I've been thinking quite a bit about PLEs, the contribution of Mobile 2.0, and the issue of ownership of learning, about which we are being invited to reflect. As John points out in his comment on my previous post, the benefits of Web 2.0 and a PLE extend far beyond the educational world. We have been considering the 'blurring' of boundaries between formal and informal learning, and between work and leisure. It's interesting that I use nearly all of the tools in my PLE both formally and informally (my formal studies being H800 which is controlled by formal assessment criteria and a recognised masters level qualification). It's only the ones down in the bottom right hand corner - TV, Faceboook, cell phone that I don't (yet) use for formal studies.
Do all these new tools in my new PLE change the 'ownership' of my learning? I don't currently think so. I don't even think the boundaries are becoming blurred, but maybe 'jagged' as one of our course readings described it. My experience is that these tools enrich both my formal and informal learning, but in my formal learning I have to conform to set assessment criteria or else I will fail the course. My informal learning about leisure, things that interest me, information that I seek etc, belongs entirely to me. I see this all the time with my son - he conforms to what he must learn at school because he has to - but his informal learning really belongs to him. He is wagging his own tail, so to speak. The formal or informal nature of the learning is always what will control the ownership in my view, and what we pay for when we to go to school or university. There will always be a need for recognised, assessed qualifications for a labour market to function, so I don't believe that educationalists need to worry that the advent of Web 2.0 tools and PLEs is going put their whole function at risk - there will continue be a role for educational institutions as we understand them now.
I believe that institutions will have to maintain their core systems, such as VLEs (LMSs), library systems etc, but that as one of our readings has suggested, there will need to be a greater integration between student PLEs and the institutional systems, with the possibility of students docking into the 'mother ship' every so often to exchange data. As with life it's never going to be black or white, but various shades of grey, that will suit different individuals.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting points here on ownership of learning Lesley. I'm only just coming to understand what this means and I know it is a key part of TMA04. I agree that these new tools still mean you own your own learning. I'm struggling with the concept of not 'owning' one's learning as part of a VLE. I still believe I own that learning too. Perhaps this is a bit simplistic but as a (mature) adult who can take responsibility for his own learning I believe I own it all. For a child, who has not yet at the point of taking responsibility for all of his/her development, there would have to be a "shared" ownership of learning (between the student and teachers/parents).
ReplyDeleteHmm it's really interesting isn't it John. My interpretation of 'ownership' (which we are asked to clarify in TMA04) is basically who's wagging my tail. I do believe that in formal learning there is a shared ownership whether adult or child. On H800, I have to study at a set pace, read particular content, follow prescribed activities, and work in specified time slots. I have little choice in varying the pace, timing or activities. So the OU owns the design of my learning. I own how I approach that within the boundaries and constraints of the course. In informal learning, there is no design as such, I am free to explore as I wish and so my learning is 100% under my control - I own it completely.
ReplyDeleteWe have had discussions in our forums about how the time pressure on activities reduces the time that we spend exploring issues which interest us, and about the prescriptive nature of some activity questions - are we attempting to define the balance of ownership, so that we can wag our own tails and still meet the learning outcomes and assessment criteria for the course? (There has been a recent discussion on this issue applied to TMA02 in the H800 cafe).
Lesley
Tops post, thought I would add a comment…
ReplyDeleteFor me I think in order to take ownership of your learning environment you need to have choice and control. The new technology/tools give me flexibility and therefore it enables me to own my own learning.
In a formal environment we don’t really have much control or choice, which I think is a shame. Im not too sure if institutes will integrate external web tools with their VLEs just yet. Perhaps the first step is for them to create variety robust in-house tools for their VLE. They could then create learning activities that give the student choice over which ones to use. If this were the case I wonder if students would consider themselves to have more control of their learning, and therefore have more ownership.
Hi all,
ReplyDeleteTo pick up on Al's post I've just written about exactly this discussion, which we're having at my school now. We use Moodle, but teachers see it as removing control in some respects, and being too ungainly to use. It's a bit like fossilizing knowledge, rather than making it agile and able to respond to changing needs.
In response to this we're looking at ways in which Moodle might remain as the primary container for schemes of work and programmes of study, but the actual content would exist elsewhere - using Web 2.0 tools, materials found in a shared area on a school server, and so on.
I think one of the big challenges will be to create a number of pathways that converge at the same learning outcome. In other words, students find themselves with a range of options for certain tasks, that give them the freedom to determine how they reach the end goal. This might range from the research and presentation of findings in different formats (prezi.com or a video, for example), synchronous online collaboration, or postings to blogs, as I'm doing now.
Of course, what I'm suggesting is very different to how secondary school learning takes place normally, so there is an educational and cultural training need for staff, that must be addressed first.
I must say that taking H800 has really made me reflect on how we teach, what we teach, and the best way to make learning engaging, meaningful and stimulating.
Thanks for the post Lesley!
Regards,
Sacha
Hello All
ReplyDeleteThanks for the really interesting comments everyone. From all our comments and as Al summarises - it seems that two of the main themes are flexibility and control, both for students and teachers. However building on John's ideas that he perceives himself as owning and taking responsibility for his own learning whether in a VLE or elsewhere - perhaps it is when the control is compromised that issues of ownership start to ring true. If Sacha's teachers see Moodle as a 'fossilising' influence then their ownership and control of the learning design is compromised. If a student is unhappy with aspects of their learning experience, whether through pace, timing, content or whatever, then they start to feel dis-engaged and that they just have to conform. I guess the challenge is to get the control / flexibility dichotomy balanced whilst still retaining necessary formal outcomes and criteria.