I have tried hard this week to reach my own learning goal: to increase my level of engagement not only reading and reflecting, but collaborting. I’m in the middle of that battle, trying to develop ideas on adults education and open education, but this requires time…which is not that easy to find. My strategy is in any case to link my professional practices to the exchanges and the project I should develop…I guess this is an authentic approach to learning, but in my case, I would nominate the strategy, the desperate postmodern approach. Two many worlds, to many identities to manage, and the fight against my precarious way of working (and I like it). Searching for inner convergence, I have to force all outside there, my many worlds bundled in one dimension…oldsmooc…

After today’s interesting convergence session, I posted some reflections to our open discussion.

Josh provoked us, as usual, with these ideas:

Some thoughts from Jeff Waistell on useful metaphors for thinking about learning and context here and pasted below.

Should we adopt the music metaphor for Learning Design?

 

Ballet Russes by August Macke, 1912

As far as I went on reading the Larnaca declaration, it came to my mind the problem of notation in the case of coreography and dance.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 I used to be a dancer (contemporary dance); I loved and explored the explotion of creativity of the Ballet Russes of Diaghilev   -

Once I had an argument with a musician: He thought that music was a superior art because of its “mathematical” notation system, whereas for dance and coreography, that’s impossible. In fact, while there are refined techniques to transmit dance styles (for example Martha Graham techniques of movement and repertoire) it is nearly impossible to annotate it. I contended with the musician that there was a complex attempt, the Labanotation () but that technologies would help Dance to find a way of notation. Labanotation in fact was so complex that coreographers do not adopted it massively. A coreography is a kind of distributed system between the coreographer and the dancers.

Rudolf Laban presenting his notation system

Why is it so difficult to generate a notation for dance. There is an element: while music is placed on a dimension of time (and time is extremely important to a musical performance) and notation regards the activities of instruments over time (I’m considering the most complex way of doing music, orchestration), dance adds another dimension: space. Time is combined with space in the movements, not only in the individual dimension of the dancer, but also in the many combinations given by the small and the big group within a coreography.

I guess that something similar happens with an education notation and Learning Design.

There are several levels of complexity, a combined educational dimension composed by the time of the teaching and learning process and the space of curriculum, group  goals and activities, single goals and activities. The granularity that Learning Design has to phase is one of the most complex combinations we can imagine.

And, like in the case of the techniques of dance, the transmission is from one generation of dancers to another; in the case of teaching (and the connected activities of Learning Design thinking, following Kali et al., 2011) a folk pedagogy is transmitted from one generation of teachers to another. Moreover, teachers’ behave as if they where virtuous performers. They interpret and improvise because teaching is in the teacher’s mind. This is my experience with K-12 teachers and academic teachers.

I think the Larnaca declaration makes a valuable contribution, and that the metaphor of music is a valuable one. But at the same time, I think that the metaphor could be a pitfall, for a framework for education notation is a complex object of study. It requires a long and intense effort of research (and I would say, empirical research) to understand how to represent the many vectors of the several dimensions (yes!). And, like in the case of the dance, it requires to overcome the complexities of representation, to be adopted in practice (as in the case of music). I guess that we have already dozens of “Labanotation” systems in educational notation. That remain unknown to the common teachers.

Teaching is changing. It is no longer simply about passing on knowledge to the next generation. Teachers in the 21st century, in all educational sectors, have to cope
with an ever-changing cultural and technological environment. Teaching is now a design science. Like other design professionals – architects, engineers, town planners, programmers – teachers have to work out creative and evidence-based ways of improving what they do. But teaching is not treated as a design profession (taken from another MOOC: Week 31, The Georgia Tech MOOC, 2012!!!).

Talking with teachers, particularly higher ed teachers (I’m not the first person to do that…from ’80′s the research on teaching profession has focussed the teachers’ thought, their cognitive and metacognitive representation of the activity of teaching, planning teaching, teachers’ narratives, etc. This idea is clear on the article of Yali et al.) you have that impression: nobody can say them how to teach (including how to represent their ideas). I could say that teachers are the first to be diffident to the idea of teaching as a design profession…they see themselves more as performers, first line performers! (we are working on that with my colleagues Patrizia Ghislandi and Nan Yang…see a presentation we made regarding the tensions and contradictions of including eLearning -and the design it encompass- in Higher Ed teaching practice)

Image: Roman Duszek © 2003

That’s all for this first week. I must jump into the W2!!!!

———————————————

(1) Kress, G.R. (2009). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge.

And MOOCs seem to be a freudian repetition: I can’t understand why with a blowing agenda, demanding bosses (yes, more than one and students (those are hundreds…) I decide to engage myself into another MOOC.

Is the topic a second concern?

Some colleagues have declared so.

“Sulla qualità dell’e-learning nell’esperienza MOOC: una discussione aperta“

Naturalmente, abbiamo fatto, in un tempo estremamente veloce (da Giugno a Novembre) un lavoro di ricerca esplorativa che è stato un po’ un “mash-up” sulle tematiche da anni analizzate da Patrizia (soprattutto, la questione della qualità) e il nostro lavoro all’interno del progetto PRIN, La valutazione per il miglioramento dei servizi formativi. Una ricerca Università-territorio per la costruzione partecipata di modelli innovativi di assessment.

L’analisi dei MOOC è partita proprio dall’iniziativa di comprendere un fenomeno che travolge, oggigiorno, gli ambiti di dibattito sul cambiamento dell’Università. Cambiamento che ci è estremamente noto, se pensiamo agli sviluppi della CRUI e dell’ANVUR in materia di valutazione della qualità della ricerca (prima) e della didattica (in secondo luogo). E’ quale ruolo possono avere i MOOC nel contesto italiano ed europeo?  O, come ci ha invitato a pensare Susanna Sancassani, I MOOC: sono davvero una disruptive technology?

Questa era una domanda troppo grande, e abbiamo deciso di pensare all’esperienza di chi apprende, al corsista che, dal contesto altro, fa uno sguardo su queste megalopoli formative dei MOOC. La nostra semplice domanda è stata: i MOOC, possono offrire esperienze di qualità agli studenti? Non US, non English come prima lingua, donne, adulte, aggiungiamo, per la precisione delle nostre affermazioni ex-post!

Il resto, è storia, e la potete seguire sul canale You tube della SIEL   . Ovvero, una storia che inizia, perchè ci sarebbe tantissimo da fare per riuscire a rispondere a questa domanda da più punti di vista, da più matrici culturali, da più situazioni e condizioni. E per ripensare il modello (ma sono davvero un modello, ha chiesto qualcuno…mi piacerebbe udire la sua voce dibattendo su questo argomento per apprendere !)

In tanto vi lascio le slide che abbiamo elaborato insieme a Patrizia e Nan, per ricevere spunti di riflessione, dubbi, perplessità…e continuare a costruire su questa tematica!

Grazie a tutti i partecipanti, ed in particolare alla Si-eL, che ha organizzato questo ottimo spazio di confronto e lavoro!

Juliana, Patrizia, Nan

In Italy most of university teachers implementing eLearning as part of their courses have in mind a very traditional model of eLearning, based on the transmission of knowledge and on the download of (textual) documents, with a very limited use of other resources, particularly environments that allow a dialogic approach. Beyond the results of ten years of research at University of Trento, Prof. Ghislandi (my boss!!!) is convinced about this. And this issue was also confirmed by a recent Cycle of Seminar of SieL (Italian Society for eLearning // See for example Gianni Marconato’s presentation) Therefore, it is not surprising that eLearning courses are seen by the students as second choice courses (with some appreciation, anyway, by the students that work, and that do not have time to participate to the faculty life).

The Trento’s research unit in which I take part, is now working on the evaluation of eLearning experiences, trying to accompany the students and teachers’ perspectives.

In fact, we are now reflecting on which qualitative research methodology  (Partecipative Action Research?, DBR-Design Based Research?, Grounded theory?, Mixed Methods?) will be the best to reach our goals that are:

1. promote , in a case study in our own faculty, university professors’ reflection on (e)Learning design as key dimension for preparing  effective (students learn) courses . In order to support this reflection, we provide university teachers with tools that mediate the process of reflection (Ghislandi & Raffaghelli, 2012)
2. involve the university professors in participatory action research about quality networked learning (beyond eLearning!), as a mean to promote the expression of their agency as professionals of education, understanding eLearning as part of  a context of educational shift where they are engaged (Ghislandi, Raffaghelli & Yang, in press).

These two presentations (and the connected papers) reflect the process of reflection, not results.

We are also participating to the upcoming event,

Teacher-led Inquiry and Learning Design: The Virtuous Circle

A hands-on research workshop at the, January, 28 – February, 1st 2013,   Villard‐de‐Lans, Vercors

Our aim will be their to deepen on the concept of Learning Design as key for networked learning quality. The event is using “Cloudswork”, the social network for Learning Designers created through the Open University project for Learning Design (OULDI).

There’s in fact a “cloudscape” that will group all the presentations and cloudworks: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloudscape/view/2440

In fact, Patrizia has created a “Cloudswork” to take part, and we are already engaged to start discussion about the topic proposed!

Learning Design as Key for eLearning Quality

Hope it will be useful for other interested groups and we can meet people to spark ideas and deepen on the research topic!

And this is the way I would define the connectivist MOOC.

What is a MOOC?

George Siemens on Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

One month ago, my chinese colleague started an experience with COURSERA just because she couldn’t analyze, for her phD research, some courses in Italian.  We work through a qualitative approach in our research activities, so she started to write and share with me her MEMOS, through an autoethnographical approach. Then she asked me to apply to another type of MOOC, just to share and discuss about our autoethnographies as learners. Of course, we are two researchers engaged with educational technologies and innovation in learning,  from one hand, and from the other deeply interested on the learners experiences, mood, impact with regard to their participation in virtual spaces. Right now, we are following a research on quality of networked learning, discussing a lot from the evaluation tools and processes to analyze “quality” to the quality in education itself as concept, with the epistemological issues connected.

Once the attention was put on the issue, what was a blur image, became a sharp (too sharp!) picture: the MOOC had arrived to my life.

The CFHE12 called my attention immediatly: not only the issue was aligned with my research interest (from the policy context to the drivers of organizational and pedagogical change in higher education) but it was one of the most interesting MOOCs I could have ever met, since it is a MOOC on MOOCs!

Promising, I said to myself. My only concern is how I will find the time to study, while struggling with the design of one course, an ongoing field research with interviews, forum analysis, students, and so one.  Will my initial motivation be enough? Well, I guess that the situation of those that will follow the CFHE12 will be the same, so…

My colleague starts her experience few days previous to my one.  Her motivation is high and her satisfaction during the first two weeks is equally good.

She writes:

Il programma di ricerca…

…ha per oggetto la valutazione nei contesti educativi e formativi. Le recenti evoluzioni degli orientamenti e dei modelli di valutazione in questo tipo di servizi hanno subito l’influenza di logiche e modelli prelevati dall’ambito industriale, dove tende a prevalere una cultura della “qualità” intesa come razionalizzazione e conformità a standard predefiniti. Questo tipo di visione rischia di ridurre la valutazione a un adempimento burocratico privo di ricaduta sul miglioramento della pratica professionale e della consapevolezza degli operatori. I servizi formativi sono attraversati da elementi contestuali complessi, interazioni, pieghe relazionali che risultano essenziali alla pratica ma sovente intangibili per i modelli di assessment tradizionalmente accreditati. La ricerca si propone di contribuire a produrre conoscenza sullo stato attuale delle culture, dei modelli e degli utilizzi della valutazione in diversi contesti formativi (asili nido, scuole, servizi educativi territoriali per minori e famiglie, università) e di sviluppare modelli di valutazione situati e indicazioni procedurali per la loro costruzione, attraverso ricerche collaborative che coinvolgono ricercatori e pratici.

Questo approccio dovrebbe consentire:

• di affrontare il tema della valutazione a partire dalla sua concreta messa in opera, senza fossilizzarsi su modelli astratti ma riconoscendo e valorizzando il sapere prodotto nella pratica da chi lavora in campo formativo;
• di promuovere processi di ricerca partecipata tra ricercatori accademici e operatori del territorio al fine di valorizzare la ricerca educativa come ricerca a servizio del miglioramento della prassi e di produrre una trasformazione della cultura della valutazione in grado di sviluppare processi autovalutativi nei contesti professionali.

A partire da un’analisi della letteratura internazionale, la ricerca si compone di due fasi:

• Una fase ricognitiva, in cui tutte le unità locali svolgeranno una ricerca esplorativa sulle pratiche valutative nei contesti educativi e formativi oggetto di indagine. In questa fase, saranno selezionati in ciascun ambito alcuni casi che saranno oggetto di studio in profondità.
• Una fase trasformativa a carattere partecipato, in cui i risultati della prima parte dell’indagine saranno esaminati da gruppi congiunti di ricercatori, professionisti dei servizi coinvolti e se necessario altri stakeholder. Questa fase mira ad esaminare criticamente le pratiche, i modelli e le culture dei contesti educativi, a produrre nuovi orientamenti per la valutazione e ad avviarne  l’implementazione nei contesti coinvolti nella ricerca.

Noi facciamo del nostro meglio con lo studio dei processi valutativi e qualità dell’eLearning nell’istruzione superiore.

Ecco la ENORME presentazione che mi tocca produrre, assecondata dalla Unit nelle persone di Nan Yang (la nostra adorabile dottoranda venuta da Beijing) e la stessa pazientissima Prof. Ghislandi