Wiki pedagogies

1,183 views

Published on

Presentation on wikis for the M25 Learning Technology Group, looking at epistemologies and group work behaviour and considering implications for wiki task design and assessment.

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

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,183
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • What it takes for wiki to work.
  • about the nature of knowledge and the process of knowing
  • Direct attention new recognitions of the education
  • Banning students from using wikipedia
  • There are two axes here – one is a measure of comfort with particular technology to support learning and on the other is the degree of familiarity with the technology.
    As an example you see top right hand corner, instant messaging – comfortable using it for learning and familiar with the technology.
    Down here we have the Virtual Learning Environment Web CT…
    The interesting point is that they are familiar with using social networks such as Facebook, but not comfortable using them as part of their learning.
    Look at the bottom left quadrant. Learners aren’t comfortable with using newer technologies or established technologies in new ways, in their learning.
    There’s a perceived split between learning lives and social lives.
  • Shaped by the educational tasks students are given.
    Funnel metaphor – transmitted, acquired, having rather than being.
  • Desirable views of higher learning:
    complex
    requiring the integration of ideas
    requiring task persistence.
  • it creates tensions regarding ownership, authorship, and requirements of
    individual contributions of comparative quantity and quality.
  • Shared mental representations may not necessarily challenge simple epistemologies because they are about transferring and comparing, rather than challenging and changing per se.
  • Wiki pedagogies

    1. 1. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Wiki pedagogies Mira Vogel Goldsmiths, University of London
    2. 2. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Overview • Why wikis? • Considerations – Learners' epistemological beliefs – Peer relationships • Implications – Design of wiki tasks – Assessment • A scenario for discussion
    3. 3. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Why wikis?
    4. 4. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 (The intensifying economic drivers for peer learning.)
    5. 5. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Wikis: legitimate learning institutions “…a collaborative, knowledge-making impulse in humans who are willing to contribute, correct, and collect information without remuneration: by definition, this is education. To miss how much such collaborative, participatory learning underscores the foundations of learning is defeatist, unimaginative, even self- destructive.” (Davidson and Goldberg 2009)
    6. 6. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Wikis: real-world “…the user-centred focus of Web 2.0 activities supports the learner in transgressing and resituating content and practices between the formal and informal learning settings in which s/he participates.” (Dohn, 2009)
    7. 7. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Wikis: real-world “... amplify the students’ sense that there may be multiple interpretations of the same topic of study or discussion point ... It also underlines the fact that interpretations may converge or diverge, highlighting the natural complexity of interrelations within the realms of knowledge.” (Trentin, 2008)
    8. 8. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 But so far they haven’t taken off in higher learning.
    9. 9. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Great Expectations, JISC IPSOS MORI, 2008 Familiar Unfamiliar ComfortableNot comfortable Instant messaging Text message admin updates Administrative materials online Using existing online social networks to discuss coursework Emailing tutors Course-specific materials online Posting questions Online to tutors Web CT Using social networks such as Facebook as a formal part of the course Submitting assignments online Using podcasts Making podcasts Making wikis
    10. 10. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Considerations
    11. 11. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Epistemological beliefs - beliefs about the nature of knowledge and the process of knowing.
    12. 12. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Desirable beliefs about knowledge Knowledge as complex, tentative, derived by reason, acquired gradually, and related to persistence and hard work. Teaching can make a difference.
    13. 13. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 “accepting the challenge of struggling with the domain” (Tolhurst, 2007)
    14. 14. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Relationships
    15. 15. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Group work behaviour • ‘Social loafing’ – Less individual effort compared to lone work – Infectious • ‘Diligent isolate’ depends on self alone to get the job done – Compounds any loafing • However, smaller groups – Can easily meet offline – May lack critical mass or creative friction
    16. 16. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Cooperation is not collaboration • Where learning is viewed as acquisition, peer editing isn’t viewed as constructive: – Multi-centred, individualistic contributions – Adding rather than editing – let alone deleting – Bargaining “I think I will cry if anyone changes my page!!!” (Wheeler et al, 2008)
    17. 17. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Design of tasks & assessment
    18. 18. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Sharing knowledge Paradigm Entails Shared mental representations Transferring, comparing, not necessarily changing Shared object Negotiating a consensus on artefact, problem, or goal Others? Stahl & Hesse, 2009
    19. 19. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Trentin, 2008
    20. 20. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Trentin, 2008
    21. 21. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Scaffolding, rules, constraints • Help keeping abreast of developments • Prefab or templated pages to edit • Taxonomy for tagging – e.g. only link designated words (boundaries) • Set of peer questioning stems • Division of labour (equal opps; control) • Things you can count (words per page, minimum number of entries)
    22. 22. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Assessment - giving credit • Negotiating assessment criteria – More than demonstrating a knowledge object – Interdependence • Multiple assessment points (stops free-riding) • ‘Procedural justice’ (metrics) • ‘Distributive justice’ (recognition) • Peer, group, and individual marks – For the overall process – For each student’s role in the process – For the end product
    23. 23. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 References / bibliography • Davidson, C. & Goldberg, D., 2009. The future of learning institutions in a digital age. Available at: http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/Future_of_Learning.pdf. • Dohn, N.B., 2009. Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), pp.343-363. • JISC Ipsos MORI (2008) Great expectations of ICT: How Higher Education institutions are measuring up. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/greatexpectations.aspx • Karasavvidis, I., 2010. Wiki uses in higher education: exploring barriers to successful implementation. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(3), pp.219-231. • Larusson, J.A. & Alterman, R., 2009. Wikis to support the “collaborative” part of collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(4), pp.371-402. • Piezon, S.L.,& Donaldson, R.L. (2005). Online groups and social loafing:Understanding student-group interactions.Online Journal ofDistance Learning Administration, 8(4). Retrieved from: http://www.westga.edu/*distance/ojdla/winter84/piezon84.htm • Schommer, M. (1990) Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension, Journal • of Educational Psychology, 82, 498-504. • Stahl, G. & Hesse, F., 2009. Paradigms of shared knowledge. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(4), pp.365-369. • Trentin, G., 2008. Using a wiki to evaluate individual contribution to a collaborative learning project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), pp.43-55. • Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D. (2008). The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 987–995.
    24. 24. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Scenario A colleague from Psychology approaches you. He wants his cohort of 20 MSc students to co-write reviews of the course’s weekly visiting presenter series. He says these will be assessed, but he hasn’t yet decided how. He asks only for a guide to using the VLE’s wiki tool that he can circulate to students. How do you respond?
    25. 25. M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010 Issues to resolve with wikis • Group task needs to be integrated • Uneven or low participation • Free-riding • Competition for popular content • Students skeptical about value of own knowledge • Complexity of editing • Trepidation about editing peers’ work • Bargaining for credit • Resistance to being edited • Need for sustained attention / awareness • Need for good communication • Plagiarism • Demands of software • Gaming the assessment • Resent being assessed as group

    ×