Open Access Week: Athabasca University
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Open Access Week: Athabasca University

on

  • 2,855 views

Presentation to Athabasca University: Open Access Week, 2011

Presentation to Athabasca University: Open Access Week, 2011

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,855
Views on SlideShare
2,852
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
11
Downloads
34
Comments
2

2 Embeds 3

http://a0.twimg.com 2
http://www.m.techgig.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Open Access Week: Athabasca University Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Making sense of complexity inopen information environments George Siemens October 26, 2011
  • 2. Openness is a control tradeoffAnd it means we have to do different things
  • 3. Where are our control points?
  • 4. Our curriculum?
  • 5. Our teaching?
  • 6. Fragmentation is a new reality. Our learning models experience Fragmentary need to embrace (reflect) it.• Conversations, content, context not (only) shaped by the school/educator• Learners are in control
  • 7. Coherence is an orientation about the meaningand value of information elements based onhow they are connected, structured, and related Antonovsky 1993
  • 8. Existing coherence forming systemsBooksNewspapersTV news programsMagazines(anything that is structured and that the enduser can’t speak into and alter)
  • 9. Openness messes up coherence (and control)
  • 10. Fragmentation of information requiresthat we weave together elements into some type of coherent frameworkYoutubeBlogsTwitterFacebookTEDtalksKahn AcademyOnline news/information sitesTraditional coherence frameworks
  • 11. Networked informationdoesn’t have a centre
  • 12. Informationfragmentation…loss ofnarratives of coherence
  • 13. “the rise of millions of fragmented discussionsacross the world tend instead to lead tofragmentation of audiences into isolatedpublics” Habermas 2006
  • 14. Argument:we socialize to make sense of information … i.e. it is our ability to work with information (abstraction, representation, “point to”) that defines humanity
  • 15. As information quantity and complexity increase…We adopt two approaches:1. Better technical systems2. Better connected social systems
  • 16. Social forms collectivenet set group Jon Dron & Terry Anderson
  • 17. ‘‘. . . information foraging refers to activitiesassociated with assessing, seeking, and handlinginformation sources” Piroli and Card, 1995
  • 18. What is sensemaking?
  • 19. “Sensemaking is about labelling and categorizingto stabilize the streaming of experience” Weick et al. 2005
  • 20. “a motivated, continuous effort to understandconnections . . . in order to anticipate theirtrajectories and act effectively” Klein et al. 2006
  • 21. CynefinFrameworkDave Snowden
  • 22. Domains of Sensemaking
  • 23. Complicated is not complex.
  • 24. When an answer and path isknown, but requires time and effort, it is complicated.
  • 25. When an answer is not known,or when agents interact in unpredictable ways, it is complex.
  • 26. Lessons #1 in Paths to Failure:Education system is treating a complex problem as a complicated one.
  • 27. Complex unknown problems require: 1. Mind of a scientist 2. Mind of an artist
  • 28. What is wayfinding?
  • 29. “the process that takes place when peopleorient themselves and navigate through space” Raubal and Winter 2002
  • 30. “is the cognitive element of navigation … it doesnot involve movement of any kind but only thetactical and strategic parts that guidemovement.” Darken and Peterson 2002
  • 31. The Landing
  • 32. Finding complex informationenvironments: research spaces
  • 33. The data setConnectivism and Connective Knowledge 2008 (CCK08)
  • 34. Tools used by learnersRoughlyanything. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/643/1402 Fini, 2009
  • 35. The methods1. Social network and participation analysis2. Corbin & Strauss’ (1990) version of groundedtheory
  • 36. SNA & Participation Habits
  • 37. CCK08 Weekly Forum Posts
  • 38. CCK08: Introduction forumLimitedinteraction.Most areisolated
  • 39. Introduction forum posts: CCK08 Dialogue limited: Group too large?
  • 40. Week 12 forum posts: CCK08 More equitable distribution? Due to smaller #’s of participants?
  • 41. Open codingusing Coherehttp://cohere.open.ac.uk
  • 42. Axial Coding
  • 43. Self-organization and sub-networksSensegiving through artefact creation and sharing Sensemaking/giving through language games Knowledge domain expansion Wayfinding cues, symbols Social organization through creating sharing
  • 44. Coherence expression (sensegiving)ArtifactsNarratives
  • 45. Participatory sensemaking:“the coordination of intentional activity ininteraction, whereby individual sense-makingprocesses are affected and new domains ofsocial sense-making can be generated that werenot available to each individual on her own” De Jaegher and Di Paolo 2007
  • 46. Artefacts re-centre the learning conversation
  • 47. Artifacts ofsensemaking
  • 48. Organizingcoursecontent Dolors Capdet
  • 49. Image of course structure created by course participant http://x28newblog.blog.uni-heidelberg.de/2008/09/06/cck08-first-impressions/
  • 50. Language/externalization reduces the“occult character” of mental images. WittgensteinLanguage gives birth to thought Vygotsky
  • 51. Language games Storytelling Debate, dialogue DescriptionsNarratives of Clarificationsensemaking Metaphors Analogies Examples Resonance
  • 52. change.mooc.ca Twitter: gsiemens www.elearnspace.org/blog http://www.solaresearch.org/Learning Analytics & Knowledge 2012: Vancouver http://lak12.sites.olt.ubc.ca/