Hi All, A major aspect missing in the elearning environment that cannot be simulated is the teacher-learner dynamic. For some subjects especially highly technical ones such as computer programming - this is a real issue - Yuwanuch Gulatee's DIT research is on this topic. What needs to be a major component of this discussion is the recognition that elearning is a completely new paradigm, not the same as face-to-face and not an alternative. When this happens we will be able to move forward and introduce new learning frameworks and structures that cater for students in the different environment. Currently, we are trying to re-invent the old model. This about-face also means new ways of assessing learning, different learning resource formats and delivery modes. It also means some research into Human Computer Interaction, the types of skills required to interrogate learning materials on the screen and an individual's emotional response to learning in what is a very isolating environment - largely unexplored in any great detail. An observation from my own PhD research in this area - students use the cursor as a line of sight guide to read text on screen and everyone is still printing.
Are we there yet? No - I don't think so. :) BC Vice President, Advocacy & Promotion, IASL: www.iasl-online.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]: http://www.chs.ecu.edu.au/portals/LIS/index.php Transforming Information and Learning Conference http://conferences.scis.ecu.edu.au/TILC2007/ Barbara Combes, Lecturer School of Computer and Information Science Edith Cowan University, Perth Western Australia Ph: (08) 9370 6072 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Whatever the cost of our libraries, the price is cheap compared to that of an ignorant nation." Walter Cronkite This email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify me immediately by return email or telephone and destroy the original message. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Catherine Arden Sent: Monday, 6 October 2008 7:07 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] PhD research on OLPC Hi Tom I agree that the "sage on the stage in the brick space structure" is an outdated model of education that perhaps has more to do with maintaining power and control than teaching and learning....However, there are nonetheless real challenges working within our new paradigm. For instance, how do we value knowledge? How do we teach 'instrumental' skills such as literacy and numeracy effectively and how do we know they are learned? How do we recognise scholarly achievement? How do we 'transmit' cultural values? Are these questions really still about hegemony and fear of losing control or do we need to have some way of controlling education if we are to further our human development and not find ourselves wallowing in a sea of pseudo? Catherine Arden ----- Original Message ----- From: "tom abeles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "The Digital Divide Network discussion group" <digitaldivide@digitaldivide.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 1:36 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] PhD research on OLPC > > this conversation in several variances is being considered currently > elsewhere on the net, particularly around the issue of virtual worlds > > Steve's example is right on target. academics hold the center stage > because they control the grades/certification which provide for student > advancement. > That is the one unique product that universities, in click or brick space > have to offer. And it is the one reason in the dominant US model that > get's student attention for the sage on the stage > > What business has found out, as have many others, is that social networks > (those articles that Steve cites as examples) allow knowledge to be gained > in entirely different and collaborative fashion, a fashion that academics > might call cheating or disrespectful of the sage. While, Mark is right, > that these technologies will find a place in The Academy, they are, almost > more importantly, a mirror for the educational system which passively > makes the point that Steve so eloquently made. The brick space structure > with the sage is a vestigial manifestation of the good old days, going > back to pre-print where knowledge was transmitted by those who had the > information stored in their heads or had access to the very few > collections of knowledge such as the libraries of Alexandria. > > Even pre-internet, social networking provided ways for gaining critical > information. What ICT's show us is that we now have many more and much > more to access, perhaps more than a single sage on the stage can offer, > except where it has been packaged for delivery in nice 3-credit > experiences and vetted by a mid-term and a final for adding a certificate > leading towards a collection for cashing in for a sheep skin. > > It is not important that universities adopt the technologies as much as > that they realize that, all factors considered, a brick space campus in > its current embodiment is probably untenable- note the increasing cost in > human lives (adjucnts) and rising tuition. > > thoughts > > tom > > tom abeles > >> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 12:29:59 -0700 >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> To: digitaldivide@digitaldivide.net >> Subject: Re: [DDN] PhD research on OLPC >> >> Mark, >> Your point out that the computer and the new communication technologies >> are >> important to "knowledge workers" in the new socioeconomy, while the older >> technologies of radio and television and film were not, and of course you >> are right. Your conclusion--that this difference will result in the new >> technologies finding their way into the schools--does not seem to speak >> to >> the point of the building-centered -teacher-centered school as itself an >> organized technology that accommodates some new technologies and >> pedagogies >> and resists others. >> >> To fashion an outlandish example, consider the assembly line as an >> organizing technology. If the suggestion is made to add a cell phone or >> computer to each station because the new "knowledge economy" us built >> around >> cell phones and computers, the counter is that the issue is not the needs >> of >> the larger society but the rhythms and routines of the assembly line, and >> whether cell phones and computers can somehow be adapted to the moving >> belt. >> >> Online universities seem to be doing very well: since there are no >> brick-and-mortar instructional technologies to contend with the new >> information technologies that problem is dissolved. "Blended" or "hybrid" >> approaches that combine traditional classroom and lecture hall >> instruction >> with online instruction seem to run into the conflict of technologies >> issue. >> I have a small collection of experiences with blended learning culled >> from >> The Chronicle of Higher Education and elsewhere that illustrate the >> clash. >> In one, a professor puts all of his lectures and readings online--and the >> students stop coming to class, and the professor has to require >> attendance. >> In several others, faculty hospitable to the computer ban computers from >> their classrooms because students are texting to friends or playing video >> games rather than attending to what is going on in the live classroom. >> >> If there is indeed a conflict between the computer and the 600-square >> foot >> classroom with a desk, blackboard, 30 tablet arm chairs, and a live >> teacher >> at a lectern , it may be that the needs of society for knowledge workers >> won't make for reconciliation. >> >> Steve Eskow >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Mark Warschauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Without comment on the rest of the Steve's interesting thoughts, I >> > would like to briefly comment on this point: >> > >> > >We might begin by trying to understand why radio, television, >> > >film--all >> > the >> > >earlier technologies that promised to reform education--have failed to >> > make >> > >a difference in what goes on in those "brick spaces" that Tom talks >> > about... >> > >Steve Eskow >> > >> > A major argument made by historian of education Larry Cuban is that, >> > since radio, television, and film did not transform schools, >> > information & communications technologies (ICTs) will not do so >> > either. >> > >> > Though I agree with the underlying idea that no technology in and of >> > itself, will automatically transform institutions (and, indeed, >> > critiquing naive assumptions about the deterministic role of >> > technology has been one major focus of my work), I think the >> > comparison between radio, television, and film, on the one hand, and >> > ICTs, on the other, is problematic. Radio, television, and film >> > have never been critical day-to-day tools of knowledge workers in the >> > U.S., certainly not in the way that ICTs are. Almost anybody who is >> > producing knowledge, whether in academic, business, entertainment >> > fields, or otherwise, uses computers and the Internet constantly to >> > do so, in ways that such knowledge workers seldom used radio, >> > television, and film previously. The role of ICTs in education is >> > thus much more natural and compelling than that of radio, television, >> > and film. I would suggest that attempts to generalize a "ceiling >> > effect" for the long-term role of ICTs in schools based on prior >> > educational technology research on the diffusion of radio, >> > television, and film are flawed. >> > Mark >> > -- >> > Mark Warschauer >> > Professor of Education and Informatics >> > University of California, Irvine >> > Berkeley Place 2001 (for mail); Berkeley Place 3000 (for visitors) >> > Irvine, CA 92697-5500 >> > tel: (949) 824-2526, fax: (949) 824-2965 >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw >> > _______________________________________________ >> > DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list >> > DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net >> > http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide >> > To unsubscribe, send a message to >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the >> > body of the message. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list >> DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net >> http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide >> To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. > > _________________________________________________________________ > See how Windows connects the people, information, and fun that are part of > your life. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093175mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list > DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net > http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide > To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. > > > __________ NOD32 3495 (20081004) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com > > _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. This e-mail is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose or use the information contained within. If you have received it in error please return it to the sender via reply e-mail and delete any record of it from your system. The information contained within is not the opinion of Edith Cowan University in general and the University accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information provided. CRICOS IPC 00279B _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
