Learn2

442 views
398 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
442
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Learn2

  1. 1. Framing Learn 2.0: Prospects, Challenges and Tasks <ul><ul><li>Colin Lankshear & Michele Knobel </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>McGill U/JCU & Montclair State University </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>http://www.coatepec.net </li></ul></ul>
  2. 2. <ul><li>Learn 1.0? Learn 2.0? </li></ul>The Ambiguity of 2.0
  3. 3. Web 1.0 Web 2.0 Google Netscape Tagging (“folksonomy”) Directories (taxonomy) Wikis Content management systems Participation Publishing Weblogs Personal websites Wikipedia Britannica Online Flickr Ofoto
  4. 4. Web 1.0/Web 2.0: For example
  5. 5. The “two-ness” of 2.0 <ul><li>Collaborative, distributed & participatory </li></ul><ul><li>Peer-to-peer, interactive </li></ul><ul><li>User-generated content and ratings/rankings. Wisdom of crowds; expertise reconceived </li></ul><ul><li>Performed rather than purchased </li></ul><ul><li>Leverage a key operating principle </li></ul>
  6. 6. Upside to Learn 2.0 <ul><li>Coheres with a range of currently popular social values like inclusion, participation, collaboration, peer-to-peer sharing, etc. that have a strong presence in leisure and non formal settings </li></ul><ul><li>Compatible with “deep learning” </li></ul><ul><li>Coheres with a lot of “smart work” and principles of 'the new work order” </li></ul><ul><li>It is in tune with current concepts and experiences of “time” and “place” </li></ul><ul><li>Maximizes leverage and “value adding” (I.e., “ecological”) </li></ul><ul><li>Coheres well with our “primary learning Discourse” (learning “organically”) </li></ul><ul><li>Can potentially enhance education for all </li></ul><ul><li>Emphasizes interests and affinities </li></ul>
  7. 7. Downside to Learn 2.0 <ul><li>Contravenes the operating logic of the consumer society (Illich 1970) </li></ul><ul><li>Contravenes many deep values that serve powerful interests well. It: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>atomizes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>control/manages </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>individualizes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>privatizes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>discriminates and differentiates (to feed the “meritocratic” ideology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>labels </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>shapes expectations and matches them to “what is socially available” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>adjusts people to industrial time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>emphasizes exchange values </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reifies expertise and legitimates elites </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>imprints authority relations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>equates competence with “official credentials” </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Our approach to Learn 2.0 and researching the practice <ul><li>Researching practice for a book chapter </li></ul><ul><li>Study design, methods and data set </li></ul><ul><li>Data collected and archived organically, using Web 2.0 resources within the practice of Learn 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Built in quality features – audit trails for communicative validity, participant input and feedback, etc. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Performance, Production, Practice <ul><li>“ Tasks” to be performed – multiple levels </li></ul><ul><li>“ Tools” to be performed – technologies, theory and templates </li></ul><ul><li>“ Knowledge” to be performed – past, present, future, distributed </li></ul>
  10. 10. Concessions we enjoy <ul><li>No grades – strictly Pass/Fail </li></ul><ul><li>No censorship/blocks/filters (except sometimes) </li></ul><ul><li>No curriculum as such </li></ul><ul><li>No timetable per se </li></ul><ul><li>No reporting templates or “standards” No lockstep page following </li></ul><ul><li>No remediation – ample in situ support </li></ul><ul><li>Large multi-purpose space </li></ul>
  11. 11. Examples <ul><li>Newbie theorising – Novice group meets Goffman </li></ul><ul><li>Newbie critique – Evaluation of published peer-reviewed articles </li></ul><ul><li>Newbie discovery of “lucidly functional language” </li></ul><ul><li>Newbie analysis using social semiotics </li></ul><ul><li>Newbie problematising of targeted advertising on Facebook (critical literacy?) </li></ul>
  12. 12. Learn 2.0 principles and our “teaching”: criteria to guide data analysis <ul><li>Aims at “deep” learning (Gee 2007) </li></ul><ul><li>Aims at “systems” learning </li></ul><ul><li>Ample “geek” project time </li></ul><ul><li>Collegial cross-group support, talk, collaboration and elicitation </li></ul><ul><li>Enactment of distributed intelligence and expertise </li></ul><ul><li>Benefits of situatedness (e.g., lucidly functional language; Gee 2007) </li></ul>
  13. 13. “ Lucidly functional language” (Gee 2007)
  14. 14. Collaborative writing (in person)
  15. 15. Collaborative writing (docs.google.com & skype.com)
  16. 16. Troubleshooting
  17. 17. Resourcing with a website
  18. 18. Collaborative resourcing with an “email posting” blog
  19. 19. Web archiving
  20. 20. Give it a go… and mucking around
  21. 21. Spaces

×