2015-04-22 research seminar

It's hardly easy to be softly hard: freedom and control in learning spaces

Terry AndersonJon Dron

University of TallinnApril 2015

Athabasca University, Alberta, Canada

* Athabasca University

34,000 students, 700 courses

100% distance education

Graduate and Undergraduate programs

Master & Doctorate

Distance Education

Only USA Regionally Accredited University

in Canada

*Athabasca University

Agenda• Reviewing Generations of Education and

Pedagogy• aligning them with Groups, Sets and Nets• Case study Using Athabasca’s Landing Elgg

installation

setnet

group

collectives

Individual

Proposition #1The Next Generation Learning Evolves

From and With Past Generations

Proposition #2

• Different Structures/Pedagogies/Technologies, with different affordances and degrees of hardness effect our use.

Learning as Dance (Anderson, 2008)

• Technology sets the beat and the timing.

• Pedagogy defines the moves.

Technologies

• The orchestration of phenomena to some use (Arthur, 2009)

• Assemblies of hard and soft components• Pedagogies are among the soft components of

all learning technologies

Orchestration of phenomena embedded

path dependencies

Uniformity

Hard is easy

the adjacent possible

Creativity

flexibility and freedom freedom from error

Orchestration of phenomena by humans

Soft is hard

Soft Hard

technologies

1. Behavioural/Cognitive Pedagogies

• “tell ‘em what you’re gonna tell ‘em,

• tell ‘em • then tell ‘em what you

told ‘em”

Direct Instruction

Gagne’s Events of Instruction (1965)

1. Gain learners' attention2. Inform learner of objectives3. Stimulate recall of previous information4. Present stimulus material5. Provide learner guidance6. Elicit performance7. Provide Feedback8. Assess performance9. Enhance transfer opportunities

Basis of Instructional Systems Design (ISD)

Enhanced by the “cognitive revolution”

• Chunking • Cognitive Load• Working Memory• Multiple Representations• Split-attention effect• Variability Effect• Multi-media effect

– (Sorden, 2005)“learning as acquiring and using conceptual and cognitive structures” Greeno, Collins and Resnick, 1996

Behaviourist/Cognitive – Knowledge As a Thing:

• Logically coherent, existing independent of perspective

• Largely context free• Capable of being transmitted• Assumes closed systems with

discoverable relationships between inputs and outputs

• Readily defined through learning objectives

Technologies of Ist generation

• CAI, text books, One way Lectures, Video and audio broadcast

Social Focus of Ist generationIndividual Learner

15

Instructivist freedoms

• Locationwhere?

• Subject

what?• Time when?

• Approachhow (pedagogy, process)?

• Pace how fast?

• Sociabilitywith whom (if anyone)?

• Technology using what (medium/tools)?

• Delegability choosing to choose

setnet

group

notional levels of choice once a typical course is in progress

Hardness of individual learningPapa Bear’s bed

Future of Ist generation

• OERU• Limitless, very low cost content• Challenges of accreditation• The (forever?) just around the corner, ‘learner

adaptation’ technologies

Content:A bargain even at 80% off??

Most of us like Free!

Interactive MIT coursesMITX Announced

Shameless Plug and Giveaways!

Issues in DistanceEducation Serieshttp://aupress.ca

2nd Generation DESocial Constructivist Pedagogy

Constructivist Learning is:

• “Learning is located in contexts and relationships rather than merely in the minds of individuals”

Greenhow, Robelia & Hughes (2009),

Kathy Sierra http://www.speedofcreativity.org/

“learning is a continual conversation with the external world and its artefacts, with oneself and with other learners and teachers” (Sharples, Taylor & Vavoula, 2007)

Knowledge as a Collaborative Process

Group as the Social Unit of Social Constructivist Pedagogy

Why Groups?• “Students who learn in small groups

generally demonstrate greater academic achievement, express more favorable attitudes toward learning, and persist …

• small-group learning may have particularly large effects on the academic achievement of members of underrepresented groups and the learning-related attitudes of women…” • Springer; Stanne, & Donovan, (1999) P.42

Problems with Groups• Restrictions in time, space, pace, &

relationship - NOT OPEN• Overly confined by leader expectation

and institutional & curriculum control• Usually Isolated from the authentic

world of practice• “low tolerance of internal difference,

sexist and ethicized regulation, high demand for obedience to its norms and exclusionary practices.” Cousin & Deepwell 2005

• “Pathological politeness” and fear of debate

• Group think (Baron, 2005)• Poor preparation for Lifelong Learning

beyond the course• EXPENSIVE

$

26

Group model

• Membership and exclusion, closed • Hierarchies of control• Focus on collaboration and shared purpose• teachers: guides

group

27

Social constructivist freedoms

• Locationwhere?

• Subject

what?• Time when?

• Approachhow (pedagogy, process)?

• Pace how fast?

• Sociabilitywith whom (if anyone)?

• Technology using what (medium/tools)?

• Delegability choosing to choose

setnet

group

notional levels of choice once a typical course is in progress

• Trust both opens and constrains• Typically a structured process• But…• Opportunities for negotiation of

control• Shifting boundaries• Diversity valorized• Big issue: getting it just right for

everyone

Baby Bear’s bed?

3rd Generation Connectivist Pedagogy

• Learning is building capacity - networks of information, contacts and resources that can be applied to real problems.

Connectivist Knowledge isA Process

• Emergent• Distributed and diverse• Chaotic• Fragmented• Non sequential• Contextualized

What is Connected Knowledge?

• Knowledge is defined by its creation through activities– Accessing information– Evaluating, filtering– Conveying ideas– Reformatting, mashing– Analyzing, – Collaborating (Barth 2004)

Networks add diversity to learning

“People who live in the intersection of social worlds are at higher risk of having good ideas” Burt, 2005, p. 90

Networks Celebrate and Stimulate Cognitive Diversity Cognitive Diversity

Arises when from:• different types of information and knowledge perspectives• different ways of viewing the world or a specific problem

interpretations• different ways of categorizing a problem or partitioning

perspectives • heuristics yielding different ways of generating solutions to

problems• predictive models - different ways of inferring causes and

effects (Fisher, L. (2009)

• “A social network is crucially different from a social circle, since the function of a social circle is to curb our appetites and of a network to extend them. “ Adem Gopnik, 2011

• Read more http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/02/14/110214crat_atlarge_gopnik#ixzz1NHjpnxne

35

The net model

• bottom-up, open• inclusive• focus on individual and connections• teachers: role models and co-travellers

net

36

Connectivist freedoms

• Locationwhere?

• Subject

what?• Time when?

• Approachhow (pedagogy, process)?

• Pace how fast?

• Sociabilitywith whom (if anyone)?

• Technology using what (medium/tools)?

• Delegability choosing to choose

setnet

group

notional levels of choice once a typical ‘course’ is in progress

• Limitless assembly• Limitless choice• Limitless dialogue• But too soft?

Mama Bear’s bed

But do learning networks really work??

• Network ghost towns

• Build it and they may come, but not likely

• When is the last time you checked into a Ning account?

Fear of open spaces

• “The property of knowledge as as a body of vetted works comes directly from the properties of paper …. There is little to none of the permanence, stability and community fealty that a body of knowledge requires and implies. The Internet is what you get when everyone is a curator and everything is linked” – David Weinberger P. 45

choice != controlit’s not just about

networks

42

Set model• cooperation, anonymity• focus on filtering and selection• tags and categorisation• teachers: analyzers, curators

and publishers• Analytics• Collectives

set

setnet

group

CollaborationStructureRolesMembershipIntention and purposeHierarchiesThe classical ‘class’ model

Sustaining tiesMaking tiesAd hoc networksKnowledge diffusionSocial capitalSocial presenceEmergenceShiftingContextual

CooperationSharingSerendipityInterest -orientationSense-makingCollective intelligenceIntentional discovery

classes, tutorial groups, learning management systems, etc

MOOCs, blogs, LinkedIn, social networks, etc

Social interest sites, Wikipedia, Google Search, Twitter, Pinterest, etc

4th generation of learning pedagogy

• reducing choices to only those choices that we want or need to make

Generations of distance learning pedagogies

1.Instructivist – Self Paced, Individual Study, etc

2.Social constructivist – Groups, classes, etc

3.Connectivist – Networks, MOOCs, etc

4.Holist - Sets and Collectives

clos

edop

en

net

group

set

indiv-idual

Hard

Soft

Instructivist

Constructivist

Connectivist

holist

Soft/open Hard/closed

47

Holist freedoms

• Locationwhere?

• Subject

what?• Time when?

• Approachhow (pedagogy, process)?

• Pace how fast?

• Sociabilitywith whom (if anyone)?

• Technology using what (medium/tools)?

• Delegability choosing to choose

net

group

set

notional levels of choice once a typical ‘course’ is in progress

48

How holist?

• plenty

• stigmergy, social navigation

• collaborative filtering• adaptive hypermedia

• learning and process analytics

• feedback loops

• sociability

• soft and malleable systems• openness (resources, people)Infrastru

cture

Structure

The collective

• Emergent structure• Individual

behaviours aggregated

• The crowd becomes an active agent that advises, filters, suggests or shapes

setnet

group

collective

direct

Collective types

stigmergic

mediated

e.g. flocks, shoals, herds, crowds

e.g. termites, ant trails, money markets Wikipedia edits

e.g.reputation systems, rating systems, collaborative filters

e.g., tag clouds, Google Searche.g. 2nd Life crowds

e.g. ant nest tidying

BioMimicry

Mobs vs Crowds

Mismatched social forms

The Matthew EffectPreferential attachment

Soft is hard Lost in social space

Deliberate attack

Valorisation of narcissism

Filter bubbles

Confirmation bias

Context separation

Loss of narrative

Control of privacy

Blind leading blind

Making landscapes for emergent pedagogy

Some concerns

Cold start problems

Mob stupidity

Exploiting the Behaviours of Others

• From an administrative perspective - Analytics

Analytics Opening and Connecting Black Boxes

LMS

StudentRecords

RegistryRecords

FinancialRecords

Graphical Profiles

Student profiles, Department score cards, instructor profilesRegistration trends, drop out, etc…etc….

idashboards.com

NKI (Norway) Quality Barometers

From a Learner Perspective

• Learner recommendation systems

APPLICATION OF RECOMMENDER SYSTEMS ON E-LEARNING ENVIRONMENTSA. Sekhavatian1, M. Mahdavi2

Learning Network Services for Professional Development By Rob Koper

Jon Insert some of your slidesFrom Lak11 and recent thinking on Sets

• to help learning designers make effective changes

• to help teachers know how learners are doing

• to help learners know how they are doing

• to help learners decide what to do next

• to tell learners what to do next

Human - adaptable

Machine - adaptive

Soft

Hard

Some risks of analytics

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mob_Chase.JPEG

http://www.flickr.com/photos/osucommons/3226077133/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3855473015/in/set-72157622140446726/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nationaalarchief/2948560477/sizes/o/

Assemblies

24

A soft space

What is the Landing?

• Walled Garden with Windows• A Private space for AU• A user controlled creative space• Boutique social system• Networking, blogging, photos,

microblogging, polls, calendars, groups and more

• Differentiating and merging work, from school, from fun

67

Multiple rationales

67

setnet

group

collective

CoursesCommitteesResearch groupsStudy groupsCentres and departments

Sustaining tiesMaking tiesAd hoc networksKnowledge diffusionSocial capitalSocial presence

CooperationSharingSerendipityInterest -orientationSense-makingCollective intelligenceIntentional discovery

Where to look first

setnetgroup

Popular activities

Blog posts (4135)

Files (4023)

Wire posts (2335)

bookmarks

Discussion topics

wikiphoto

Wiki sub-page

Hard spaces

Filling gaps with people

Stretching tools

Filling gaps the Landing way

The Landing Platform

74

1,424 plugins available, our installation using about 90Fairly strong development team, plotted roadmap

Athabasca Landing

2,988 users as of Jan. 19, 2012

Landing Groups

• 271 Groups• Average of 10.79 members each

UNDEGRAD COURSES (UC); 16%

GRAD COURSES (GC); 29%

ADMIN (AD); 24%

BEYOND COURSE (BC); 12%

SOCIAL (SO); 4%

STUDENT GOVERNMENT (SG); 5%

RESEARCH (R); 7%LANDING ADMIN (LA); 3%

Type of Landing Groups

UNDEGRAD COURSES (UC)GRAD COURSES (GC)ADMIN (AD)BEYOND COURSE (BC)SOCIAL (SO)STUDENT GOVERNMENT (SG)RESEARCH (R)LANDING ADMIN (LA)

New Users Added per week

Weekly Blog Posts

Files

80

Public vs private

• It all depends on context and purpose...

80

PUBLIC SET NET GROUP

Blogs 36% 50% 2% 11%

Wikis (8% private)

18% 45% 2% 33%

Bookmarks 9% 65% 0.5% 24%

Images 6% 75% 6% 10%

81

Sets, groups, nets (in that order)

81

Project Three Major Objectives1. develop a platform to investigate the

relationship between individual and group learning (both formal and informal) in online communities utilizing networking technologies.

2. allow researchers, faculty, students, alumni and staff to interact, collaborate, communicate, and forge online communities throughout our distributed community.

3. Investigate “Beyond the LMS” next generation learning support systems

82

Teachingcrowds.ca

• https://landing.athabascau.ca

• terrya@athabascau.ca• jond@athabascau.ca