Logos & Mythos: the political dilemmas of Web 2.0 in an accreditation-driven educational environment Contact : Michael.Beg...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Who are we? And why? </li></ul><ul><li>Educational Informaticians </li></ul><ul><li>Academic Skunkw...
<ul><li>It was a simple proposition </li></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 is lovely </li></ul><ul><li>Institutions are old fuzzy wuzzi...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>What’s the problem? </li></ul><ul><li>What is Web 2.0, and where are the standards?  </li></ul><ul>...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 1 - institutions </li></ul><ul><li>eLearning increasingly embedded, but open to individual in...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 2 - Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Definition open to interpretation, few standards </li></ul><ul>...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 3 - Learning Technologists </li></ul><ul><li>Role, purpose and function open to interpretatio...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 4 - students </li></ul><ul><li>HE is now - and has been for some time - a system of accredita...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Towards Logos </li></ul><ul><li>High occurrence of “personal interpretation” with regards to eLearn...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>The politics of Web 2.0 engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Dialectic between corporate and individual </l...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Personal construction of domains </li></ul><ul><li>Personal Construct Psychology </li></ul><ul><li>...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Soap Opera Reprise </li></ul><ul><li>New democratic tools being offered by multinational corporatio...
Logos & Mythos <ul><li>More than soap </li></ul><ul><li>The relationships between institutions, practitioners and applicat...
Thank You! Contact : Michael.Begg@ed.ac.uk
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Logos & Mythos:the political dilemmas of Web 2.0 in an accreditation-driven educational environment

420 views
376 views

Published on

Slides from the Ideas in Cyberspace Education conference, 2007

Published in: Travel, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
420
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Logos & Mythos:the political dilemmas of Web 2.0 in an accreditation-driven educational environment

  1. 1. Logos & Mythos: the political dilemmas of Web 2.0 in an accreditation-driven educational environment Contact : Michael.Begg@ed.ac.uk Learning Technology Section College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine University of Edinburgh Michael Begg, Rachel Ellaway, David Dewhurst, Hamish Macleod
  2. 2. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Who are we? And why? </li></ul><ul><li>Educational Informaticians </li></ul><ul><li>Academic Skunkworks </li></ul><ul><li>ICE 2 “In a Glass Darkly” </li></ul><ul><li>Proximal Developers </li></ul><ul><li>Being proximal we are “at odds” occasionally “threatening” and usually “awkward” at an institutional level </li></ul><ul><li>So… </li></ul>US! Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  3. 3. <ul><li>It was a simple proposition </li></ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 is lovely </li></ul><ul><li>Institutions are old fuzzy wuzzies </li></ul><ul><li>They don’t like it up ‘em …But </li></ul>Logos & Mythos Don’t Panic! Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  4. 4. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>What’s the problem? </li></ul><ul><li>What is Web 2.0, and where are the standards? </li></ul><ul><li>Why do institutions say they like it, and do so little? </li></ul><ul><li>Who is implementing this - and who owns “it”? </li></ul><ul><li>From where does the claim arise that its going to make things better? </li></ul><ul><li>What makes us “us” and the institution “them”? </li></ul><ul><li>Is Web 2.0 for us or them? </li></ul><ul><li>And students? … So </li></ul>Wee bit of Panic! Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  5. 5. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 1 - institutions </li></ul><ul><li>eLearning increasingly embedded, but open to individual interpretation </li></ul><ul><li>Institutions now reliant upon technocracy for increased activity, increased numbers, increased distances </li></ul><ul><li>Growth of “managerialist” “top down” “centralist” processes </li></ul><ul><li>Often overbearing - and largely unsubstantiated - caution over committed implementation of user-centred technologies </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation (if any) at teaching not reflected in alignment of assessment </li></ul>Underlying framework Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  6. 6. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 2 - Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Definition open to interpretation, few standards </li></ul><ul><li>Powerful corporations steer the democratisation of content </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation “hype-cycle”… but a lot of good work out there! </li></ul>Underlying framework Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  7. 7. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 3 - Learning Technologists </li></ul><ul><li>Role, purpose and function open to interpretation (see a pattern?) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Professionalism? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Activities aspire to pedagogical interventions but largely amount to enhancement of existing centralist administrative paradigms and tasks </li></ul><ul><li>Direct eLearning activity carried out at a sub-institutional level, in cahoots with individual teachers, equally operating beneath the institutional radar </li></ul><ul><li>Learning Technologists delivering eLearning as a partisan activity </li></ul>Underlying framework Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  8. 8. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>P.O.V 4 - students </li></ul><ul><li>HE is now - and has been for some time - a system of accreditation </li></ul><ul><li>Students are complicit in this so… </li></ul><ul><li>“ the suggestion that students are engaged either willingly or subconsciously with their own education as a means towards accreditation rather than a period of their life devoted to the self enriching and societal advancing qualities of academic engagement begs the question – who are the partisans fighting for?” </li></ul>Underlying framework Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  9. 9. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Towards Logos </li></ul><ul><li>High occurrence of “personal interpretation” with regards to eLearning, Learning Technologists and Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of concrete definition for Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of common standards within Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Little of substance in institutional adoption (or lack of) strategies </li></ul><ul><li>SPIRE (JISC funded) explored usage </li></ul><ul><li>Work required to explore alignment of institutions, L-Techs and Web 2.0 - political and personal constructs So… </li></ul>Towards Logos Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  10. 10. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>The politics of Web 2.0 engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Dialectic between corporate and individual </li></ul><ul><li>Potential value beyond Web 2.0 to address power and influence more fully </li></ul><ul><li>Questionnaire returns? </li></ul>Socio-economic positioning Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  11. 11. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Personal construction of domains </li></ul><ul><li>Personal Construct Psychology </li></ul><ul><li>Elicitation - new phenomena “anticipated” by existing knowledge and beliefs </li></ul>Reifying personal belief structure Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  12. 12. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>Soap Opera Reprise </li></ul><ul><li>New democratic tools being offered by multinational corporations </li></ul><ul><li>To institutions who love the idea but cannot get under the skin </li></ul><ul><li>While partisans work beneath the radar to provide “good stuff” </li></ul><ul><li>To a user-base more interested in getting their certificate of attendance </li></ul>Soap Opera Reprise Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  13. 13. Logos & Mythos <ul><li>More than soap </li></ul><ul><li>The relationships between institutions, practitioners and applications are personally construed and collectively positioned in socio-political terms </li></ul><ul><li>The terms can only be negotiated when irresistibly clear for all to see </li></ul><ul><li>Such terms are not negotiated through championing individual activity or hollow dogmatic reservations </li></ul><ul><li>All factors are relevant (Art Worlds) It is unreasonable to expect the logical exploration of Web 2.0 (or 3, or 4) to NOT include consideration of personal and institutional politics, power and philosophy </li></ul>More than soap Ideas in Cyberspace Education 2007: Loch Lomond, Scotland
  14. 14. Thank You! Contact : Michael.Begg@ed.ac.uk

×