I found
McLoughlin and Lee's 2008 and 2010 articles engaging and informative.
Richardson's (2006) 'read-write web' is a clear description of the interactive
Web where the user no longer consumes but also produces and becomes a 'prosumer'
(Sener 2007 in McLoughlin and Lee 2008) with the recurrent idea that learner
empowerment comes about through a closer focus on what the student can do:
customise, personalise and network and take an active part in through
collaboration in the creation of their own knowledge and skills. I personally
like the concept of Pedagogy 2.0 and its relation to Web 2.0 as I see Cousin's dynamic
interaction between technology and pedagogy (2005:118) take shape through the
concept of learner autonomy, agency and personalisation, essential triggers in
motivation, as described by McLean's (2003) three A's of motivation (agency,
autonomy and affiliation) via tools like blogs, wikis, media sharing apps, and social
networking sites. Another concept I found interesting was that of generativity
and connectivity and how they are changing how learners see content: from static,
in the form of institutionalised, set, rigid tutor created content to a more
dynamic learner-controlled role in the process of its creation. In my own
experience, I can see how exploration of resources available through the
different courses I have taken online have led to a more creative and fruitful
approach to my own learning and the sharing of this learning with my peers and
learners alike for instance through the creation of a series on my YouTube
channel called Methodology Pills for Induced Reflection thus opening new ways
of engagement with peers, tutors and the community at large 'in creating and
sharing ideas, creative authorship (Flickr, MySpace, YouTube) or personal
publishing (Downes 2004:18 in McLoughlin and Lee 2008)'. In turn, this
experience allows me to have a better understanding of how to implement and
replicate the same conditions within my context while being a tangible example
of how Pedagogy 2.0 transcends the walls of the institution (O'Reilly 2005 in
op.cit.).
As far as
the 3 challenges presented in the article, I would argue, based on my own
experience of having seen my Facebook page mutate from a personal realm to a
hybrid now predominantly populated by my professional life, that Prensky's
(2001 in op.cit.) digital and generational divide between Digital Natives and
Immigrants does not apply across all contexts. I would also argue that while Facebook
may be 'mainly trafficked by students and teachers may not be welcome' I have
not seen my credibility diminished but, on the contrary, reaffirmed through my
association to different groups without necessarily portraying 'a different
self online' from that F2F as reported by Mazer, Murphy and Simonds (2007 in
op.cit.).
Also, in my
own experience both as an online and F2F tutor, I agree with Katz & Mcklin's
(2007) claim that students 'lack competencies to locate and assess resources
for objectivity, reliability and currency' while being especially true in today's
sharepocalypse
('a new era of social networking
insanity caused by social overload) where being selective is requirement more
than option. I believe these competencies and skills can only be developed by
informed educators and find pertinent McLoughlin and Lee's quoting of Kind 1993
and Doolittle 2003: 'Web 2.0 allows recognition of the role of the teacher an
expert guide-on-the-side as opposed to sage-on-the-stage.
Their 2010
article sees the concept of 'active learning experience that is social,
participatory and supported by rich media' (p28) repeatedly addressed with a
focus on the design of activities with a central pillar, that of scaffolding to
support the learner. The agency afforded by social software tools takes again a
leading role as it allows the much sought after 'autonomy and engagement in
social communities, s-centred self-directed and self-regulated learning'(p29).
PLEs are said to be essential to the integration of learning outcomes such as
lifelong learning, informal learning and self-directed learning and my personal
experience as a learner fully supports this claim. Firstly, because lifelong
learning becomes a possibility at one's fingertips and this comfort not only fosters
but encourages my continued professional development and learning. Informal learning which I would say also takes
place incidentally whenever I am in the process of exploring resources and is
not intentional through the serendipity effect (Merton & Barber2003;
Moskaliuk & Kimerle 2009 in Moskaliuk et al. 2009:550), and also thanks to the fact that recourses are no
longer linear by way of hypertext (lost in hyperspace phenomenon Edwards and
Hardman 1999 in op.cit.). Last but not least, self-directed learning
which I see as agency incarnated. In Downes words: 'PLEs affirm the role of the
individual in organising, customising and shaping his/her own LE (2005), which
again resound the concept of agency above and define how I learn, a clear
example being the organisation, customisation and shaping of the content I
create and share via my YouTube channel,
my Powtoons visble through my YouTube
channel, my resources curation through Pearltrees, my Blog, and Glogster amongst
others.
Although I
agree with the two interpretations of PLEs offered in the article in which the
first one sees 'personalisation as the need to embrace a s-centred but
provider-driven approach to education' and the second one where a 'wholly
learner-driven approach transcends the walls of the classroom' (p30), I believe
that the first one is and will continue to be provider-driven while the second
one although already a reality for the self-directed learner is still in
cyberspace, that is, not institutionally tangible yet as alluded too by Sener (2007
in McLoughlin and Lee 2010) with student produced content (essays and reports) still
being used for assessment purposes. Again, the ideal scenario where I want to
be both as a tutor and elarner being that where student created content is
central to learning and they are seen as 'prosumers of knowledge and curators
of the community's knowledge and artefacts' (Esutace & Hay 2000, Lee et al
2005 in op.cit.).
References
McLean, A.
Journey to Excellence - The Three As of Motivation. [online]. Last accessed on
16 November 2014 available at:
http://www.journeytoexcellence.org.uk/videos/expertspeakers/the3asofmotivationalanmclean.asp
Mcloughlin,
C. & Lee, M.J.W., 2010. Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web
2 . 0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social
software. [Online] Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1),
pp.28–43. Last accessed on 25 November 2014. Available at http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet26/mcloughlin.html.
Mcloughlin,
C. & Lee, M.J.W., 2008. Future Learning Landscapes: Transforming Pedagogy
through Social Software. [Online] Innovate, 5(4). Last accessed on 25
November 2014. Available at: http://moodle.nottingham.ac.uk/mod/resource/view.php?id=1017720.
Moskaliuk, J., Kimmerle, J. & Cress, U., 2009. Wiki-supported learning and
knowledge building: effects of incongruity between knowledge and information. [Online]
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(6), pp.549–561. Accessed
November 13, 2014. Available at:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00331.x
Sharepocalypse Now: Why Social Media Overload Means New Opportunities for
Startups, 2011. [Online] Last accessed 28 November 2014 at: http://mashable.com/2011/07/31/social-media-overload-startups/.
