ALT C 2009 – reflections and dissemination September 10, 2009

Alt C 2009 Reflections

Alt C - Photo By James Clay, that's me bottom right hand corner looking very interesting talk to the guys from WIMBA

All the powerpoints, abstracts and papers can be found here: http://altc2009.alt.ac.uk/

I found it a very good conference. With both my hats on – my Learning Consultant role and my role as a learner I could select sessions to attend based on work interests and H800 relevance, sessions that would help not only my understanding of concepts we’ve covered in H800 but in helping with my ECA. It has made it a very productive 3 days for me as I’ve been able to relate it to both of those contexts rather than only having one context. It’s great to hear so many different views as well, which complement the course notes and the opinions I am starting to form.

My favourite sessions were Tim Neumann’s stuff on e-conferencing, probably from my student Hat more than work, but work relevant too and Uni of Plymouth’s report on learner experience presented by Jennie Winter.

Some key learning points/points of reflection I’ve got right now are:

Although many (not all) people are becoming adept at multitasking this is not good for learning, as it means concentration on each task is shallow and good engagement is not occurring.

If we introduce too many social technologies to students PG/PT students, they will have greater difficulty in creating the  boundaries they need to focus on learning even thought the advantages of using these software are good for opportunities to learn in a socio-constructivist way.

Meeting someone from H800 was interesting, we found it useful to reflect together on things we heard at the conference against what we’d done in our studies, useful to exchange interpretations of course activities and so on. Although the distance learning communication tools of blogs, e-conferencing and forums go someway to give me social learning experiences when I am someone who needs the convenience of distance learning due to my work and life commitments, nothing beats F2f discussion. What is that X factor that this has given me that the social technologies have not – a lot of it is the visual clues, some is the synchronousity, and some is the ease at which you can communicate in person. The barriers to this were the asynchronousity, lack of emotional clues/visual clues and in Audio Conferencing, the turn taking issue.

However, the keynote speeches did not add anything by being f2f. I could not interact with the people around me or the presenter. The people who logged online while watching were talking on Twitter so they were able to engage in simultaneous discussion about the topic. It would have been fine to have saved a lot of money and the environment by having the keynote speakers streamed in from their places of work (or wherever they were).

Being at the conference really focuses the mind on concentrating on absorbing knowledge and reflecting. Being able to talk about sessions and reflect on what I’d learnt immediately afterwards with Carol was useful. I could blog it, which is useful, but any replies/responses/reactions I might get might be delayed or might not even happen. It’s likely that people will read my blog on this but will they comment – a challenge there for my readers.

Notes from sessions that really stood out for me follow below…H800 students wil find some of this useful I hope…

Weeks 13 and 14 Activities 2b, 2c – audio/video evidence May 15, 2009

I watched a narrated slide show of the results of the JISC LXP study by Grainne Conole (you need to download and save the presentation to get the narration to work)

[slideshare id=121445&doc=conole-jisc-lxp4304]

This followed on from the paper we read in Activity 2a which provided a report of the same project.

The slide show helped to reinforce and scaffold (dare I use a term like that when I don’t fully understand it, have I used it correctly) the learning from the paper.  Watching the slideshow having read the paper made it easier to understand. Just listening and watching the very BUSY slides would have been confusing if I’d done that first.  I found the slides really messy and hard to read it all while listening. The downside I found about the slide show was that having already read the report twice, I wanted to skip some of the slide show but whereas with reading you can skim read and leap frog bits, this is difficult with audio as you may miss something important or  new. I chose not to use the transcript by the way, as I wanted to experience just slides and audio narration.

The media used for this message the author to emphasise points in a much more informal way as it isn’t bound by research publication standards, enabling the author to emphaise key messages to the audience without having to stick to academic writing standards – the author can be more personal and refer to the first person and their findings which, for me, made it more interesting.

For me the video clips added some level of reality to the study. The things the student was saying complimented the studies findings, however, the video of her working at home and in the learning labs at University made the prose in the study come to life. I could now picture, for real, what it was like to be a student today and not just imagine what the study means. However young I like to think I am, it is wrong to assume that you can put yourself in the shoes of those 15 years younger than you in this completely different environment to myUG experience where you were lucky to get access to a PC and all PC’s did then was enable you to present your work in Word, Excel and PowerPoint – well, at least that’s what I found. With the videos you are not just taking someones word for it, you can see the claims in action.

Keith wrote this in the forums: “For the LXP project, Conole(2008) finds that “that students are using a range of different types of e-learning strategies, appropriating the tools to meet their own needs” What does this imply for us educators or designers? Should different types of technologies be made accessible for particular learning outcomes so that all possible types of learners can be accomodated? I think that the research we have been reviewing is putting us in this direction, but I doubt that this is practical in a real context.” (Keith Aquilina, 14 May 2009 22:49:45
Subject: Re: A2d: Forum discussion To:  H800 les6 09 W13-14 A2d)

I responded: “If you think that  Conole’s statement refers to e-resources (eg podcasts, multimedia resources, online tests etc) then the answer to how to accommodate all types of learners means that yes we would have to create these resources in all type of media which would not happen due to cost. So how do we ensure, with these types of resources, that different learning styles and the need for learner choice (as Conole puts it – voting with their feet if they don’t see value in it) will suffer.

However, I think she is actually referring to dialogue tools to encourage participatory learning. eg  Web 2.0 tools like forums, SNSs, MSN, blogs, etc (i include VLE forums here) then the implication is that we need to design the learning content to enable communication and then let the students choose how they communicate. But the implications of this is: should we make participation a requirement, if so, I like the idea of the eportfolio self assessment of participation that we touched on several weeks ago for this. The other implication is how to we ensure students are discussing the right things and not leading each other down the wrong paths. I wonder if Emma and Jenny’s course in the videos for LXP made the eportfolio a requirement or optional…and wonder what the opinions of the the less “comfortable with technology” students were…”

Weeks 13 and 14 – A 1b and 1c – perceptions and use of technology by students May 12, 2009

We read two reports, one from the USA ECAR survey of UG students from 2008 on their use and preferences for ICTs, and an Australian study in 2006 with a similar scope. The comparison between countries and results is hard due to the dates, as web 2.0 and Social Networking Sites (SNS) etc are more prevalent in 2008 than in 2006. So the analysis is really about how have students moved on since 2006.

Weeks 13 and 14 – Activity 1b – notes from reading May 11, 2009

A1b readings of research into student behavours in USA and Australia

1, Salaway et al 2008 ‘The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology’. http://www.educause.edu/ECAR/TheECARStudyofUndergraduateStu/163283 (accessed 11th May 2009)

Annual US student survey. 14000 student responses- picture of changing patterns of use of T over the years.

2.Kennedy et al (2006) Questioning the net generation: A collaborative project in Australian higher education http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney06/proceeding/pdf_papers/p160.pdf

Wk 1 A11 – Patterns of internet use in Britain February 14, 2009

I read the report, Dutton, W.H. and Helsper, E. (2007) Oxford Internet Survey 2007 Report: The Internet in Britain (Oxford Internet Institute)

My notes from reading the executive summary are here. http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfjp86bs_88dq9ntsgs

Some of the patterns of internet use I would like to comment on are:
The most popular information seeking activities are making travel plans, looking for local events and news - I use the internet for this alot. In fact, most of my time is spent doing this. However I find that the internet does severely lack in local information, unless you live in a city.
Use of internet for everyday learning has increased – I think I learn something new everyday on the internet and think it’s great when you are thinking or talking about something and you need more information, you can just go online there and then if you have mobile access, and get the answers or information you want.
First port of call for majority of internet users - Yes, I always start with the internet for information, if I can’t find it there, then I go elsewhere. I get frustrated if it’s not on the interne especially if I don’t know where else to look.
Information about purchases is a common use but still doubts over the lack of face to face contact with the product/retailed – and as a result peopel depend on online reviews much more.
TV watching has reduced as a result - I’ve seen this in my life and friends of ours. People are spending more time using resources on the internet and socialising via the internet. In an indirect way, the internet created the role I am working in now, which created my ambition to do this course, which has meant I watch less TV.
Less than 1/5 use social networking profiles – althought I’m a self confessed internet addict, I hate social network sites and can’t yet see they’re benefit to me. Perhaps it’s just an issue of time and I am becoming more selective in how I spend my time.
People do not feel that the internet intrudes on the time they spend with friends and families - I think it does intrude on this time, but it also increases the time you spend with friends and families. Without the internet my parents could not see their granddaughter as regularly as they do – we have regular Skype chats with them with the web cam since she was born; there are friends I am still in touch with, who I would not be without the internet. People are reunited over the internet too.
It increases contact with others, esp those at a distance *** See above
Civic participation is low – eg signing online petitions – but is that because we are quite an apathetic nation?
e-gov’t services have increased – I’ve used the internet for ordering tax discs, it’s so much easier than going to the post office and trying to find all those documents you have to take and queueing on a Saturday morning. One simple online form, no evidence required, it arrives in the post within a couple of days.

Implications for learning and teaching activities
Learners come from all ages and all background so not all will have the same experience, confidence or preferneces for using the internet. The study said that there are people who do not use the internet (Digital divides exist – men, students, Higher Ed’d and higher income individuals more likey to use than women, retired, disabled, lower education and lower income.) and these are people who study too so we have to consider their abilities when integrating technology into the learning.

I wonder if the gap that women show in this research is not down to confidence but to time (those in a traditional family arrangement of course). I’d love to learn more about this gender divide and the reasons behind it.

Simon’s comments:
Given the discussion that has been ongoing about lurking, the statement that says, “Internet users tend to consider themselves more extroverted and social than non-users” seemed pertinent. Acknowledging that some people prefer to learn alone suggests that the context of Internet use has a bearing on user confidence. This has implications for designing online learning activities for students when our own experience is different to the experiences of others. (Simon Allan, 12-02-09 12.39 Wk 1 A11)

A6 – Information literacy crisis – screen cast, Ian Rowlands February 12, 2009

Screen cast is here – http://stadium.open.ac.uk/ stadia/ preview.php?s=31&whichevent=1173.

My notes on this are here – http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfjp86bs_87cn3pzvgr

Comments:

Conclusions

There is a continuum of ICT comfort across all generations, the google generation is not entirely different to older generations. There is diversity within that generation, educators need to segment that group and respond to their differing needs. Librarians need to bring back the skills of information literacy. We’ve got to take information skills more seriously.

Which part(s) of the argument are most relevant to you as a reader and a student?

As someone with a background in marketing his conclusions about segmenting the generation for targeting your approach to information literacy, education etc was perfectly sensible. I also was pleased that he recognised the diversity at all ages and that in fact age isn’t the key digital divide. Ultimately I think the divide is access, age is an obvious thing to plump for as older people have an obvious difference in their access to ICTs as compared to the under 20s who have always had a computer at home, have mobile technology and do a lot of their everyday tasks by ICTs.

Which part(s) of the argument are most relevant to you as a teacher, trainer or other practitioner or potential practitioner?

That the pre-google generation are very adaptable and can retrain into these new ways easily – as long as they are open to it and being aware that not all of this generation want to or engage with ICTs that much so choices must be made available.I had not considered the issue of information literacy before (not having a teaching/academic background) and will admit to being one of those people who search with sentences and not key words and have lost my information search skills due to becoming used to using sentence based searching for websites and then transferring this searching skill to my academic searches. I’m also guilty of the brand associations made with the terms library being linked to print and search to online. I have experienced using libraries online and using digital resources in an physical library but have developed a preference for searching online rather than physically.

What for you are the strengths and weaknesses of each form of presentation – reading from the report in Activity 4, and listening to a webcast lecture now? We will return to this issue in Week 5.
The written report gives the student/reader critical statistical information to help them understand the paper; the screencast gives you the chance to hear things from the horses mouth in a much more informal and understandable way.

H800 – Week1 Act 5 – Digital Natives February 10, 2009

Activity A5 – teaching/reaching the net generation
Introducing us to debates about the net generation / digital Natives (DNs). Gregor Kennedy interview and paper about their research into Marc Prensky’s claims/assumptions about the DNs.
Interview by John Pettit from OU and research paper

Some of the assumptions about the DNs is that they are highly skilled with ICTs, grew up with digital tools all around them, good at multitasking with technology, create and consume web content and are practised at social networking and other web 2 tools.

This is research into how different this generation is to the rest of the generations, is it really an age thing. Many debaters are saying yes they are different. Prensky wrote about the DN in 2001 and he suggested that these people had spent their whole lives surrounded by technology and as a result changed the way they think, with the implications that we therefore have to change the way we teach. Prensky also claimed that students want technology in their education. Prensky’s papers, according to Kennedy shocked the educational sector. Kennedy aimed to gather evidence to support or not.

Prensky also labelled the educators as digital immigrants, aliens in the DN environment facing a big challenge, and that the biggest gap in education today is the gap between DI and DN, and that pedagogical models need to change to suit a new kind of learner. Prensky’s claims assume uniformity in the generation, that they are all “blessed” with the characteristics of the net generation.

Evidence based understanding of students’ technical experiences is vital for informing HE policy and practice and if preferences in their own lives regarding technology are also preferences in their education.

Pilot study in 2006, 2000 1st year students at one Australian University (Uni of Melbourne) (Oxbridge style uni). Survey into their access to, uses of, skills and preferences for technology at university. (Paper linked above is results of this survey).

Followed up with research and three very different universities, Melbourne, Charles Sturt (mostly DL students) and Wollongong University (modern university).

Survey, interviews and focus groups to be able to ascertain process issues and feelings in more depth. The different collection methods garnered a different level of inquiry. Focus groups did have negatives in that not everyone would speak (either because they agree or too scared to disagree). They also gathered information from the support staff and academics (The so called digital immigrants).

Research found that many 1st year students were tech-savvy but it was not uniform or homogeneous.

Students showed a mixture of reactions to whether certain technologies should be used in their education. Kennedy looked at the relationship between frequency of use of technologies and students’ desire to have them used in their education and found weak connections for some technologies.

Results – a lack of homogeneity and a digital divide within just this one year group. Countering Prensky’s assumptions, so warn educators that overhauling curriculum to suit a homogeneous DN is dangerous. Challenge for educators is how to cater for this broad range of students’ levels of access to, familiarity with and preferences for technology based tools.

This study negates a one size fits all approach to integration of ICT in education and supports the argument that integration should also be pedagogically driven.

Educators and educational developments who have expertise in existing and emerging technologies need be proactive against the evidence and assumptions of what DNs students have access to and have preferences for. Evidence should inform policy and practice.

Student equity is an issue, e.g. increase use of podcasts but what if students are unfamiliar with MP3 players, don’t have one, have never downloaded or used podcasts then the key benefit of being able to download and listen when you like is lost.

At end of interview Kennedy does not discount the terms ND or DN totally and says there is a lot more research to be done but that we should be more focused on what students’ experiences of technology are and not just take the concept of the DN as read.

H800-Week 1 – blog 1 February 10, 2009

Hi World
I learnt about keeping a journal or portfolio of work in H808 and plan to do so for H800 which started on 7th Feb 09. I think this shows a significant piece of reflective learning as I have had 2 weeks off since H808 and starting H800 and I’ve realised how useful it was keeping a portfoliop/blog for the assessments and TMA 1 in H800 is also evidence based so here I go.

Week 1a
First impressions – a bit scared. The course is designed around learning objects and a list of tasks I have to do. Although it’s just as much commitment as H808 it seems more rigid and makes me feel I’ve taken on too much. My tutor group also make me scared, there are all a lot older and wiser than I and in general are lecturers/teachers so have a completely different take on elearning to me and are all VERY active on the discussion boards making even me seem inactive. Looking at it more positively I can see that I am going to learn alot from these people and in particular learn alot about their viewpoints which will help me in my working with academics. Maybe I’ve misinterpreted them, so far though they are all a lovely group of people – well they’d better be, we’ve got 32 hard weeks together ahead of us.
A1: Meeting fellow students and tutor. We had to send a message to the group introducing ourselves and saying something unusual about yourself and one learning technology that we enjoy using. We were also asked to reply to interesting points in other people’s messages. I enjoyed this activity, there was a lot to do as I don’t like to see anyone left out so wanted to reply to everyone and what I found that everyone made a point of picking up something in each other’s messages to actually have a conversation about. This was rare in H808, which tended to be just a collected of postings, no real discussions as I would define them. I think we’ve done a good job of starting to get to know each other. I also note from the level of activity that I may be able to enjoy being a follower rather than the followed which I will enjoy. I don’t have time for too much leadership. I look forward to discussions with the group.
Despite the high levels of interaction, there are a few group members who claim not to enjoy group study and love to be buried in books; quite the opposite to me. It’ll be interesting to see how their views change, or mine of course! I think H800 is quite a different kettle of fish than H800 – I think it’s stepped up a notch.
A2: Sharing your reactions to the courses themes. We were asked to tell the group about something that interested you about the course themes and the learning outcomes, to compare reactions. I posted that I was particularly interested in 2 of the learning outcomes, number 2. choices that learners make about their own learning, in terms of which technologies they use, why and how and 8. draw on a wide range of experience, accounts and formal research evidence to recommend appropriate ways of using technologies in specific contexts. Eddy at least had the same reasons as me, I think there were more. A lot of people were keen to learn about how they could use technology in their teaching.
A3: How much changed when printing arrived – see article here. about the first law of technology “THE FIRST Law of Technology says we invariably overestimate the short-term impact of new technologies while underestimating their longer-term effects.” and how the invention of printing had such a huge impact on society that was not expected. We discussed other examples that upheld this view, such as the invention of the car (Eckart’s post) and how Mr Ford can’t have realised how much impact his invention would have.
A4: Generations of information seekers. This started off the debate about the Google generation or the supposed age based digital divide. A comparison of students of different ages in terms of how dependent they were on five methods of finding articles was shared with us (CIBER/UCL 2008). It showed that 17-21 mostly used online sources, and older generations were less dependent on these but more dependent on a range of sources including more traidtional ones. We compared the sources of information to our own preferences and I said that “
“My preferences are for Personal recommendations, which I include reference lists in course materials, and then Google Scholar to explore the reading further. I haven’t the time for browsing libraries and find them difficult to use/find what I want, so prefer the online route. Like Simon this is also a reflection of how I shop!” Keith has also posted similar, and we three are all in the 26-35 age bracket which is showing a pattern already.
They tried to prove or disprove some of the myths of the Google Generation such as The need to feel constantly connected to the internet, the cut and paste generation, picking up computer skills by trial and error and expert researchers. This is what I thought about those 4 statements and me:
“1. ‘They [the Google Generation] need to feel constantly connected to the web’
Well you tell me, 6 months ago we went Wifi, 1 month ago I bought a phone with 3G and unlimited web surfing, this week I received a laptop. I do EVERYTHING online, it’s scary. Shop, plan travel, talk to my friends, (i hardly ever phone anyone), do academic research, look for and apply for jobs, read the news, rent DVDs, the list goes on, study! If it’s online I’m there. If it’s not online I generally don’t do it, or do it under duress, to my own disadvantage I know! I get really frustrated about services who do have websites and email addresses but don’t respond to them. Another piece of evidence to prove this is me, as if I need it, is that when I go to Kazakhstan in a few weeks just for 3 days, I’ve already sussed out where the internet cafes are!
2. ‘They are the “cut-and-paste” generation’
I hope that this doesn’t apply to me, but I have just cut-and-pasted Frauke’s message and deleted her entries to save me typing the structure out again! Is that the same or is that me just being efficient?
3. ‘They pick up computer skills by trial and error’
I think I’m a partly this one, I start off with trial and error but then refer to the experts when I get stuck.I learned to use a computer early because we always had a computer in the house growing up for office tasks, not for games, so was exposed to it very early. I am a self taught touch typist and self taught at MS office. However, this only goes so far; I need to consult “online” manuals and attend training when things get more advanced and tend to refer to forums a lot for technological guidance. The drawback of trial and error learning is that you probably miss out on so much functionality.
4. ‘They are expert searchers’
There are so many legitimate sources online now that you can be an expert searcher online. It certainly helps to be digitally literate to help in your ability to be an expert searcher of online resources, so I partly disagree with the researchers, and as Frauke said, it’s the ability to identify what to look for, how to find it and show you’ve made good research choices that make you an expert searcher, not simply being able to use a digital source of information. Whether you find the information in a physical library or an online library doesn’t matter as long as the information is valid.”
The same article explains a lot about the myths and truths of the google generation and it’s potential impact on education in the future. There is an argument to say that even though the characteristics of the Google Gen exist, it’s not restricted to the 17-21 age group, in fact it is the 30-50 age group who creates much of the content that the younger gen enjoys in social networking/web 2.0 stuff.
” But there is no evidence in the serious literature that young people are expert searchers, nor that the search skills of young people has improved with time . Studies pre-dating the widespread public use of the Internet have reported that young searchers often display difficulty in selecting appropriate search terms, and research into Internet use has consistently found similar difficulties.”
However concerns are that young people are not questionning the validity of information as well as they should, and taking what they read on the web as true so one of the challenges in education is to unteach that.
The authors warn educators that: the internet is fading into the background in that it is being taken for granted and educational bodies are not keeping up with this and are not present enough in the environment. Educators need to be “more e-consumer friendly and less stodgy and intellectual”. Educators also have to be wary of being decoupled, ie students finding information elsewhere that you have no links with or knowledge of and cutting you out of the process altogether eg making libraries obsolete.