Tag: personal cyberinfrastructure

Attwell, G. (2007). Personal Learning Environments-the future of eLearning?. E-Learning Papers. vol. 2 (1)

The idea of a Personal Learning Environment recognises that learning is continuing and seeks to provide tools to support that learning. It also recognises the role of the individual in organising their own learning. Moreover, the pressures for a PLE are based on the idea that learning will take place in different contexts and situations and will not be provided by a single learning provider. Linked to this is an increasing recognition of the importance of informal learning.

In terms of educational technology, there has been little attention paid to informal learning. It is remarkable that formal learning technology and applications have only really been made available to those enrolled on an educational programme or to those working for larger enterprises.

Many institution are experimenting with the use of blogs and other social software tools in a more restricted environment as part of the curriculum. One interesting issue is the extent to which ‘communities’ continue after the end of a particular course. this also raises questions about what responsibilities institutions and teachers or moderators have for supporting such learning, outside course times.

PLEs provide learners with their own spaces under their own control to develop and share their ideas.
Moreover, PLEs can provide a more holistic learning environments, bringing together sources and contexts for learning hitherto separate. Students learn how to take responsibility or their own learning. Critically, PLEs can bridge the walled gardens of the educational institutions with the worlds outside. In so doing learners can develop the judgements and skills or literacy necessary for using new technologies in a rapidly changing society.

Borgman, C. (2003). Personal digital libraries: Creating individual spaces for innovation. NSF Workshop on Post-Digital Libraries Initiative Directions (2003)

This is an article about the design of digital libraries to support innovation, but has some implications as it discusses monolithic vs. individual applications in an educational environment.

The digital libraries of today (and the near future) tend to be monolithic systems that serve large distributed communities. These are critical mass technologies that become more valuable as their repositories grow in size. Their strengths are also their weakness: by being large and general, they are not easily tailored to individual uses.

Cognitive psychologists distinguish between two fundamental types of memory: recognition and recall. Recognition occurs when you see something familiar, while recall requires that you remember something and are able to articulate it. Most information retrieval depends upon recall skills – the user has to describe what he or she wishes to retrieve. Browsing depends more on recognition skills – looking around until you find something of interest that you recognize as useful. But most browsing still requires that the user describe a starting point.

Farmer, J. & Bartlett-Bragg, A. (2005). Blogs@ anywhere: High fidelity online communication. ascilite 2005: Balance, Fidelity, Mobility: maintaining the momentum? pp. 197-203

This article has some really great citations. Be sure to mine them.

Abstract:
Since early 2001 several institutions and many individual teachers have incorporated blogging into their online pedagogical strategies. During this time, weblog (blog) publishing technologies have evolved towards accessibility and ease of use and the technological barriers preventing adoption have, to a degree, dissolved. Blogs and their associated technologies are arguably heralding the most significant technological development in online teaching and learning since the introduction of enterprise level Learning Management Systems (LMS) (Downes 2004).
This development is all the more significant as a result of the communication dynamics inherent within blog technologies. Whereas an LMS stores and presents all information on a centralised and hierarchical basis, bound within the subject and the organisation, blogs are distributed, aggregated, open and independent. Through the use of blogs, it is suggested that teachers and learners are becoming empowered, motivated, reflective and connected practitioners in new knowledge environments. The balance between individualised and centralised technologies is restored.
The application of weblogs in an education setting will, at best, have a limited impact if due consideration of these developing communication dynamics are ignored. This paper includes a brief review of some of the institutional and individual blog projects that are taking place in higher education. In doing so it examines the different types of blog environments that are being used in terms of their communication dynamics and subsequent impact upon teachers, learners and pedagogy. Further, a more detailed examination is made of the use of blogs in teaching and learning in courses at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS). In light of these studies and examination, possible approaches to implementing blogs in institutional settings are outlined in the form of an alternative Online Learning Environment. In addition, a study to be undertaken in 2006 examining the impact of blogs on teaching and learning at Deakin University will be described.

…arguably the most important developments in this area have had little to do with visual representation and form, and much more to do with the facility for the development of individual digital identity and an XML language known as RSS.

RSS… differs from email and discussion boards in that users are able to select from where to receive communication and, in most cases, how much of that information that will eventually arrive (summaries, titles, or full entries). Publication of a users own material through RSS allows for the user to communicate only with those that are have selected to aggregate the RSS feed hence giving both parties control over the process. Further, as most RSS aggregators are either integrated with or stand-alone desktop/web applications, no requirement is placed on the reader except to check the aggregator for new items.

Indeed, for MacColl et al.1 the individualisation of the blogging experience was significant in that it allowed for the students to express themselves through “heavily customising their blogs and requesting more advanced functionality”. This control over information is, they surmise, critical to “fostering appropriation of the technology for unintended uses” and plays heavily in their future plans to “explore extensions that approximate the fluency of a shared paper-based journal, as a basis for the serendipitous backtalk that reveals unanticipated problems or surprise opportunities”. Invariably, it would seem, aggregation and individualisation would play a key role in this.

In a traditional learning management system communication, content and participants are generally segmented into specific areas such as discussion boards, ‘learning modules’ and synchronous chat environments. Participants are able to communicate in specified areas through bulletin boards and interact with content as separate instances. In essence the participants are focused on the (bulletin-board) communication environments and the presented content.
However, in a blog based Online Learning Environment while content may be accessed from a particular location it is seen to be an integral part of each blogs production through links, commentary and more. Further, communication between participants is centred upon the each individual and facilitated through individual and group aggregation, comments on individual blogs and the use of hyperlinks by the participants.
Rather than segmented areas, courses become clusters of individuals. The capacity for participants to post to multiple categories through particular blogging tools allow then to actively belong to multiple communities and the use of comments, email, voip, instant messaging and other communication tools (frequently integrated into blog structure as alternative means of contact) allow for interaction extended beyond the discussion board area.

Web publishing technologies are providing educators with radical new opportunities, but simply mixing them within existing institutional paradigms will not be sufficient. Strategies for embracing technologies must not be constrained by currently available or popular options; consideration must be given to future and possible applications of newly emergent technologies as well. A clear commitment to implementing pedagogical strategies that are underpinned by the application of theoretical frameworks and research is to be encouraged if we, as practitioners and researchers, are to fully and responsibly enhance the opportunities presented by the dynamics of personalised, collaborative learning environments.

1. MacColl, I., Morrison, A., Muhlberger, R., Simpson, M., & Viller, S. (2005). Reflections on reflection: Blogging in undergraduate design studios. Blogtalk downunder conference 2005. Retrieved June 22, 2005, from http://incsub.org/blogtalk/?page_id=69 [↩]

Dutton, W.H., Cheong, P.H., & Park, N. (2004). The Social Shaping of a Virtual Learning Environment: The Case of a University-wide Course Management System. Electronic Journal of e-learning. vol. 2 (2) pp. 69-80

A characteristic of higher education culture throughout the world is that instructors generally teach the way they were taught: using a traditional one-many teaching paradigm based on class lectures and discussion. With notable exceptions, such as the one on one tutorial approach, this paradigm is entrenched in most university cultures, which generally tie teaching rewards to the quality of lectures and discussion. These paradigms are key influences shaping outcomes from the introduction of a VLE and other ICTs within institutions of higher education.

Two aspects of the culture of campus-based higher education can constrain innovation outcomes: the strength of entrenched values underpinning university teaching and the degree to which students and systems of teaching evaluation can discourage risk taking in the classroom.

Van Harmelen, M. (2006). Personal learning environments. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’06)

Abstract:
Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) are attracting increasing interest in the e-learning domain. PLEs may be characterised in a multidimensional space. Examples of PLEs are discussed.

this is a very short paper, outlining some examples of PLEs.

There is increasing awareness of a major limitation in many VLEs, namely teacher or institutional control of resources. Control of PLEs may vested in their individual users.

Duffy, P., & Bruns, A. (2006). The use of blogs, wikis and RSS in education: A conversation of possibilities. Proceedings Online Learning and Teaching Conference 2006. pp. 31-38.

Abstract:
In a ‘socially mobile learning environment’, it is no longer sufficient to use online learning and teaching technologies simply for the delivery of content to students. A ‘digital literacy’ exists where flexible and mobile technologies must be explored for collaborative and (co)creative purposes, as well as for the critical assessment and evaluation of information.
This paper will focus on the educational possibilities of blogs, wikis and RSS feeds. Blogs and wikis are two new content development and management technologies that enable an interactive and intercreative engagement amongst students and between students and teachers. RSS is a technology for syndicating information such as the content of websites. These technologies enable desirable practices such as collaborative content creation, peer assessment, formative evaluation of student work, individual as well as group reflection on learning experiences, and up-to-date information regarding changes in collaborative spaces, and can be used in the development of authentic learning tasks. An overview of each technology will be presented with pragmatic suggestions for their incorporation into the student learning experience.

A commonly asked question relates to the difference between blogs and discussion fora. While similar in some respects, however, there remain substantial differences in user experience in both spaces. Discussion fora are predominantly shared community spaces in which individual voices may make themselves heard but are afforded no specific space of their own. First and foremost, blogs provide a platform for individual expression and also support reader commentary, critique, and interlinkage as subsequent steps. In other words, blogs foreground the individual, while discussion fora foreground the group. The suggestion here is that this makes blogs the more useful tool, especially in cases where there is no strong sense of group belonging or loyalty, or there is a lack of group turn-taking and communication skills. An example of this could be large classes or at early stages of students’ semesters and/or degrees.

Walker (1985)1 believes that ‘creative interaction with one’s own development helps to ensure that new knowledge is incorporated in, and integrated with existing knowledge’ (p. 65). A blog offers interaction with reflective comments and also the ability to interlink to related ideas. Also, other members of the community can comment on blog entries to suggest additional considerations and explorations of the idea presented and promote further reflection and thought regarding a stated viewpoint.

Such socially based technologies sit well with the understanding of learning as socially constructed, which has been a cornerstone of recent pedagogical theory. Blogs, wikis, and RSS provide a means to encourage, live, and make visible the social construction of knowledge that such theory postulates, and it is incumbent on teachers to embrace such tools where their use is beneficial to learners and teachers alike. They provide a useful prompt for the further rethinking of teaching practices in the pursuit of supporting socially constructed learning practices.

1. Walker, D. (1985). Writing and reflection. In D. Boud, R. Keogh, & D. Walker (Eds.), Reflection:
   Turning experience into learning. London: Kogan Page. [↩]

Lee, C.P., Dourish, P., & Mark, G. (2006). The human infrastructure of cyberinfrastructure. Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work. pp. 483-492

Abstract:
Despite their rapid proliferation, there has been little examination of the coordination and social practices of cyberinfrastructure projects. We use the notion of “human infrastructure” to explore how human and organizational arrangements share properties with technological infrastructures. We conducted an 18-month ethnographic study of a large-scale distributed biomedical cyberinfrastructure project and discovered that human infrastructure is shaped by a combination of both new and traditional team and organizational structures. Our data calls into question a focus on distributed teams as the means for accomplishing distributed work and we argue for using human infrastructure as an alternative perspective for understanding how distributed collaboration is accomplished in big science.

An infrastructure is an underlying framework that enables a group, organization, or society to function in certain ways, such as the series of pipes, drains, and water sources that comprise a water system. However, our use of the term “infrastructure” is intended to suggest more than this; We want to draw attention to the usefulness of comparing the ways in which human and organizational arrangements share a range of significant properties with technological infrastructures.

Increasingly, traditional organizational structures are being replaced by networks of people formed to work on particular projects. However, personal networks often remain after the project is finished, as people are bound together based on their common work experience. These networks aid organizational members in local coordination. Nardi et al.1 found that these networks are formed deliberately and consist of two properties: emergence, formed to accomplish particular tasks, and history, which enables their rapid formation. These networks, they note, can exist alongside traditional teams.

1. Nardi, B., Whittaker, S., Schwarz, H. 2002. NetWORKers and their Activity in Intensional Networks. CSCW Journal, 11, 205-242. [↩]

Wilson, S., Liber, O., Johnson, M., & Beauvoir, P. (2007). Personal Learning Environments: Challenging the dominant design of educational systems. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society.

note: the authors use “VLE” where we may use “LMS”. they should be interchangeable.

Abstract
Current systems used in education follow a consistent design pattern, one that is not supportive of lifelong learning or personalization, is asymmetric in terms of user capability, and which is disconnected from the global ecology of Internet services. In this paper we propose an alternative design pattern for educational systems that emphasizes symmetric connections with a range of services both in formal and informal learning, work, and leisure, and identify strategies for implementation and experimentation.

Within current learning systems there is often a very clear distinction between the capabilities of learners and of teachers. In particular, the tools to organize and create are richer for the teacher than for the learner. This asymmetry sends a conflicting message to users; on the one hand they are exhorted to be creative, participate, and to take control of their learning, and on the other they are restricted to a primarily passive role, where what contributions are possible are located first within the small slice of their overall learning represented within the VLE, and then further by the slots within the existing structure of information organization presented within the VLE.

The course-centric organizational model and the limits on learner’s ability to organize the space combine to create a context which is greatly homogenous; all learners have the same experience of the system, see the same content, organized in the same fashion, with the same tools. This replicates the general pattern of education that places emphasis on the common experience of learners within a context. This contradicts the desire often expressed under the general heading of lifelong learning for an individualized experience tailored to personal needs and priorities.

The VLE typically restricts access to content and conversations to the cohort engaging in a unit, and through arrangements with publishers acts to safeguard licensed content from external view. This restriction acts against the drivers of lifelong and lifewide learning, which seeks to unite the experiences of learning in the workplace and home, and of cross-organizational learning. Most content within a VLE is not available to the outside world; it is also often unavailable to learners after they leave a course.

Efimova, L. & Fiedler. S. (2004). Learning webs: Learning in weblog networks. Proceedings of the 2004 IADIS International Conference on Web Based Communities.

Abstract:
This article explores how professionally oriented weblog projects support the emergence of loosely coupled learning networks. We provide an overview of the technical infrastructure of this particular form of personal webpublishing and the social ecosystems that emerge through current weblog authoring practices. Furthermore, we suggest that some weblog ecosystems can be conceptualized as learning webs. These learning webs appear to meet the specific needs of knowledge workers for flexible and dynamic learning environments. Some preliminary results of qualitative data collection in this area are shared and some further lines of research are proposed.

Ecosystems of weblogs seem to support peer-filtering of ideas and serendipitous connections between people based on their interests. At the same time their open-ended nature allows going beyond “group think” by supporting diversity and bringing together multiple perspectives and backgrounds.

A weblog provides its author with personal space for learning that does not impose a communal learning agenda and learning style. At the same time learners are not alienated and can benefit from a community feedback, validation and further development of ideas.

Regular reading of other weblogs provides novices with opportunities to learn from experts’ “thinking in public”, selecting role models and engaging in conversations beyond geographical or disciplinary borders.

These published and continuously updated collections of artifacts form a dynamic and constantly changing, largely de-centralized ecosystem for self-organized learning and social networking.

Dalsgaard. C. (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning.

Abstract:
The article argues that it is necessary to move e-learning beyond learning management systems and engage students in an active use of the web as a resource for their self- governed, problem-based and collaborative activities. The purpose of the article is to discuss the potential of social software to move e-learning beyond learning management systems. An approach to use of social software in support of a social constructivist approach to e-learning is presented, and it is argued that learning management systems do not support a social constructivist approach which emphasizes self-governed learning activities of students. The article suggests a limitation of the use of learning management systems to cover only administrative issues. Further, it is argued that students’ self- governed learning processes are supported by providing students with personal tools and engaging them in different kinds of social networks.

…weblogs primarily support independent and individual presentation.
A weblog which is maintained by a single individual can function as that individual’s representation on the web. This representation can form the basis of socialization on the web. When a weblog is related to other weblogs, the weblogs become social, and communities or networks are formed. It is possible to subscribe to weblogs using RSS feeds.

Students’ self-governed and problem-solving activities are considered the focal point of a learning process. This conception of a learning process means that it is not possible to structure or pre-determine the students’ activities in a learning process – the activities must develop on the basis of the student’s own problem-solving. As a consequence, a learning environment needs, in the words of Land & Hannafin (1996), to be open-ended. An open- ended learning environment provides students with multiple possibilities for activities. A similar approach is outlined by Jonassen (1999) who presents a model for designing ‘constructivist learning environments’. Students’ activities in constructivist learning environments are initiated by a problem or project. Surrounding the student are different tools and resources which support the student’s problem-solving process.

LMS are to a large extent developed for the management and delivery of learning – and not for self-governed activities of students. Learning processes of the kind described in the social constructivist approach outlined in this article cannot be managed. What can be managed, however, is the administrative aspects of a course. Thus, a management system is limited to organizing administrative issues.

Personal tools are defined as tools owned and controlled by students. They are used by students for various kinds of construction and reflection; for instance, writing, presenting, drawing or programming. There are at least two kinds of personal tools:

1. individual tools, and
2. collaborative tools

Networks between people working collaboratively could be students working together in groups. Such networks are primarily supported by personal tools. They are networks of closely related participants, meaning that participants will not only have access to each other’s personal pages, but will share personal pages.

Seeing each other’s work, network and references can provide a basis for discussions between students and teachers. Such discussions are different from discussions in a discussion forum. The difference is that discussions based on weblogs arise from the individual entries of students. Further, a weblog is a personal page whereas a discussion forum is shared; writing individual entries on your personal weblog is different from participating in a discussion. Since students can subscribe to different weblogs, they can create their individual network, which means that their participation in discussions is not limited to specific discussion forums within an LMS. The potential of social software tools such as wikis, weblogs combined with RSS feeds and social bookmarking is to facilitate closer relationships and more frequent interaction between students and teachers. This is facilitated by their sharing of work and references and their engagement in discussions.

The learning processes do not take place within the management system, but develop through the self-governed work of students which is manifested in personal tools such as weblogs or wikis. Separate from the system, the student has different personal tools for construction, presentation, collaboration, etc. In relation to self-governed, problem-based and collaborative activities, the most important tools to the learning process are personal tools. They directly support the active process involved in working on problems and continuously constructing a solution. A personal tool is a manifestation of the work of students. In other words it can be seen as a manifestation of the learning process. This means that students’ participation in networks is motivated by the process directed at solving a problem. Networks are secondary to personal tools.

…students not only learn a specific topic, but they are equipped with tools to navigate and make active use of the web to solve future problems. After the end of a course or an education, the networks continue to exist. Continued participation in social networks and creation of new networks give people access to a vast number of people and other resources.