diff --git a/_posts/2018-10-24-eduhack_coventry.md b/_posts/2018-10-24-eduhack_coventry.md index ec0ae26..ffa5815 100644 --- a/_posts/2018-10-24-eduhack_coventry.md +++ b/_posts/2018-10-24-eduhack_coventry.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ --- title: eLearning in the age of Social Networks, the EduHack Platform -date: 2018-10-24 +date: 2018-10-26 author: pesceWanda layout: post categories: @@ -13,9 +13,10 @@ tags: - facebook --- -Tomorrow I am giving this [talk](http://conf.owlteh.org/contributions/published/elearning-in-the-age-of-social-networks-the-eduhack-model/) at the [OWLTEH Conference 2018](https://www.conf.owlteh.org/) at the Coventry University. +This is the revised transcript of my [talk](http://conf.owlteh.org/contributions/published/elearning-in-the-age-of-social-networks-the-eduhack-model/) at the [OWLTEH Conference 2018](https://www.conf.owlteh.org/) at the Coventry University. + +![Me, giving the talk](/wp-content/uploads/2018/coventry.jpg) -This is what I am going to talk about. # In the beginning there was the LMS @@ -38,7 +39,7 @@ There are many corner cases that lack a general method that allows users to expa Moreover, traditional LMS are highly gerarchic and foster an epistemology of "possession": learners are defined by the content that they "possess", the course they subscribed to, the material they downloaded. The educator is forced to be an authoritative source of knowledge that needs to direct the activity of the learners by having students pull the knowledge through an online portal. The flow is unidirectional and content centric. -In my experience instructors create delivery-centered pedagogies because LMS lacks the flexibility to be adapted to learners, especially when they are used by a variety of instructors (e.g.: all of the professors of a UNI). While this model better reflects the traditional classroom I would argue that modern users are not used to this kind of dynamics in modern online communities. +In my experience instructors produce delivery-centered pedagogies because LMS lacks the flexibility to be adapted to learners, especially when they are used by a variety of instructors (e.g.: all of the professors of a UNI). While this model better reflects the traditional classroom I would argue that modern users are not used to this kind of dynamics in modern online communities. You can learn more about the friction in the usage of traditional LMS in the following papers: @@ -129,25 +130,19 @@ Advantages: 3. Educators found that boldlier students asked more questions because of absense of face to face shyness. -4. Students avoided to befriend educators and lecturers in order to hide their private lives. +4. Students help each other in answering questions -5. During the research period, no student befriended the interviewed lecturers. +5. Six people from prior classes idependently requested to join the group -6. Students did not accept friend requests from lecturers. +6. Constant and more accurate feedback for teachers -7. Students help each other in answering questions +7. Constant communication for teachers -8. Six people from prior classes idependently requested to join the group +8. They got to know classmates better -9. Constant and more accurate feedback for teachers +9. In heavily moderated OSNs, few users find disappropriate contents. -10. Constant communication for teachers - -11. They got to know classmates better - -12. In heavily moderated OSNs, few users find disappropriate contents. - -13. In a comparison Facebook's discussion were more numerous than Moodle's discussions even when people were not allowed to be friends +10. In a comparison Facebook's discussion were more numerous than Moodle's discussions even when people were not allowed to be friends Disadvantages: @@ -161,6 +156,13 @@ Disadvantages: 5. Some students worry that their personal life could be discovered and misjudged by tutors. +6. Students avoided to befriend educators and lecturers in order to hide their private lives. + +7. During the research period, no student befriended the interviewed lecturers. + +8. Students did not accept friend requests from lecturers. + + #### Quantitative Participation @@ -210,7 +212,7 @@ For this reasons, as part of the EduHack Project, we are developing the EduHack The EduHack Knowledge Sharing Platform was born around the assumption that many of the advantages in terms of user engagement and group dynamics -provided by OSNs could be replicated by adopting their widely known design patterns and replicating closely the UX. +provided by OSNs could be replicated by adopting their widely known design patterns and mimicing closely the UX. At the core of the platform there are the founding principles of the Open Web. @@ -225,7 +227,7 @@ The personal area is user centric and provides a window into the activities of t The user can create and manage different roles for external editors to his private area. By default no other user is allowed to post a "story" in his personal area, but other users can be added as team members and can manage group works in different blogs. -Learners are expected to create and remix what they learned (e.g. from online classes or MOOCs). +Learners are expected to elaborate and remix what they learned (e.g. from online classes or MOOCs). The public area is modelled after the UX of Reddit and it is divided into diffent sections (e.g.: mathematics, IT, discrete phisics, etc...), each providing a wiki. @@ -250,5 +252,34 @@ We want to provide with this model an ethically sound framework for user centric +## References + +* Using online social networking for Teaching and learning: Facebook use at the University of Cape Town, Tanja E Bosch. + +* The myths about e-learning in higher education, James Kariuki Njenga and Louis Cyril Henry Fourie + +* Group Formation in eLearning-enabled Social Networks, Steffen Brauer and Thomas C. Schmidt + +* eLearning 2.0 and new literacies: are social laggin behind, Wei-Ying Lim, Hyo-Jeong So and Seng-Chee Tan + +* Using the Facebook group as a learning management system: An exploratory study, Qiyun Wang, Huay Lit Woo, Choon Lang Quek, Yuqin Yang and Mei Liu + +* Using Social Networking Technology to Enhance Learning in Higher Education: A Case Study Using Facebook, Peter Ractham and Daniel Firpo + +* Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook, Khe Foon Hew + +* The future of e-learning: a shift to knowledge networking and social software, Mohamed Amine Chatti and Matthias Jarke + +* Using Facebook as course management software: a case study, Elizabeth M. LaRue + +* Electronic Social Media in Teaching: Usages, Benefits, and Barriers as Viewed by Sudanese Faculty Members, Ahmed Yousif Abdelraheem and Abdelrahman Mohammed Ahmed + +* The Use of Social Networking in Education: Challenges and Opportunities: Ashraf Jalal Yousef Zaidieh + +* Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites, M.D. Roblyer, Michelle McDaniel, Marsena Webb, James Herman and James Vince Witty e,4 + +* Online social networks: Why do students use facebook? Christy M.K. Cheung, Pui-Yee Chiu and Matthew K.O. Lee + +* e-Learning: The student experience, Jennifer Gilbert, Susan Morton and Jennifer Rowley diff --git a/_site/archive/index.html b/_site/archive/index.html index 59df7ae..3120d29 100644 --- a/_site/archive/index.html +++ b/_site/archive/index.html @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@

Blog Posts