Collaborative Learning Spaces

512 views

Published on

"Collaborative Learning Spaces: Methods, Ethics, Tools, Design." Great Plains Alliance for Computers and Writing Conference. North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND. October 2010.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
512
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
9
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • More specifically, I am interested in the role of distributed learning and open source production processes in contemporary pedagogical and professional communication contexts. Whether through crowd-sourcing, open source organizational strategies, or real-time data mining, emerging information economies and technologies increasingly produce value by leveraging large scale aggregations of relatively disparate and fragmented individual actors and actions. My research argues that these large scale social and information processes are salient and instructive for the micro-physics of team work, localized projects, and even the composition classroom. Whether at the level of the individual or a community of learners, knowledge is produced through reshaping of our common spaces and re-articulating of our common interfaces for composing ourselves, each other, and the world.
  • My research argues that these large scale social and information processes are salient and instructive for the micro-physics of team work, localized projects, and even the composition classroom. Whether at the level of the individual or a community of learners, knowledge is produced through reshaping of our common spaces and re-articulating of our common interfaces for composing ourselves, each other, and the world.
  • Collaborative Learning Spaces

    1. 1. Collaborative Learning Spaces<br />Methods, Ethics, Tools, Design<br />
    2. 2. Abram Anders<br />University of Minnesota Duluth<br />adanders@d.umn.edu<br />GPACW Fall 2010<br />
    3. 3. Emergent Spaces<br />Demand Side<br />Professional Environments: collaborative, networked, just-in-time<br />Information Workers: new media skill sets and flexible adaptation to new tools and contexts for cooperative action<br />
    4. 4. Emergent Spaces<br />Supply Side<br />Institutional Values: online learning, non-traditional network communities<br />Pedagogical Innovation: technology and cooperative learning, Open Education, Connectivism, COINs, etc.<br />
    5. 5. Emergent Spaces<br />Personal Motivation; Situated Innovation<br />Research Interests: new media, open source, rhetoric, and professional communication technologies<br />Service Learning: University online learning initiative, College-level team and group-work initiative<br />
    6. 6. Emergent Spaces<br />Social media, crowd-sourcing, collective intelligence<br />Composing common spaces and shared interfaces<br />Ethical and practical challenge for the immediate future<br />
    7. 7. methods<br />Best practices for collaboration and technology-use<br />
    8. 8. Criticisms of Group-work<br />Student Feedback<br />Waste of time, too unfocused<br />Too complicated and/or inefficient; <br />Mismatched goals and/or abilities<br />Social loafers vs Dutiful achievers<br />
    9. 9. Group-work goes wrong<br />Pooled work; group structure is non-essential<br />Homogeneous membership: dynamics for invention are weak<br />Heterogeneous motives and/or weak management: goals and processes are unclear or underdeveloped<br />
    10. 10. Best Practices for Groups<br />Shared Purpose, Goals, Interests<br />Interdependence and Mutual Accountability<br />Make work relevant, competitive, evenly distributed<br />Structured Processes: Group Contracts, Peer Evaluations, Group and Individual Assessments<br />
    11. 11. Achieving Purpose<br />Daniel Pink, “Drive”: simple incentives are counter-productive<br />Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose<br />Make profit motive and purpose motive congruent<br />
    12. 12. Purposeful Group Learning<br />Tragedy of commons = higher order purpose; making the best of a bad situation<br />Need to get “self-interest” out of the way; better higher order purpose<br />Must make project/process purpose congruent with grade incentives<br />
    13. 13. Similarly, Technology<br />Avoid redundant, irrelevant, over-complicated, needless proprietary<br />Usability (and accessibility): Effective, Efficient, Engaging, Error Tolerant, Easy-to-Learn<br />Specific tools are too often solutions in search of a problem<br />
    14. 14. Ethics<br />Values for Technological Commons<br />
    15. 15. Values for Learners<br />Students who are engaged, interested, challenged, motivated<br />Autonomy: choice, immediate action, 3rd person play<br />Mastery: activity-specific goals for skill development (intrinsic)<br />Purpose: long-term objectives; continuing value; community investment<br />
    16. 16. Collaborative Commons<br />Facilitate connections and create common ground between:<br />Pedagogical Goals and Opportunities<br />Technological Tools and Applications<br />Collaborative Processes<br />Engage the unique challenges of situated learning communities<br />
    17. 17. Composing Ethical Commons<br />Common Purpose<br />Develop sustainable processes of innovation<br />Develop sustainable communities of learners<br />
    18. 18. Composing Ethical Commons<br />Immediate Value<br />Overcome pedagogical challenges<br />Achieve emergent goals/objectives<br />
    19. 19. Tools<br />Examples and Applications<br />
    20. 20. Building a Better Bullet Point<br />Resume Draft-work<br />Open Source process<br />Typewith.me<br />Unique challenges: self-representation; rhetorical sensitivity; writing process<br />
    21. 21.
    22. 22.
    23. 23. Crowd-sourced Editing<br />Editing business correspondence<br />Assembly line: identify, rewrite<br />Microsoft Word<br />Unique challenges: first author inertia; “pretty-good”-isms; achieve action bias in revision<br />
    24. 24. Design<br />Putting it TOGETHER; Iterative development<br />
    25. 25. Collaborative Service Learning<br />Inspiration<br />Implementation<br />Iterative Development<br />
    26. 26. Inspiration <br />Overcome traditional zero-sum “coverage v group” work problem<br />Students teach each-other<br />Build connections between successive generations of students<br />Practical knowledge developed by students for students<br />
    27. 27.
    28. 28.
    29. 29. Implement<br />Best Practices <br />autonomous results: products and assessment <br />interdependently structured processes for invention, distribution, and performance<br />Utopian impulse must be matched by pragmatic application<br />
    30. 30.
    31. 31.
    32. 32.
    33. 33.
    34. 34.
    35. 35.
    36. 36. Iterative Development<br />1 ed. Basic Assignment; Teamwork Instruction; Screencast Capture<br />2 ed. Group Selection; Work Roles<br />3 ed. Commissioned Assignments; external (local) clients<br />Future: Web-based deliverable for public portal site, videos with abstracts and supporting references<br />
    37. 37. Creating Collaborative Environments<br />Purposeful, Interdependent, Group Processes<br />Highly Structured Interfaces and Infrastructures for Learner Practices<br />Scaffolding and Iterative Development for Learners and Curriculum<br />
    38. 38. Summary Outline<br />1) formulate an Ethics: identify stakeholder goals, values, and formulate outcomes; <br />
    39. 39. Summary Outline<br />2) choose appropriate Tools: consider institutional/contextual affordances, consider issues of usability and integration; <br />
    40. 40. Summary Outline<br />3) outline a Design: strategically integrate writing, technology, and collaboration knowledge and skill sets, employ scaffolding, regular reinforcement, and achievable expectations;<br />
    41. 41. Summary Outline<br />4) review, revise, Redesign: always try something new, expect to improve, iteration is the key.  <br />

    ×