Incorporating Web2.0, Pedagogy
2.0 and Moodle 2.0 into your
learning and teaching agenda:
But just wait one sec...
Dr Michael Sankey
Some key cultural shifts
Conceptual shift to collective intelligence & user participation
Web is not just about communication, but also education
B t we mostly use it for communication
tl f i ti
Moved from the Desktop to the Web
From the computer platform to the network platform
From the personal to the shared
From hardware to d
F h d data
From fixity to remixability
So what this all mean? We need to realign our pedagogy
‘Pedagogy 2 0 integrates Web 2 0 tools that support
knowledge sharing, peer-to-peer networking, and
access to a global audience with socioconstructivist
learning approaches to facilitate greater learning
autonomy agency and personalisation’
McLoughlin & Lee (2008)
Pedagogy 2.0 cont...
They identify the main challenge as enabling ‘self-
di ti knowledge b ildi
l d building, and ld learner control
by offering flexible options for students to engage
in learning that is authentic and relevant to their
needs and to those of the networked society while
still providing necessary structure and scaffolding’
till idi t t d ff ldi ’
McLoughlin & Lee (2008)
So we are left to ask...
Do we make it all open or keep it all walled?
Outside or i id ?
O t id inside?
But sometimes we need to be able to close
the door – as teaching is about trust
So how has USQ done this?
And where are we going
Moodle Land USQ
USQ My USQ
StudyDesk StaffDesk Community
Developers Community of Practice (CoP)
USQ – minimum standard
Heaps of resources
Integrated Content Wimba collaboration
Environment (ICE) suite
Moodle: Student System
Other 3rdparty open StudyDesk
source modules MyStaffDesk EQUELLA
EASE assignment came Mahara
Well over 130
How many of these have you visited?
Just out of interest…
Fark is a news aggregator and an
edited social networking news site.
10 things to be careful of
1. Technical problems 6. Loss of history
2. Clashing cultures 7. Assessment woes
3. Technophobia 8. Overwhelming choice
4. Loss of monitoring
L f it i 9. Loss of trust
L ft t
5. Loss of control 10. Inequalities Skip to 26
Dron & Bhattacharya (2007)
Students accessing voice/video needing plug-ins
with downloads quotas greater than students have.
ith d l d t t th t d t h
Most Uni’s have computing standards, but once
outside the Uni there is little or no control over this.
Security issues for staff/students accessing sites
that use improper protocols for the infrastructure.
Traditional ways of teaching exist in many courses,
tensions arise if a ‘whole of program approach’ is
p g pp
not adopted for new technologies.
With a strong DE focus, staff come to USQ but only
taught face-to-face. Students become dissatisfied
and staff being frustrated.
Moving to a common web friendly platform for
producing teaching environments is essential.
Technophobia looms large for students/staff, a
natural resistance to change. Some staff don’t even
use online discussions, tricky when 76% study DE.
A high % non-traditional students, adopting too
many new things too quickly (particularly with Web
2.0 technologies) can be off-putting
If tools are integrated in ‘the walled garden’ then
some monitoring and support can be provided.
Loss of monitoring
Web 2.0 tools by-passes traditional ways of
teaching, students operating outside the gaze.
Same as students gathering in a café.
If strong DE, this becomes problematic, as tools
used for assessment, housed in the public domain
cannot be monitored
This is addressed by the design, by limiting the
dependence on this aspect for assessment.
Loss of control
Similar to lack of monitoring, using tools outside
the Uni domain who says those tools will endure.
important data could be lost affecting student
If Web 2.0 type tools can be employed in the uni
i t there i a reasonable compromise,
is bl i
as will be demonstrated.
Loss of history
The main benefit of an LMS (Moodle) to house
and mediate Web 2.0 app’s is there is always a
record of practice that can be called upon.
Systems are usually backed up daily and less risk
of outsiders corrupting important data.
Although not important to some staff there are
legislative responsibilities for uni’s in Oz, requiring
environments to be maintained for two years.
Staff need to assess the veracity of student work.
Yes problems exist within ‘the wall’, but at least
there a track of who has been there.
A level of security for student too track submissions.
PLEs allow RSS of external sources, partly bridging
the divide monitoring based on disclaimers
We design assessment to minimize identity fraud
but take full advantage of Web 2.0 affordances.
There are so many environments that could be
used, it is impractical to be conversant with the lot.
One uses Facebook, another MySpace, another
wants the uni PLE.
When so much choice is offered the additional
cognitive load can be overwhelming
If the Uni provides syndication to a select number,
the potential to reduce confusion is highly reduced.
Loss of trust
Trust is a two-way street; students & staff need to
be able to trust the environments they work inin.
Web 2.0 tools mediated through the PLE, or
housed within the LMS, there is more trust.
Also a sense that the teacher, or uni, can monitor
the space, protecting students (& staff) from
misuse, hackers and unreliable transient spaces.
Large diversity of experience within the non-
traditional student base, it can be inequitable to
use a wide variety of Web 2.0 tools that may
simply be used for their novelty value.
Solid pedagogical advantage should be found first.
So a Pedagogy 2 0 approach is preferred
including sufficient scaffolding to prevent
advantaging one set of skills over another.
Management or Facilitation
What we have had What is emerging
Traditional LMS LMS
The dream ☺
Moodle 2 Mahara
(LMS) (PLE) OCC
Activity 4 USQOpen U
The walled garden The big bad world
Personal learning environment
Outside Artefact 1
For course assessments Group 1
Flickr Skill 1 Group 2
For potential employers
YouTube Individual 1
A t f t6
Facebook Skill 2 View 3
For parents or friends Individual 2
5000 concurrent seats. U d f
t t Used for:
• Staff ◄► Student
• Student ◄► Student
• Staff ◄► Staff
Second Life and Legal Education on the USQ Island -
Eola Barnett (aka Azalee)
Advocacy assessment (role play)
Student consultation and student
directed study groups. Included
I-Phone/Pad Vs e-Book Readers
The advantages are roughly two-fold:
1. A staggered institution wide approach can provide
adequate support & PD along with safeguards
q pp g g
against ad hoc, inconsistent practices, thus
providing a benefit to both student & staff.
2. Professionally most students will need to be comfy
with Web 2.0 upon graduation & have an ability to
quickly adapt to changing opportunities