Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Collaborative Systems
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Collaborative Systems

592

Published on

I discuss theory of collaboration support tools, and look at a selection of web2.0 services in the context of supporting teaching and learning in an HE institution.

I discuss theory of collaboration support tools, and look at a selection of web2.0 services in the context of supporting teaching and learning in an HE institution.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
592
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Collaboration and co-learning Pat Parslow (p.parslow@reading.ac.uk) OdinLab (odinlab@reading.ac.uk) – Shirley Williams, Karsten Lundqvist, Richard Hussey, Patrick Hathway, Sarah Fleming 24 March 2009
  • 2.  S. Kleanthous and V. Dimitrova 2006  Towards a Holistic Personalised Support for Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Learning Communities E. Tomadaki and P. Scott (Eds.): Innovative Approaches for Learning and Knowledge  Sharing, EC-TEL 2006 Workshops Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, p. 333-344, 2006. Community/Enterprise 24 March 2009
  • 3.  quot;The key for a transactive memory system to function is that the divergence of information held in members’ heads must be known to the others.quot; Community/Enterprise 24 March 2009
  • 4.  Consensual reality - the agreed representation of the environment, despite differing subjective filters  Agreement on concepts (and the processes used to gain agreement) 24 March 2009
  • 5.  Members' positions within the community and the roles they play Community/Enterprise 24 March 2009
  • 6.  TM: Search, feeds, quot;missingquot; ontology (relationships between knowledge) but hyperlinks and crediting fill gap to some degree (and build trust)  SMM: Visualisations help build common understanding. Missing from most SNS, but tag clouds a primitive form. Topic maps etc. can be used. Also communal bookmarking helps + Cohere (cohere.open.ac.uk and MeAggregator)  CCon: Categories and tagging, ontologies and folksonomies  CCen: Doing some work on tool to help people recognise their position in a community, based on feeds. Early days. Also an aspect of DI work 24 March 2009
  • 7.  Connectivism tenet - knowledge has short half-life; not what you know but how quickly you can assimilate and use knowledge  perhaps the “Social Network” *is* the learning from this viewpoint... 24 March 2009
  • 8.  50% of our students report learning through using Facebook  It has no learning materials in it! (Facebook v Blackboard study, 2007)  Students appear to value a ‘safe environment’  But for them this means not having oversight by staff  Control of who sees what  Open discussion in self-defined peer groups 24 March 2009
  • 9.  Collaborative tools to capture the knowledge for later use - wiki, ontology, folksonomy  Cost effectiveness, speed of deployment, mentoring, local experts  These tools support learning, but also straight forward collaboration – they enable a more distributed virtual office than traditional means of communication and group work permit 24 March 2009
  • 10.  Static web content  Supports Transactive memory  Slight support for Shared mental models  No real support for cognitive consensus  No support for cognitive centrality  Also true of content management systems (generally) 24 March 2009
  • 11.  Forums  Slight support for Transactive memory  Support for Shared mental models  Slight support for cognitive consensus  Slight support for cognitive centrality  Also true, to a degree, for email lists 24 March 2009
  • 12.  Wikis  Support for Transactive memory  Support for Shared mental models  Support for cognitive consensus  No real support for cognitive centrality  Mode of use tends to imply a ‘correct’ view decided by consensus, with majority drowning out ‘fringe’ views 24 March 2009
  • 13.  Blogs  Slight support for Transactive memory  If you have an aggregated view  Slight support for Shared mental models  No real support for cognitive consensus  Some support for cognitive centrality  With aggregation – blogs emphasise the individual view over the consensual view 24 March 2009
  • 14.  Social Bookmarking  E.g. Delicious, clipmarks, amplify, citeulike  Slight support for Transactive memory  More of an index into TM than a form of TM itself  Slight support for Shared mental models  Tagging provides a slight insight into others mental models  No support for cognitive consensus  Some support for cognitive centrality  You can build a view of where you ‘sit’ within the bookmarking community 24 March 2009
  • 15.  Online office tools  Such as Google Docs, Office Online, Zoho et al  Supports Transactive Memory  Though in a fragmented way  No real support for Shared mental models  Without ‘meta’ level documents being generated  Support for cognitive consensus  No real support for cognitive centrality  Most documents are private to small groups (though, see scribd) 24 March 2009
  • 16.  Concept mapping tools  Such as Mindmeister, Cmaptools, Cohere  Supports Transactive Memory  Though as a ‘high level view’  Support for Shared mental models  Almost by definition!  Support for cognitive consensus  Though generally not for the processes involved in achieving it  No real support for cognitive centrality  Individual maps possible + community maps, but seeing a view of how yours fits into the whole is ‘missing’ 24 March 2009
  • 17.  SNS  Some support for Transactive memory  Depending on use, but shared files for groups etc.  Some support for Shared mental models  But would be improved by having mind mapping/concept/topic/ontology tools built in  Some support for cognitive consensus  Embedded forums (including ‘wall’ and comments)  Groups which can have ‘rules’ defining behavioural norms  Some support for cognitive centrality  View of group memberships  Lists of interests 24 March 2009
  • 18.  Corporate culture - does it clash?  If “yes” then  Change_culture! || do_things_your_own_way  End if  Accreditation - how do you prove soft-knowledge gained through SNS use? (trust networks, ePortfolios)  Open - can staff/students take their ePortfolio with them?  One size fits all?  ‘wiki-wars’ etc  People prefer different systems for valid reasons 24 March 2009
  • 19.  When using any collaborative system  Your use says something about you  Most require an ‘account’  To benefit from ‘network effect’ you need to be findable  Profiles convey information about you  What do you want to portray?  How persistent is information about you?  Can you create a good impression without a DI?  This Is Me – http://thisisme.reading.ac.uk  Funded by Eduserv 24 March 2009
  • 20.  Diversity is not a bad thing  But keeping track of materials used in different systems is hard work  Re-using content is not as easy as it should be  MeAggregator is a service oriented, agent based system based on a folksonomical file system  Tag your resources  Tag your friends/colleagues  Apply permissions to resources  Aggregate and re-publish content  Funded by JISC 24 March 2009
  • 21.  open-learner models (OLM) + domain ontologies -> difference engines -> individual learning plans  Topic/concept maps + domain ontologies -> differece engines -> work-flow, research plans etc.  OLM aggregation + behaviour logs -> recommender systems  Recommend learning styles  Recommend learning resources  Recommend mentors 24 March 2009
  • 22. 24 March 2009

Ă—