, planning, publishing) means that the platform must offer a lot of scope for individual personalisation of the platform. Until a student has got their head around what it is that they want to achieve with their e-portfolio, the many options might be very confusing.

But this is a good experiment for me, as I hope to incorporate the use of eportfolios into a new programme of mine.

When Social Cues are absent

The background reading on Social Cues in H807 week 6 has made me think about what has happened in a volutary activity in which I am involved. The service is one that befriends people in emotionally difficult situations and continues to be telephone and/or face to face based, but over the past 10 years, we have begun to offer the option of email contact, for those who prefer the option. The email service has seen exponential growth in popularity since it was launched, and many users tell us it is extremely helpful.

The remote contact can be welcome because the person is not located in the UK, and therefore would find telephone contact impractical or too expensive. But probably more importantly, some people find themselves in a situation which they cannot bring themselves to talk ahout -  perhaps because of embarrassment, fear or just pain. Being able to write about these feelings is often the first step for these people in dealing with the difficult situation.

I had a difficult email encounter yesterday which has given me pause for thought about the emotional dimension of virtual communication. It would be quite improper for me to disclose anything about the situation, but suffice to say the person concerned had an emotionally charged situation which they had not shared with anyone. There had been 45 emails sent to us and replied to over the past month or so. Every email they had sent had only short statements, or just a word, and the person at first would disclose nothing at all about their situation. But gradually, as my fellow volunteers gently supported and questioned this person, the story began to unfold.

Although we cannot see this person, or hear their voice, the words on the page and the way they are written have many clues about their emotions. And the fact that we can read all the emails sent and all the replies that volunteers have given lets us build up a much better picture of the situation than would be possible in other than a regular one to one relationship. At one point we manage to persuade this person to write two or maybe three short sentences. The next response is short and sharp - pushing back on the quesion or comment made. Or even worse - capital letter shouting!

Several of my fellow volunteers refuse or are reluctant to engage in email befriending, as they think it is too impersonal, but my view is that this is their chosen medium, and we should respect that. What I have to do is to create a mental picture of the person, and to use every word they write to imagine their situation and to try and put myself in their shoes. I then have to do exactly the same with every word I write. Could that word be misconstrued? Have I been too sharp or direct? Could I inadvertantly push them in a direction that might not be natural for them?

The experience of email befriending has definitely made me much more sensitive when I write any email personal or business - and ironically, I think it has also made me a much more sensitive listener.

The other phenomenon that I think makes this kind of communication easier is that these days people are much more used to texting each other and the idea of written communication is getting more acceptable.

So I am wondering whether this point of view that face to face is the only way to pick up emotional cues will in time become irrelevant?

Affordances and Communication Technologies: H807 Week 5.1

Using the affordances cited in Conole et al, I have considered the extent to which email and blogs are technologies which afford the characteristics listed.

I have added a couple of characteristics, which I have found to be important in my practice; Stimulate Action and Reward Action

I have made a spreadsheet on Google docs to record my conclusions.

Although several of the characteristics listed are afforded through email and blog, there are a few that seem particularly well served.

Email, because of its instantaneous capability and its ubiquitousness is good at Accessibility, Speed of Change, Communication, Immediacy, Stimulate Response/Action and Incentivise Action.

Blogging on the other hand is good for Reflection and Collaboration. The technology also enables users to be rewarded for participation when commenters post replies. The use of RSS feeds on blogs also means they can enable speed of change and immediacy.

Doug Hall's criteria for judging innovation

Quick reminder to myself, on the subject of successful innovation:
Doug Hall, who is an engineer by profession, and began career in product development in Procter and Gamble, has devoted himself since leaving P&G to the study of innovation. He works with many of the most innovative companies, such as Disney and Nike and has developed a methodology around innovation. One of his discoveries has been the features that are common to successful innovative products.

He has found three characteristics of a product that are essential for success;
1. Overt benefits of the product - what does the customer get that matters to them?
2. Reason to believe - how can you prove that your promise for the product will deliver? (guarantees, testimonials, trials periods all help here)
3. Dramatic difference - how is your product in a different league to others with which it might be compared? Better still, if it creates a new league for itself.

All thee features above aree essential for a new product to be successful, but by far the most important is number 3 - dramatic difference!

Reference
Hall, D, (2001), Jump Start Your Business Brain, Betterway Books, Cincinnati OH

Criteria for Deciding on which Innovation to Fund: Week 3, Activity 4

I can understand that the Kaye & Hawkridge criteria helped them to select the case studies for a book on innovative elearning examples. However, in the innovation life cycle, the end product may be a way off yet. Johnson (2010) explains that the process of innovating is a continuous process of working in the "adjacent possible" - ideas that occur to you that are stimulated by the way things are now. Later he says "we take the ideas we've inherited or that we've stumbled across and we jigger them together into some new shape" (p 30) I would therefore be most concerned to make sure that potentially significant innovations that are not developed enough yet were not rejected too early.

The three criteria I am going to nominate are from the perspective of a project manager (like myself) in a private sector training company which is looking to make elearning a channel through which to develop new routes to market. At the moment this is relatively unchartered territory,

Cost will always be an issue and if the project is too expensive, it will not be afforded. Other criteria might help us work out which cost we should do well to find ways to afford. After all if the top line revenue generated by the programme can be increased, the cost becomes less of an issue.

The three criteria I would therefore nominate are:

1. New routes to market: is the programme appealing to and accessible by a wide audience of clients that would be new to our business? This might be judged by the number of students attracted so far, and the extent to which they are a new type of customer for the business.

2. Engagement of students: Our business prides itself on the impact that its f2f training interventions has on the performance of students back in the workplace. The degree of participation and excitement which it is possible to generate on and offline should therefore be a second criterion for deciding on the most worthy programme. Online participation monitoring and feedback from the workplace about any changes in behaviour/performance of students are at least two ways in which this criterion could be measured.

3. Customer Service: being able to monitor students progress, and then to personalise the programme to meet their learning needs and the needs that their business has of them will be an important way to differentiate our service in the market place. Programmes and technology that enable us to connect intimately with the learning progress of our students will therefore, again, be a differentiator in the market for the innovative programme. Activity in a VLE, and student responsiveness to new input could be methods of measuring against this criterion.



Madeleine


Reference:
Johnson, S (2010), Where Good Ideas Come From - A Natural History of Innovation, Allen Lane, London

Innovators and the "Chasm"

Moore's chasm model highlights the gap that exists between those who invent new products and the rest. The chasm analogy that he uses paints a graphic picture of the distance.

In my experience, it is not just the gap between innovator and the rest that is the challenge in a new product introduction. It is the singlemindedness that an innovator often requires to drive his/her idea through to fruition. This determination can make the innovator resistant to input from others, and therein lies a major weakness. For ideas to be adopted by many, the reservations of others must be dealt with by reaching over the chasm and finding ways to bridge the gap.

As for whether the chasm theory that might be relevant to elearning innovation, the fact that this is a consumer marketing model is a weakness. The audience for elearning innovation is threefold; the student, the teacher and the investor/institution. I am not convinced that these three constituents all act as consumers in deciding whether to adopt an elearning innovation.

However, the notion of the need to bridge the gap between innovation and potential users is an important one, and finding sponsors/supporters is essential.

Innovation Case Studies Block 1, Week 2.2

In this task, we are asked to study a number of case studies - too many to read them all;-) I have decided to choose cases that have some relevance to my work life.

1. Bradford University Physiotherapy  Course - a module that brings the user (customer in my parlance) to life, and helps with the transfer of learning. The case based scenario module incorporated media rich elements, to make them more emotionally engaging. The scenarios were used in a blended learning format, which encouraged problem solving debate on the cases. Student feedback shows they are engaging with the material.
2. Derby University BA in Business Studies. This course has been transformed by being available fully online. This has attracted a more mature student, that is motivated to complete the course. As well as being available online, there is flexibility about when modules are taken, which means that a three year course can be completed in two years. Student enrollments and satisfaction levels have been on the increase. No particular evidence of any pedagogical innovations.
3. Swansea University BA and MA in Archaeology. The use of a combination of images from archaeological site, with an accompanying podcast commentary by an academic who is working on/visitng the site has been very well received. The larger number of requests to attend field study summer schools is an example of this greater level of engagement. The evidence is that students find the input much more engaging. It is also an excellent option for students with mobility issues, who would otherwise miss out on the experience of 'visiting' a site. The staff have extended their use of podcasting technology to respond to specific student enquiries. These can then become a shared resource for the future.
4. Warwick University Team Based approach to creating e-resources. This project focuses on the method used by the UReCA department which has over 1000 part time students and more than 80  modules. Previously course materials were provided in paper based form - e-resources were provided only by enthusiasts. By taking a collaborative, whole department approach to developing e-resources, the project raised the confidence and competence of staff to engage with elearning. As a result, not only has the student experience been enhanced, but staff development and collaboratiion continues on the VLE that was used for the collaborative project. Free lunches were used to reward, entice participation of reluctant members of staff!!

Week One Reflections H807

In Block One of H07, we were encouraged to share our initial thoughts about innovation in elearning. There were several strands of discussion, one of which was 'what is the definition of innovation?'

I think we all agreed that innovation was about creating something new, but there were several debates 

1. Does a new idea/application have to be successful to qualify as an innovation?
2. Is a new use of a existing technology an innovation?
3. Can an application that is new to a person (although not new to the world) be counted as innovation?  

With my 'business' hat on, we tend to look on innovation is a very results oriented way; if an idea has no practical application, it tends to get dismissed out of turn. But as any successful innovator will tell you, it is the tries that don't work that get you to the point where you find a try that does work. So maybe the most helpful label would be to call an innovative idea that does not work an  'experiment' whereas the idea that does work gets the label of an innovation.

As for new uses of existing technology, that, in my mind is definitely an innovation. Technologies are simply tools, and finding new ways to use them opens up our understanding both of the subject being studied and of the potential of the tool. On both counts, that is definitely innovation.

If we take the definition of innovation as being to create new or to renew, the fact that an innovation is known to one group, does not mean in my mind that it is not innovative to a new audience. And as that new audience interacts with the innovation, they are very likely to create new meaning for themselves.

Without trying to summarise what I made of the activity, there are a number of points that have given me pause for thought.

The reference which Anita Houghton made to digital storytelling took me to an excellent paper. http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=120-1 The author, Nalin Sharda, pointed out that digital technologies give learners access to incredible amounts of information, but that making sense of that information was more tricky. Simply using the electronic media to present (even more!) information does not guarantee learning, never mind superior learning. His solution of engaging learners in reading and/or creating digital stories that force them to investigate a subject, and engage with the material is an innovation that enhances learning. Sounds good to me, although I'm sure it's harder than it sounds. Sharda sums up the pedagogical challenge of elearning as follows: "E-learning systems that just transform the traditional educational content (for example, books or lecture notes) into digital media are not successful; because, e-learning content that presents only facts and figures can loose the learners attention more easily than a good lecturer, who can capture the learners' attention with personal charisma. With e-learning content, the lack of personal connection (with a real teacher) can be overcome by creating "educational stories" that embody good storytelling principles."
Nicholas Keene drew attention to the difficulty of getting colleagues who were not schooled in ICT on board with innovations. "I could name 10 professors who were hostile the varying degrees to incorporating technolouyg more into their teaching forevery 1 who was in favour." Nicholas Keene Post 36 in reply to 23 • 11 February 2011, 00:10

It is very clear that there has been an explosion in the use of technology in learning in some academic circles. This however is not reflected in business. Although all my clients are electronically wired for producing their product/service, I don't see the innovation in using technology to the degree that seems present in some academic circles. Most business leaders see elearning as a way to deliver training more easily and many assume that this will mean it is cheaper. Grasping that elearning presents a pedagogical challenge is not on many non academic radars;-)

One last thought. Nicholas also found that "My first introduction to e-learning in an HE environment was chaotic. "Nicholas Keene Post 47 in reply to 44 • 13 February 2011, 01:39 This is a very typical response to a disruptive technology - we are suddenly presented with a brand new tool and working out how to use it is always going to be a bit messy.It would be nice to think that its introduction could be more orderly, but my sense is that the chaos creates learning, and it is only then that we can create order;-)
 

Getting Organised for H807

I am very excited to be coming back to the subject of elearning technology. My very first MAODE module was on this very topic, back in the pre web 2.0 days of 2002!! It is going to be fascinating to get underneath the surface of all of the changes that have taken place since then, and to work out which technologies can play a bigger part in my company's embryonic distance learning offering.

Before getting stuck into the content of H807, I have decided to take time to reflect on some of my H808 experiences.

My overwhelming memory of H808 was of confusion. I found it hard to make connections between the various topics we covered, in particular what the eportfolio was, and how it connected with the various etivities in which we took part. The fact that my eportfolio (the H808 Examinable Component) gained me the lowest mark of any of my 14 academic submissions so far tells me something about the extent to which I did eventually work that out!

With this in mind, I have decided to spend time during the week before the module starts by studying the course structure and the assignments, and by re-reading the TMAs from H802. This will make it much easier to be making connections with H807 material right from the start. I am confident I will find the connections on H807 easier to make, given my H802 experience and the fact that I do use web 2.0 applications of various kinds already (Facebook, Twitter, Blog, Linkedin, Elluminate, Google Apps etc). Let's hope I haven't been picking up too many bad habits on my own!!

Another frustration, I now realise, was that I allowed the timing of the TMA's and the EC to dictate how I organised my thoughts. I suspect that this made the execution of these assignments more laboured than they needed to be. My mind works in quite a butterfly way, and this time around, I want to do a better job at picking up these disorderly thoughts as I go. I have created an electronic notebook which has separate sections for each of the assignments, and I plan to collect nuggets of information there, as they occur to me. There is no rule that says that you can't start collecting your thoughts for future TMA's before you have finished the current one, is there?

One last note to myself; isn't it time I reviewed the experience of the changes that I made on the second Distance Learning Programme as a result of my H808 experiences? I really must do that before I become engrossed in H807 thinking; I am planning to use this same DL Programme for my H807 Examinable Component, so summarising the progress I have made will be a great discipline for me.