Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study 'Minerva'

1,082 views
1,043 views

Published on

Dr. Ilona Buchem
Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin
Research project „Mediencommunity 2.0“

Online Educa Berlin 2011, 02.12.2011
Theme: NPA – New Pedagogical Approaches to Learning

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

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,082
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
260
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study 'Minerva'

  1. 1. Mediencommunity 2.0 Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study Minerva Dr. Ilona Buchem Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin Research project „Mediencommunity 2.0“ Online Educa Berlin 2011, 02.12.2011 Theme: NPA – New Pedagogical Approaches to Learning
  2. 2. Overview1. Mediencommunity 2.02. Expansive Learning3. Case Study „Minerva“4. Community Size5. Open Questions Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 2
  3. 3. Mediencommunity 2.0 Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 3
  4. 4. Shift in learning culture …1. Industry-wide cooperation2. Modernised vocational training3. Educational permeability Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 4
  5. 5. Media designers : Vocational SchoolFinal exams twice a year all over Germany Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 5
  6. 6. Participation?Alarm! Exam! Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 6
  7. 7. Expansive LearningLearning by expandingLearning is an „action which Klaus Holzkampdifferentiates itself from other actionsby its goal to extend ones own controlpossibilities.” Holzkamp, K. (1993). Lernen. Subjektwissenschaftliche Grundlegung. Frankfurt/M. Campus Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 7
  8. 8. Expansive vs. defensive Learning Averting negative effects such as Expansive Learning poor grades, punishment,Extending one‘s power to act as sanctions intentional subject Foto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/letcombe/1586241141/ Defensive LearningFoto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/letcombe/1586241241/ Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 8
  9. 9. Web 2.0: Expansive LearningLearning 2.0Learner-centered design“(…) is more than just adapting for Stephen Downesdifferent learning styles or allowing the userto change the font size and background color;it is the placing of the control of learningitself into the hands of the learner.” Downes, S. (2005) E-learning 2.0. eLearn Magazine, Association for Computing Machinery. Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 9
  10. 10. Case Study „Minerva“Exam tasks Moderate MinervaWiki Collaborate Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 10
  11. 11. Over 400 Minerva members!Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 11
  12. 12. Who is Minerva? • 29 year old media designer • First PC with Internet at age of 12 • Fan of strategy/adventure games •Minerva Learned web design in online forums • Former archeology student • Made her hobby to her career Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 12
  13. 13. What motivates Minerva? ***What are her subjective reasons to moderate a group of peers preparing for the final exam? Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 13
  14. 14. … a virtual substitute? “ I was missing my own peer group as I was already out of school andMinerva working full time. I had no peers around that I could learn with.” Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 14
  15. 15. … a missing benchmark? “ I was unsure about what I have to learn. I did not know what the others already knew and how IMinerva compared to them.” Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 15
  16. 16. … a favorable environment “There was simply no other? possibility to set up an own group. I had the tools and the peers, whoMinerva were in the same situation like me.” Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 16
  17. 17. … role identity “I had the responsibility for leading the group. Sometimes it was? difficult , for example when I had a stressful day at work. But I knew if IMinerva did nothing, people would drop out. So I tried to contribute on regular basis.” Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 17
  18. 18. expansive learning …… starts with a subjective perception of adiscrepancy between current abilities andthe task requirements.The learner aims to Foto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/waltstoneburner/3372746317/master the task. Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 18
  19. 19. … prosumers? Rarely OftenConsume Produce Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 19
  20. 20. Why are they only consuming?• MISTAKE: Cautious to publish in public, because it could be a mistake and others from school would laugh at you, mock you.• QUALITY: Cautious to produce own content, because it may be incorrect and mislead others.• NORMS: Cautious to learn with/from the Internet, because books have been recommended by teachers for years.• EXPECTED UTILITY: Unwilling to invest time, energy, because unsure what this will bring, if this will be of use at all. Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 20
  21. 21. Defensive learning …… takes place in order to avert negativeeffects such as bad grades or other sanctions.The learner tries tocope with challengesWith a minimum effort. Foto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcandrelariviere/3251428624/ Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 21
  22. 22. Other reasons? Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 22
  23. 23. … almost 800 members!Allysia Allysia Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 23
  24. 24. Ringelmann effect …• Individual members of a group become less productive as the size of the group increases. http://ht.ly/7Kto9• Reason 1: Loss of motivation• Reason 2: Coordination problems Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 24
  25. 25. Social loathing …• Individuals put less effort to achieve a goal when they work in a group than when they work alone. http://ht.ly/7KuJs• Deficit 1: Personal accountability• Deficit 2: Uniqueness of contribution Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 25
  26. 26. … subjective reasons? • “Too many cooks spoil the broth, so I better help somewhere else.” • “I seldom got any responses to myAllysia contributions or they came late”. • “ I contribute only when I am sure I can bring in my special knowledge” Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 26
  27. 27. Community size???• Critical Mass Theory: Active users produce enough content to motivate others to join.• Information Overload Theory: Contribution rates drop as user population and their contributions grow.• Social Loathing Theory: The larger the group, the less personal effort. Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 27
  28. 28. Lessons learned … Promote expansive learning • Create opportunities for taking responsibility • Foster self-organised forms of learning • Promote positive error culture Foto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/letcombe/1586241241/ Prevent social loathing • Foster sub-groups for strong membership • Assign individual members specific goals • Recognise personal, unique knowledgeFoto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/letcombe/1586241141/ Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 28
  29. 29. Open questions• How many members are needed to trigger a community? • Is effective group size dependant on the type of technology used? Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 29
  30. 30. Thank you for your attention!Mediencommunity: http://www.mediencommunity.deDr. Ilona Buchem: http://www.ibuchem.com/ Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 30

×