Log on:
Powered by Elgg

Feed detail

November 01, 2011

A thousand conversations

I was labelled a 'radical' yesterday by one of my colleagues. Well, bless. I hadn't thought about myself in those terms before, because what I do is instinctive and what I write about seems to be absolutely normal to me. But standing back from me and trying to look in from the outside, I suppose some might think I was slightly out of left field, or that some of my ideas were idealistic. Whatever.

What I would like to know is, what does 'radical' actually mean in the context of education? A post on my blog last year, entitled Outrageous Alternatives outlined a brief history of what are considered to be radical approaches to schooling. Others have also written recently about radical ideas about how to effect the transformation of education many of us wish to see.

If you're into 'radical' thought, one set of resources I can highly recommend is by Beth Davies-Stofka. She curates an excellent Scoop.it site called Radical Education which is crammed full of great blog posts written to get us all thinking about how we can transform education and create more effective learning environments. In a post on digital storytelling, Aleks Krotoski writes:

"Human experience is a series of never-ending, overlapping stories bumping into one another in expected and unexpected ways. Our days are made up of personal narratives of good and evil, joy and conflict, magic potions and angry gnomes."

I can subscribe to this. The magic potion in this part of the world would be cider of course. Even the angry gnomes part can be a little too close to the truth, in this neck of the woods. Krotoski goes on to elaborate about why storytelling is so important:

"They are naturally co-creations based on a push and pull of projection and interpretation. We interpret, analyse and synthesise the characters and events in our lives to help us make sense of the world, and these have been translated by professionals into folk tales, myths, legends, pantomime, bestsellers, soap operas and Hollywood blockbusters. Storytellers are simply curators of information who finesse the elements of a yarn into a beginning, middle and end."

Story telling is important to all of us. It goes beyond a mere collection of events. We tell the story of our lives when we meet. We make sense of the world around us as we relate our histories. We establish norms and decide what is important for our community. Krotoski again: "Stories are memory aids, instruction manuals and moral compasses. When enlisted by charismatic leaders and turned into manifestos, dogmas and social policy, they've been the foundations for religions and political systems. When a storyteller has held an audience captive around a campfire, a cinema screen or on the page of a bestseller, they've reinforced local and universal norms about where we've been and where we're going. And when they've been shared in the corner shop, at the pub or over dinner they've helped us define who we are and how we fit in."

In short, story telling can be very powerful. It's powerful because it is a route through to making sense of our worlds - one of our prime motivators in life. It is our common search for the tacit knowledge that will enable us to survive. If something doesn't make sense, or if there is a clash of principles in our heads (cognitive dissonance), we go all out to try to resolve the conflict. That is how tacit learning happens. According to Thomas and Seely-Brown (2011), you can't teach tacit knowledge. Unlike explicit knowledge, which is peddled every day in our schools in the form of lessons full of facts, this deeper 'tacit' knowldge has to be experienced personally by each individual before it becomes theirs to own and to use. Storytelling takes each participant on a personal journey through a sometimes bewildering landscape of opportunities to acquire this kind of learning.

Digital storytelling can take our personal narratives up to a new plane of experience. The tools available to us today enable us to take companions on our journey through this terrain. We can co-create content, tell the story to each other regardless of location, and rework it so that it has common meaning and purpose. Our stories can be told time and time again, each time differently, with each version taking on a greater richness than its predecessor.

Is digital storytelling a radical departure from traditional education practices? I don't think so. We have been telling each other stories since the day we could string a sentence together. Children tell jokes in the playground. They write essays about what they did during their holidays. Children read Harry Potter and watch Eastenders on evening TV. It's something they are habituated into. Yet there is something new in the way our own stories can be generated, shared, repurposed and retold. The digital tools we now have at our disposal enable what Rose (2010) calls "multi-way conversation." For Rose, storytelling has reached a new pitch, has opened up space into a new social dimension: "It's very different when you have a medium that forces you to engage with other people," he says. "You don't know if you're going to have to tell a story for one hour, two hours or 10 years."

Telling your story is an age-old cultural practice. Digital storytelling takes it to another level, involving global conversations, multiple versions, and a cast of thousands. The radical part is where our understanding of the world around us can be transformed through these conversations. You don't need school for that.

References
Rose, F. (2010) The Art of Immersion: How the digital generation is remaking Hollywood, Madison Avenue and the way we tell stories. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.
Thomas, D. and Seely-Brown, J (2011) A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change. USA: Create Space.

Image source

Creative Commons Licence
A thousand conversations by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 31, 2011

Me and Malcolm McLaren

This is the story behind that photograph. Malcolm McLaren was notorious for a variety of reasons. He was in a relationship with the avant garde fashion designer Vivienne Westwood, introduced fetish-wear, managed various punk rock bands including the Sex Pistols, and was agent provocateur and innovator in the art and music scenes for decades. It could be claimed that he was not only the originator of punk rock, but also one of the prime movers in the New Wave and Hip Hop music genres. He earned the nickname 'The Godfather of Punk' during this period, but in his later years, he seemed to have mellowed out to a more avuncular version of his younger restless self.

When I heard that he was to speak at the 2009 Handheld Learning Festival in London, I made sure I had a front row seat. I wanted to hear what McLaren would say about learning and about technology. Further, what would be his take on education and its place in society? Would he be controversial, caustic, conciliatory? Predictably, McLaren did not disappoint, polarising the audience with a very personal, sardonic and provocative account of his own learning journey. His reference to Karoake culture resonated - where anyone through the medium of technology, especially the reality TV shows, can become famous ... for simply being in the public eye for long enough. His key message was that failure and messiness are the key to the best kinds of learning. None of us at the time were to know that he had very little time left to live. A few days after this public appearance, he was diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer, and died 6 months later, in a hospital in Switzerland.

I took several photographs of Malcolm during his speech. The one I considered to be the best was posted up onto my Flickr account, and I labelled it for free reuse as I always do, under Creative Commons licencing. I also used the image in my subsequent blog post entitled Karaoke Culture. It turned out to be one of the last photographs ever taken of him. Later, someone saw my photograph on Flickr and uploaded it for use on his Wikipedia page. It was thereafter mirrored on all the other foreign language versions of Wikipedia. When Malcolm McLaren died, guess where many of the journals and newspapers went to find copyright free images of him?

This is why newspapers such as the Caledonian Mercury and the London Daily News, websites such as Shapers of the 80's and Compas, and Goldmine all carried the image when they reported on McLaren's funeral. It appears that my name (credited with the photograph) will forever be linked to that of Malcolm McLaren. What have I learnt from this experience? Just being in the right place at the right time is not always enough. Posting your content on social media sites and making them available for free use and reuse is not only an equitable way of sharing the love. It is often a precursor for widespread amplification of that content. Whether or not something goes viral is left to the whims of the social web, but giving your content away for free can give it an excellent chance. 

Creative Commons Licence
Me and Malcolm McLaren by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 30, 2011

Do it yourself education

Reading Edupunks, Edupreneurs and the Coming Transformation of Higher Education by Anya Kamenetz has been fascinating. It's a book that has been recommended to me several times over, so it was long overdue that I laid my hands on a copy. With its lurid red cover and aggressive image of a fist gripping a pencil (I would have suggested an iPod Touch or iPhone instead) while wearing a wrist band that proclaims DIY U, the books holds a lot of promise. But we all know you don't judge a book by its cover. Anya Kamenetz is no edupunk, and doesn't pretend to be. Turns out she's a journalist, working the scene, trying to make sense of the open access and bricollage movements that are gripping the imagination of teachers in schools, colleges and universities across the globe. Yet she does express opinions that are sympathetic to the Edupunk philosophy of 'do it yourself', rage against the system, undermine the edubusinesses and give it all away for free (with the exception of her book, which is reasonably priced .... and she does earn her living as a writer). You can visit her DIY U website for a deeper insight into her views.

In a fast moving writing style that reminded me of a squash ball, she ricochets off subject after seemingly unrelated subject, weaving her way swiftly through a history of education, philosophy, science, music, popular culture and sociology in an attempt to paint the broadest of brushstroke backdrops to the book. Her key message is simple - that education needs to change to make it more accessible to those who want to, but cannot afford to enter into full time higher education. Like some seasoned livestock farmer, she herds her illustrations, examples and 'key player' profiles together, to reiterate this theme throughout. Some of our favourite Twitter buddies pop up to make cameo appearances, including Jim Groom (inevitably included, but described in gritty terms as chain-smoking and unshaven), David Wiley, Alec Couros, George Siemens, Lawrence Lessig and Stephen Downes. Notably, the book is disappointingly parochial and inward looking however, focusing largely on North American activism, with scant interest to the rest of the world, as if nothing much is happening outside the borders of the USA and Canada. There is no mention for example of the New Zealand based OER University (or its founder Wayne McIntosh) and the ground breaking work they are doing to transform open educational practices in higher education. This criticism apart, the book still manages to provide some useful observations about the DIY and Open Ed movements and explores their crossover points.

One of the best ideas in the book is where Kamenetz suggests that ideas travel faster over informal networks than they ever could within the closed silo of an organisation or department. Those of us who are residents in the land of social media already know the truth of this, but it's nice to see it opined on the pages of a mainstream publication. Kamenetz eulogises over blogs which she describes as nodes in a vast, informal network of learning and opportunity. If there is a need for your ideas to escape the walls of your organisation, blogging is an excellent way to set them loose, she says. This is all good stuff, but although it may have been considered Edupunk a decade ago, it's a little passe now. What Kamenetz does do well however, is to highlight the significance of Massively Online Open Courses (MOOCs), suggesting that they may yet play a part in breaking the hold of the traditional, ivy league universities on mass higher education. What she misses the opportunity to explore is the informal nature of MOOCs, the amplifying power of connections created by such endeavours, and the resultant myriad of artefacts, activities and achievements that result from direct engagement with these learning movements.

Although it leaves much unsaid, Anya Kamenetz's book is useful to read if you are new to these ideas. The challenge, she says, is to capture the potential of technology to both lower costs and improve learning for all. High ideals indeed. Higher education is changing slowly, and it is good to know that the ideas of the Edupunk and OER movements are being written about formally, and that the ideals of these approaches is entering into the mainstream of people's consciousness.


Tomorrow: Me and Malcolm McLaren: The story of that photograph.

Image source

Creative Commons Licence
Do it yourself education by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 25, 2011

The elephant in the room

Far too many futurologists, authors and commentators are ignoring the issue of the digital divide. Several books I have read recently on new and emerging technologies provide a healthy balance. They eulogise about the benefits, and are circumspect about the dangers of technology. Yet few acknowledge that many members of society are still technologically peripheral. The digital divide will not go away, but it cannot be ignored. Some even talk about the 'digital dividend', which to me sounds very much like a neat side step around the main issue. Avoiding the issue is not helpful. Call it what you want - digital exclusion, techno-marginalisation, analogue culture. It's the elephant in the room, and those who hold the purse strings are steadfastly looking away from it. Not everyone can participate in the digital society. Some people don't have mobile phones, and many more are not, nor ever will be, on Facebook, regardless of the hype Zuckerberg and his pals periodically peddle.

Some don't have access to the tools that enable this kind of participation. But to be fair, the digital divide is not always about lack of money, even though most accounts cite this as the prime cause. Some people avoid participation in the digital world even though they have the resources to fully participate. They become refuseniks, techno-luddites, laggards. Still others simply don't have the skills or literacies to meaningfully involve themselves in the digital society. It's not always about money. Not only are there the 'haves and have nots', there are also the 'wills and will nots' and the 'cans and cannots'.

Regardless of the causes - whether the divide is socio-economic, psychological or practical - the fact is, many people around the globe will not be subscribing to the digital citizen club any time soon.

Those of us who work at the 'chalk-face' are limited in what we can do to bridge the digital divide but we are not completely powerless. Many people choose to create that gulf between themselves and the connected world. For any number of reasons, they refuse to participate. Those who are lacking skill or confidence are another matter. We should make it our duty to help such people to gain the confidence they need, and that is exactly what many teachers are doing. The big challenge to all teachers and trainers now is this: How do we continue to develop 21st century learning, when there are always those few who are stuck (for whatever reason) in the last century?

Most of the problems are caused by lack of provision. Lack of broadband infrastructure. Lack of training opportunities. Lack of finance. The digital agenda of many western governments is falling sadly short of its intended outcomes, because the issues are far more complex than anyone could have imagined. Those in authority need to wake up and acknowledge that the digital divide is one of the key threats to lack of progress and that there are many causes. So just how long will it take until people wake up and notice the elephant in the room? Will they continue to ignore it until it fouls the carpet?

Image by Tom Clearwood

Creative Commons Licence
The elephant in the room by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 23, 2011

Eye on the future

Below is my keynote abstract for the C-SAP Showcase in Birmingham. C-SAP is the Higher Education Academy subject Network for Sociology, Anthropology and Politics, and it's in it's eleventh and final year of existence. The event will take place tomorrow at the Burlington Hotel, and will include numerous papers, workshops and poster sessions from delegates.

The future of learning will be...

How much can we shape our own futures? As an academic community, how much can we invest in our present to secure a better future for ourselves and our students? The answer is clear - the more we invest in the present, the more we will reap in the future. But we cannot control everything. There are randomly variable events. George Orwell once said 'He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past'. This is why the media - television, newspapers, radio, internet, gaming - have so much influence over public perceptions. For slightly different reasons it is also why lecturers can wield such power in the classroom. We know what technologies we can use to create excellent learning opportunities for our students. We also know from research what the pitfalls and caveats are. We know for example, that technology used for technology's sake is usually a mistake. We also know that learners engage better when they have tools to use they feel comfortable with and enjoy using. The balance decision is ours to make. What we don't know much about (but can guess) is what technologies are just around the corner, waiting to be harnessed. In this keynote presentation I will explore our learning technology past, attempt a glimpse into our technological future and trace the trends that will lead us into a future that will be open, personal, social and mobile.

Image source

Creative Commons Licence
Eye on the future by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 22, 2011

Always asking questions

Always asking questions. That's how children learn. They wonder about something and ask a question. Why is the sky blue? Where did I come from? (Are we there yet?) Parents of small children will tell you that sometimes, the incessant 'why?' questions their kids ask drive them mad. When children arrive at the school gates, do teachers encourage them to keep asking questions? Hopefully, in most cases, the entire experience is about asking questions. But the curriculum often militates against good question times. It is so stuffed full of unnecessary content, there is far too little time left for teachers to help children to frame their questions. They must make time, because the bloated curriculum shows no signs of going away just yet. Questioning is far too important to gloss over or push into a corner. Give the kids time to ask questions.

We should be wary about giving too many easy answers though. If you have to give answers, give ones that prompt more questions. As the author Nancy Willard once said: 'Sometimes questions are more important than answers.' Teachers also need to listen closely to children's questions. A misunderstood question can lead to answers that are damaging. Take a read of this account on Pay Attention at the Front.

What about when we grow older? Do we still continue to ask questions? Often, we have learnt that asking questions can sometimes be socially unacceptable. We may have learnt from bad experiences that asking questions can make us look stupid. 'I know this is a stupid question, but...' we start, apologetically ... when we can actually summon up the courage to externalise our doubts about something. Lack of knowledge isn't stupidity. Not asking the question when you have the chance - that's stupidity. The old Chinese proverb says: He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes. He who does not ask a question is a fool forever. I usually give plenty of time for questions and dialogue during my lectures, presentations and workshops, whoever the audience is. It gives time for everyone to assimilate new things and to consolidate their understanding. Who cares if there are arguments or disagreements? That is all part of the (dialectical) process of learning.

I decided many years after bad experiences in school, where some teachers ignored or ridiculed my questions, that I would redress the balance. I took a conscious decision to force myself to ask questions, because I was tired of listening to presentations and then going away without clarification on the finer points. I didn't want to stay ignorant one moment longer. Now, when I sit in a public presentation, and I don't understand something the speaker has said, I ask them to elaborate. It's not a sign of weakness to say you don't understand. The sign of weakness is not asking the question you should have asked. As I have gained confidence, I have discovered that arguing with others, can open up and challenge ideas and help everyone to form their own deeper knowledge of the field. I have even been known to conspire with speakers beforehand to publicly challenge them and ask controversial questions during plenary sessions. It can certainly liven up a discussion.

'Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning' - Albert Einstein.

Image source by Mark Klotz

Creative Commons Licence
Always asking questions by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 18, 2011

When the dam breaks...

Publication of research is one of the most important facets of academic life. I can't stress enough how important it is for good research to be as widely and swiftly disseminated as possible. Without it, our practice is less likely to be informed, and more prone to repeated errors. As a researcher myself, I take this challenge very seriously. Along with other educational researchers, I attempt to identify key issues for investigation and then spend considerable time and energy examining as much of the terrain that surrounds my research question as I can. Once I have analysed the data, I am usually able to arrive at some conclusions and write some form of report, which is likely to include a set of recommendations that I hope will benefit my community of practice. Such findings should be published widely to inform the entire community. This is the way it should be. And yet often, sadly, it just doesn't happen.

Recently, several writers have bemoaned the fact that a) there is often a significant time delay between the submission of papers to academic journals, and the papers actually reaching the reader, and b) many of the top, elite journals we are expected to publish in are in fact read by a very small percentage of the community the research is intended to reach. Open access journals (and there are several alternative funding models that support these) are the best way to address these problems. They open content up to be read by a much larger audience, and in my personal experience, they turn around reviews and publish sugnifcantly quicker than the standard traditional closed journals. Much of this argument is elaborated on in Sarah Thornycroft's excellent post Redefining Academic Publishing in Digital Spaces, in which she calls for a reform of the current archaic system.  


Way back in 2008, in one of the most erudite arguments ever made for open access publishing, danah boyd called for a boycott on writing for closed academic journals. Several notable scholars joined this boycott - refusing to publish again in pay-to-subscribe academic journals - but at present this movement is a trickle rather than a deluge. The truth is, not many academics can afford to turn their backs on closed journal publishing. Those that do take a public stand against closed publishing do so for a very good reason. As it stands, the current publication system has academics over a barrel. Many cannot secure tenure or gain promotion without publishing their work in the top notch journals, almost all of which are currently locked down. Moreover, many governments apportion research money to institutions who have the best track record of publications in the said journals. This strangle hold rewards the publishers with huge profits at the expense of the hard working academics, who are forced to provide their labour for free. I believe the prices many publishing houses charge for access to their journals is obscene and unjustifiable, and the costs prevent many students and scholars from reading important research they would otherwise benefit from.

Last month I took a similar personal stance to danah boyd, vowing that I would never again publish my research in closed journals. Because I feel very strongly about this, I have decided I must take this even further. From now on, I am no longer reviewing for closed journals. I have also resigned from my post as co-editor of the journal Interactive Learning Environments, after 3 years at the helm. I have nothing against the good people who run the journal, many of whom are friends of mine. I resigned because the role of editor of a closed journal is incompatible with my personal stance on open access. It would have been hypocritical of me if I had stayed. I'm now putting my full support behind the open access movement, because it is the right thing to do. Education should be accessible for all, and we can no longer sit back and do nothing as the edubusinesses charge people more than they can afford for learning they need.

I don't have the hubris to believe that this will change the world. It won't. Nor am I deluded enough to consider that what I am doing will challenge the might of the dozen or so big publishers who hold the monopoly. It will not. It may not make any difference whatsoever. But if by taking this stance I can raise awareness of the problems locked down journals cause, and signal that there are alternatives, then it will be worth it. If others feel the same, we can begin to make a difference. The cracks are already showing and the dam wall is beginning to leak. Some publishers are already seriously considering how they will survive when the open access movement gains enough traction to pose a significant threat. I'm hoping that one day soon the trickle will become a deluge, and that when the dam breaks, the publishers will have to sit up and take notice.      


Image source

Creative Commons License
When the dam breaks... by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 14, 2011

PeLC is reborn!

It may have escaped your attention, but the Plymouth e-Learning Conference has been repurposed. Now in its 7th year, the event has been evolving steadily, from a one day local event for teachers in 2004 into the present 3-day international learning technology event. PeLC was long overdue for a face-lift and a new identity.

Firstly, we looked at the name. We took the decision last year that the 'e' in the name was a bit of a nonsense. It didn't mean that much anymore. There was no point in using it to represent 'electronic', which in itself is a little passe now. But there was also no point in removing it, because the 'e' was a significant part of the identity of the conference. So we decided that the 'e' actually stood for enhanced. So there you have the new identity - it is now officially the Plymouth Enhanced Learning Conference or PELeCON. There is more than a tip of the hat here in the direction of the Pelican Fringe - the PeLC Fringe Website from 2009.

In the past, the conference has attracted delegates from all over the world, from Canada to New Zealand and all points in between. We have had a prestigious list of prominent keynote speakers over the years too, including, in chronological order, Stephen Molyneaux, Gilly Salmon, Mark Stiles, Graham Attwell, Mike Blamires, Josie Fraser, David White, Stephen Heppell, John Davitt, Jane Seale and Shelly Terrell - a kind of who's who in e-Learning. I promise that the PeLC 2012 keynotes will add further to the roll of honour.

As you can see, the conference has also been rebranded. The logo above is the new graphic we will be using on all our publicity, products and events in future. PELeCON also has its own Twitter account (@pelecon), which you can follow to keep up to date with the latest news from the conference and its community. And finally, we have a completely new website at this link. Visit the site to read all about the conference themes and call for papers, submit your proposals (open on November 11), find announcements of keynotes and special events, book your attendance, submit your proposals, book exhibition space, read about the social events and find local accommodation. This blog will also carry more news in the coming weeks as the planning of the conference begins to gain momentum, culminating in the full three day international event next year, on April 18-20. I hope to see you there.

Creative Commons License
PELeCON is reborn! by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 11, 2011

The ripple effect

Anyone who is interested in the social media phenomenon would be very interested to read this from Abday Adhikari, writing in the Guardian:


Every time we publish information on the internet, we are effectively starting a conversation, because people can respond or react to it. However, we are also speaking to a vast, unknown audience and it is easy to get lost in the crowd.


Adhikari is right of course. Anything that is posted on the social web can be seen and read by others, but can also spread more widely than it could by the sole efforts of the author. Those involved in this dissemination can be producers as well as consumers of the content, but as James Slevin (2002) suggests, the basis is almost always dialogical in nature. That is why social networking tools are so powerful and if used appropriately, can have such a positive impact on learning. Much of what we learn, we learn within a social context, through dialogue. We synthesise our beliefs, knowledge and understanding of the world through constant exposure to the ideas of others. Our own views can be modified if others are convincing enough, but we in turn also have the power to persuade others. This process of negotiation often changes individuals, but can sometimes change an entire community, as new collective meaning emerges from the dialogue. A 'wisdom of the crowd' emerges, as each individual member of the network applies his or her own personal expertise and tacit, specific knowledge to solve a generic problem (Surowiecki, 2009)

The power of the network resides not only in the sheer strength of its numbers, but also in its public reach. Howard Rheingold makes an important point when he declares that everyone who wants to be, is on the stage, all are in the audience, and everyone can be a critic (Rheingold, 1993). Most importantly though, the potency of the network is often experienced most visibly in its ability to adapt or change its focus. This process occurs through large numbers of sustained discussions between individual members within a network, and then spreads outward in a gradually activating wave like ripples from a stone cast into a pond. Shirky (2008) says that we now have communication tools that are flexible enough to match our social capabilities. We are susceptible to force of the ripple effect, but direction changes can be made if the network requires them. We can take any number of pathways, but essentially, as those pathways become well trodden, they strengthen and provide more value to the network (see Clark, 2003).

When we post content to the social web we are performing our ideas to a vast and unseen audience. We create the opportunity for dialogue. We increase the likelihood for conversation. I don't know who will read this. But what I do know, is that anyone who reads this and has further ideas or alternative perspectives is free to post their comments to this blog for all to see. Who responds next is up for grabs. It might be me, but sometimes, someone else may get in first to offer their support, rebuttal or alternative comments. That is what makes the social web such a fertile place for the creation of good ideas, and re-negotiation of meaning, but also for conjecture, speculation, rumour trading, and a whole host of other distributed thinking. Some of it is to be avoided, but there is also a treasure trove of great ideas and content out there just waiting to be found, discussed and repurposed. Social media amplify and spread ideas, much further than the reach of any single producer, and I know this: The power of this ripple effect will inevitably increase as networks strengthen, and extend their reach.

References
Clark, A. (2003) Natural Born Cyborgs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rheingold, H. (1993) The Virtual Community. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Shirky, C. (2008) Here Comes Everybody. London: Penguin.
Slevin, J. (2002) The Internet and Society. London: Polity Press.
Surowiecki, J. (2009) The Wisdom of Crowds. London: Abacus.

Image by Seriu Bacioiu

Creative Commons License
The ripple effect by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 09, 2011

Permission to fail

Playing Angry Birds earlier today made me realise afresh that one of the key strengths of games based learning is the freedom to fail. Games offer a psychologically safe environment within which to learn new things. There are no sanctions for failing - but there is the chance to try again and try again. As with real life, you don't always get it right, but you then have the option to learn from your mistakes, and improve your skills, or fail to learn, and make the same mistakes all over. Ultimately, in trying again, you hone your skills or thinking, and assess your performance against previous ones. Social gaming takes this a step farther, in that you can also learn from other people's mistakes. Games like Farmville may be addictive and seen by some as a waste of valuable time, but at the same time, they enable players to learn new skills. So if you don't tend your crops, they wither and die. If you take care of your neighbours, they are likely to reciprocate. It's an analogue of real life. 

Playing games enables us to learn new skills, practice new thought processes, and create and apply strategies in new and unfamiliar contexts. The fantasy and suspension of reality enable hypothesis testing and problem solving on the fly, both extremely important transferable skills. But it is the ability to fail repeatedly, and still remain in the game that is the greatest affordance of games based learning. What could teachers achieve if more school systems afforded this? Imagine what children heights children would be able to attain if instead of being frowned upon for dreaming the impossible and asking the 'what if' questions, they were rewarded for their enterprise, risk taking and creative thinking?

One of the new features at next year's Plymouth Enhanced Learning Conference - PELeCON 2012 - will be a 'failure confessional'. The session, which I will host (but not necessarily wearing the vestments of a priest) will be an invitation for any delegate to talk about their failures, and crucially, what they learnt from their mistakes. Too often at conferences, success is lauded as the only criterion to be judged by. The thinking behind the failure confessional, is that researchers and teachers can tell their stories 'warts and all', in the hope that everyone can learn from the experience. We hope to see you at PELeCON next year, 18-20 April, so we can learn from each other. And you have permission to fail.

Image by Dan Pupius

Creative Commons License
Permission to fail by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 08, 2011

In the same boat

It is comforting and reassuring - but also somewhat disconcerting - to attend an international event on education, and discover that whatever problems you experience in your own system are also present in just about every other education system in the world. As we converse with delegates from other countries, it dawns on us that we are all in the same boat. And that is one very good reason why educators around the world need to continue their dialogue, whether face to face, or at a distance. Why we are all in the same boat is perhaps an indication of the power of governments around the world to 'sing from the same hymn sheet'. Each in its own way wants to measure and judge the effectiveness of education, but each does it in the wrong way - by relying exclusively on metrics that impose impossible pressures on teachers and students alike, and ultimately end up getting in the way of good learning outcomes. It's a universal challenge for teachers and change is definitely long overdue. But how do we send this message strongly enough that our respective governments will sit up and take notice?

The 8th International Seminar on Teacher Training: Reconsidering Teacher Roles (hosted by the Open University of Catalonia, in Barcelona) took on this challenge. The two day conference was well organised, and ideally located, attracting a worldwide audience, both through physical attendance and via streaming channels and Twitter. Teacher roles are changing, ran the theme, but exactly what do teachers need to learn to enable them to exploit the potential of new media and technology? The roles may change, but the institution often does not. What tensions are there and how are they fracturing the fabric of the teacher/institution relationship? How can we train teachers to hit the ground running when they enter the profession? These and other pertinent questions formed the basis of the dialogue that ensued.

One of the important points made during the conference was that content on the web is overwhelming, whilst context is vitally important. I suggested on Twitter in summary that content is a tyrant, and context is now king. Content floods our lives and it is difficult to filter, whilst context frames learning, and provides the grounding to apply it in real life situations. This theme was reiterated throughout the two day event in many ways, especially in an analysis of creative approaches to teaching and learning. Douglas Thomas (USA) argued that it only takes about 12 years to beat the wonderment and joy of learning out of children. It's sad but true, and it is often the death of divergent thinking - one of the key building blocks of the innovation that is often sadly lacking in the world of work.

Hanna Teras (Finland) convinced her audience that authentic learning can be promoted through the appropriate application of social media. She also emphasised the point that although the tools are available for all teachers to use, many cannot do so effectively without developing their own personal 21st century pedagogical skills. Peter Baptist (Germany) offered very similar recommendations, but used visual media and animations to liven up the teaching of numeracy and mathematics. An excellent session on Day 2 by PhD student Janak Bhimani (Japan) impressed the audience. He demonstrated how contextualisation of learning has been creatively realised in Japanese schools through the use of animated videos and finger puppet movie projects. Children script, perform, produce and direct - all with minimal supervision from their teachers. This form of narrative story telling in digital form enables young people to express their creativity and can transfer these skills to real world applications. Other schools are doing the same, providing exciting and challenging authentic learning activities for children.

Great closing day keynotes by Edem Adubra (UNESCO, France and Namibia) and Ferran Ruiz Tarrago (Spain) encapsulated the running theme of the conference - that a reconsideration of teacher roles is simply not enough for today's educational requirements. There needs to be reform, because education as a system is broken and cannot be repaired or patched up, said Terrago. A telling remark from Terrago was that teachers must be aware that they are required to be excellent in an outmoded system. He was scathing of the academic publishing system and the strangle hold it currently has over tenure and funding. Governments are complicit in perpetuating this ivory tower syndrome, he suggested, and that needs to be challenged at all levels. The conference has been summed up succinctly in blog posts by Hanna Teras and Ishmael de Pena Lopez.  


The final remark from conference co-chair Julia Minguillon (Spain) said it all - don't sit on this discussion and let it pass you by, he warned. By doing so, he suggested, you perpetuate the ivory tower syndrome - go out and make the changes that are needed to reform our education systems. We all need to row in the same direction.


Image by Adam Poselli

Creative Commons License
In the same boat by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 06, 2011

Slightly dangerous

Barcelona is the most dangerous city in Europe. That is the assessment of well known author and TV producer Manuel Castells who resides in the city for part of each year. As I dined with him and his wife Emma last night at the upmarket La Camarga restaurant, he told me they had recently been attacked and robbed near to their home. Two burly men in leather jackets roared up on motorcycles and accosted them. Emma's bag was stolen, and Manuel, in the struggle to protect her, was thrown violently to the ground and suffered injuries for which he is still being treated. There is not a single visitor to the city they know, Manuel told me, who has not been the victim of some crime. Fortunately, this is one form of education that I have not personally experienced.

Barcelona does have a rather edgy, slightly dangerous ambience. The outrageous building designs, a mixture of gothic splendour and outre modern designs are an architectural student's dream, the whole ensemble is due largely to Gaudian proclivities and Barcelona has long been a magnet to draw avant garde designers from around the world. OK, enough of the French words. Every where you go in the city, there is a feast for the eyes. Gaudi's Sagrada Familia, which has been under construction for over 120 years, is bedecked with cranes, and still over 15 years away from completion. Yet it remains an iconic representation of the city, and is a stunning spectacle either day or night.

Today at the 8th International Seminar on Teacher Training, hosted by the Universidad Oberta de Catalunya, we heard presentations from a number of academics and practitioners about how they are transforming and enhancing learning experiences through the use of technology. Douglas Thomas (Annenburg School of Communication and Journalism, at the University of Southern California) gave a masterful keynote on the theme 'Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change'. Drawing largely on his book A New Culture of Learning (co-authored with John Seely-Brown), Thomas talked at length about the issues we are confronting in our quest to provide learning that is relevant, up to date and effective within a rapidly changing world. His indictment of schools resonated. "Children have a sense of wonderment about learning and discovery, and it takes schools about 12 years to beat this out of them", he remarked. Much of what Douglas Thomas said about how to tackle change and transform the educational system is summarised very succinctly by Ismael de Pena Lopez on his blog ICTology.

Other presentations that were well received yesterday included Peter Baptist, whose stunning infographics and animations showed us how to open up a world of fascination for numbers and mathematics. If we applied this to other supposedly dull subjects he suggested, education would be transformed. You can read more about Peter's work here on the SINUS project site and a full summary of his presentation by Ismael de Pena Lopez here. It was all slightly dangerous stuff, but in a good way.


Image source

Creative Commons License
Slightly dangerous by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 05, 2011

Identity play

I have just spent a very interesting two hours with members of staff and researchers of the Open University of Catalonia today here in beautiful Barcelona. Tomorrow I will be giving the opening keynote at the 8th International Seminar on Teacher Training, but as a precursor, I was invited to meet some of the OUC team. And so I sat and talked in a relaxed but thoughtful atmosphere with some impressive young academics earlier today. We discussed a lot of issues related to distance education and technology mediated learning, including digital identity, social media and open scholarship. Many of the ensuing discussion and questions kept me on my toes, and provoked us all to reconsider our roles as educators in the digital age. It was digital identity though, that most of the group were interested in, and kept returning to talk about.

One of the things the group wanted to discuss was this blog and the way I use it to not only disseminate my ideas, but also as a tool for research. We talked about taking risks, and playing with digital identity. Do we present ourselves differently online to real space? What do we share on the web and what should we keep private? We analysed why I had posted yesterdays story about my Silver Wedding Anniversary, and what were the potential issues with such a public performance of a personal celebration. Someone also wanted to know why I displayed badges on my blog. I responded that it is a measure of peer esteem, which may help some readers to determine whether a site is trustworthy or not. Alternatively, I display them because I am grateful to my own academic community for the way they continue to support this blog (and others) by continually returning to read more. When they vote for my blog as one of the best (and competition is very stiff now, with many excellent e-learning blogs out there), then I feel my work and effort has been worth something.

So, when I returned to my hotel just now and found another award badge waiting for me to display on my blog - this time from the e-Learning Council - it was a welcome addition to the peer reviews I have already received. Thank you to everyone who voted to place me among such an illustrious company. Here's the full list of the top ten (it's actually a top 11).

1. Jane Hart
2. Elliott Masie
3. Cathy Moore
4. (tie) Harold Jarche
4. (tie) Jane Bozarth
5. Steve Wheeler
6. Tom Kuhlmann and Dave Anderson
7. Clark Quinn
8. Clive Shepherd
9. David Kelly
10. Tony Karrer

Perhaps the display of these badges adds something to my digital identity? Who knows...

Creative Commons License
Identity play by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 04, 2011

Silver and gold

Today my wife and I celebrate our silver wedding anniversary. Those 25 years have flashed by, and like most couples we have had our ups and downs, but I wouldn't change any of it. Our marriage has been the golden age in my life. I want to thank Dawn for all her support, love and commitment to me over those years. She has given me three beautiful children, and has always been by my side through good times and bad.

A few people already know this story, but it will probably be new to most: I first met Dawn Kendal on an Autumn morning in 1985 outside my Father's house, on what was supposed to have been her wedding day to another man! Dawn had decided to call off her wedding (in Newcastle, 400 miles away), she had travelled down to stay with relatives and here we were talking together in my Dad's garden in the Plymouth sunshine. Ultimately she decided to stay in Plymouth, and the rest is history. You just can't make that kind of story up, can you?

We quickly realised we had plenty in common (even little quirks like both being right handed, but both swapping knives and forks to eat left handed) and we were married on October 4, 1986. I have never been in trouble for forgetting the date of our anniversary - it was a very memorable day, particularly when Dawn was over 20 minutes late arriving at the church and I wondered for a brief moment whether she had bailed out from a wedding for the second time.... It is also easy to remember because October 4th is the date of the launch of the first ever artificial satellite - Sputnik - which heralded the space race, and also a new era in telecommunications.

Dawn originally trained as a nurse, but then after our children came along, she took a few years out and then retrained as a teacher, gaining a first class BA honours degree in English Language and ICT from Exeter University, and her PGCE Secondary Education from Plymouth University. After various teaching jobs including two years working within my own university department as an associate lecturer (where we did some research on social media together) she is now a teacher in one of the most technically advanced schools in the UK - Saltash.net. She works alongside people such as Dan Roberts (@chickensaltash), is key stage 3 co-ordinator and is a very popular and innovative educator. I am of course, extremely proud of her. She is @dawnywheeler on Twitter by the way...

So thank you Dawn for our first 25 years together. Thank you for believing in me and sticking by me. Now, is it too much to ask if you and I can go for the 50? ;-)

Creative Commons License
Silver and gold by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 03, 2011

Blogging about

The academic world doesn't tend to value blogging as much as it does formally peer-reviewed publications. In the past, this has been justifiable. However, as a growing number of academics, many highly respected by their peers, migrate away from the closed journal system and refuse to dance any longer to the old tune, greater numbers will be publishing not only in open access journals, but also on blogs. I have written about this previously, but need to re-emphasise the true value of blogging. Here are four reasons why the academic community should revise its collective opinion about blogging.

Blogging is an excellent medium for professionals to use to crystallise their thinking. When I write down my thoughts, whether on paper, or direct to the text box on this blog, I begin to refine my thinking. Before I write down my ideas they tend to be inchoate and not particularly lucid. Once my ideas have been laid down on the page, I am then free to elaborate, edit, revise and refine. I can also save the work to come back to later when I have thought some more about what I'm trying to articulate. Although this in itself is value enough, there are many other benefits for academic bloggers.

Blogging also offers authors a potentially worldwide audience. Some blogs have a greater following than mainstream newspapers or established media sites. The blog you are now reading regularly attracts an average of 50,000 hits each calendar month. Star bloggers can exert a certain amount of influence if they have the audience. Yesterday I argued that most closed academic journals have a limited readership. I know, academic publishing has never really been about how many people read your work, it's usually more to do with the kudos gained from publishing in an elite journal. And that's exactly what is so badly wrong with the current academic publishing system. Publications are for the public. We should all make our work more freely and widely available for our peers to read. We should also make our work available to the interested laypeople out there who may not have the academic qualifications, but do have the interest and the passion for the subject. Blogging is an ideal popularist method for making ideas and research accessible for all.

Thirdly, blogging is a very powerful dialogic tool. Important ideas should be open to challenge and debate. Closed journals, with the best will in the world, can only ever provide a contrived, time-shifted debate on any given subject. Blogs are different, because blogs are virtually instantaneous. Once a post has been published, anyone can read it and quickly respond, sending their comments directly to the blog while their ideas are still hot. Many a valuable debate has already been had on blogs, with a simple post as the stimulus for valuable dialogue across a community of practice.

Finally, anyone can start a blog, share their ideas and build a community of interest around their subject. It takes a little time, effort and commitment, but the rewards can be extraordinary. So, what will you be blogging about?

Creative Commons License
Blogging about by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


October 02, 2011

The open case

Today, more than ever, academics and professionals need to question the value of publishing in closed journals. Forget for a moment the ludicrous prices many publishers charge for personal and institutional subscriptions. Think about the audience. Just how many people will actually read an article in a closed journal? 10? 20? 50? 100? The answer for most closed journals is - not very many. Conversely, publishing in an open access journals can increase the audience dramatically. Essentially, because they are free and online, open access journals are read more widely.

Online open access journals trump paper based journals every time in terms of amplification of ideas too. Often open access journals provide online forums for discussion of the articles presented. This kind of dialogue is invaluable both for the readers and authors. Many open access journals also provide reader metrics. Authors can see at a glance how many people have downloaded their abstract, or full paper, and some also track where the readership is located around the globe. This simply cannot be achieved with paper based journals. All you can know for certain is how many subscribers there are for each issue sold. I have already written about sharp practice - the cynical manner in which some publishing houses exploit the goodwill and free labour of academics, and then make huge profits selling on journal subscriptions back to the academic community, so I won't revisit this point.

What is worse though, is the fact that much of the academic establishment continues to frown upon open access publications as though they were second class citizens in the publishing world. There are a number of elite journals (largely rated on the basis that their published works are cited more widely than those of other similar publications, and also tacitly on the reputation of the editorial board) that academic managers encourage their researchers to target. If researchers can secure publications in any of these elite closed journals, they will be well placed when it comes to the official research assessments that come along periodically, where governments award money for further research. Those top universities that demonstrate the best research outputs (that is, the most prestigious) and publication track records receive most of the cash. Those who don't can pretty much forget it for another round. It's an inward looking, self-feeding, self congratulatory 'old boys' club, and it is entirely unjust at so many levels. It's a hierarchy that rarely changes. No wonder many people despise the ivory tower brigade and their academic snobbery.

There has to be a better way to disseminate research. There are many high quality open access journals in existence, and several that are highly recommended in the field of learning technology and distance education. Some of these are listed as links below. If you know of others, please send me the links and I will include them on this blogpost. There is also a large list of links available to open access and hybrid education related journals. One that is not listed yet on the list is Research in Learning Technology (formerly ALT-J) which will be converting to open access in January 2012. Other closed journals should, and probably will follow suit. Open access is not synonymous with poor quality. In fact many online open access journals work twice as hard to prove that they are high quality. What open access does mean is larger readerships for the published research. That has to be worth something in anyone's book.

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology
Digital Culture and Education
e-Learning Papers
EDUCAUSE Review
European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning
Future Internet
International Review of Research in Open Distance Learning
The Journal of Distance Education
Journal of Interactive Online Learning
Journal of Technology Education

Creative Commons License
The open case by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 29, 2011

Not so tasty now

"You are salt for the earth. But if salt loses its taste, how will it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled on by people". Matthew 5:13 (New Testament)

The Delicious social bookmarking site used to be one of my favourite social media tools. Not any more. When Yahoo bought Delicious back in 2005 for an estimated $18 million, we all expected great things, and we got them. It was a great place to post a link, share it and watch it blossom. The tagging facility was second to none, and it was easy to see who else was interested in the same links as you, and then discover what other links they had bookmarked that might have passed you by. It was both creative, and a voyage of discovery. A lot of that functionality has changed since Delicious has been sold on to AVOS (known as founders of YouTube) for a reported $5 million. This represents a significant loss of capital for Yahoo.

Since the launch of new Delicious this week, the Twitterverse and blogosphere have been buzzing with scathing commentary and complaints, stories of lost bookmarks, mislaid tagging bundles, personal networks that have simply disappeared. This post from Pulp Tech is particularly critical of the new Delicious. The old maxim, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, seems to have passed AVOS completely by. People don't like change, so when AVOS relaunched Delicious on September 27 this year in a 'back to beta' state, it went down like a lead balloon. Too much change too quickly is a big mistake. Many are migrating their content to other bookmarking sites such as Diigo, because they can't see any point in using Delicious anymore, given that much of the useful stuff they spent years becoming familiar with, is gone. That also has a compounding influence on the personal networks users have built up of course. Many of us wish that AVOS would put Delicious back to its previous state, where everything was familiar and where we knew exactly where our tags and networks were. AVOS has done more harm than good changing things so radically and so quickly.

It is annoying when you rely on a service as a knowledge tool, and then suddenly, your content isn't there anymore, or it's there but you can't find it easily. To be fair to AVOS, they gave advanced warning that changes would be made. What they didn't do very well was inform users fully to what extent those changes would affect everyone. Now they have a bit of a crisis on their hands. Amidst the storm of criticism they are weathering, Delicious is struggling to put things right and while it's doing so, appears to be leaking many of its previously loyal followers. I don't blame people for leaving. Delicious just isn't that tasty anymore.

Have your say: What do you think about the new Delicious?

Online casino | buy shaving products | Casino | Online polls | 888 Ladies

Creative Commons License
Not so tasty now by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 27, 2011

Talking to camera

I seem to be doing a lot of interviews lately, many of which are on video. No-one ever warned me that I would be doing video interviews when I first became a teacher. No-one came up to me and offered me media presentation training like they do for politicians. I have never been briefed on what to do when standing (or sitting) in front of a camera. I have had to learn all about it by trial and error. Error more than trial actually. I can now tell you what a noddy is (no, it's not a Toytown character) and what a cut-away does (best not to ask, really). It has very much been informal training on the job, and I'm sure I've screwed up now and then. Yet my most recent video interviews seem to be watchable, and I appear to be reasonably coherent and not talking too much gibberish. I'm now at the point where I don't care anymore if someone comes up to me and asks for a video interview. I'll do a talk to camera at the drop of a hat. That actually helps when people suddenly walk up to me and shove a mobile phone into my face and ask for an impromptu interview. Talking to camera doesn't make me sweat or tremble like it used to when back in 1992 I did my first ever TV studio interview. Back then, I remember feeling physically sick, and spending a lot of time prior to broadcast in the toilet (yes, the TV interview was a live broadcast and there was no room for error .... scary).

My time spent later working for the RATIO telematics project from 1996-1998 gave me plenty of opportunities to sit on the other side of the microphone, and I suppose was a kind of on the fly media training. I had to learn fast. I even had my own Training Hour show once each week, which went out live by satellite to the whole of Europe. It helped me to think on my feet and cope with most situations (dead air with guests clamming up and not speaking, technical problems such as failed phone-ins, mouse droppings on the carpet, etc....)



When James Clay invited me at the recent ALT-C event in Leeds to sit in as an interviewer, and converse with guests for the live webstreaming ALT-C Live Beta TV programme, it all came back to me. I would have no more than a minute or two to find out a little about them and formulate a few questions and then it was straight in with the live streaming interview. It felt quite natural to do the intro direct to camera, and then turn to the guest and try to get some interesting snippets of insight from them. John Traxler was probably the best to interview because I only had to ask him one or two questions and then he was off, talking twenty to the dozen until we eventually hauled him out of the studio kicking and screaming (OK, I exaggerate, but John did most of the work for me). Above is a brief, unscripted one minute elevator pitch interview I did for my own university, about some of the research I'm currently engaged in. And below is an on the spot interview I did while over in Dublin at the EDEN Conference in June. There are several more in the pipeline that will appear on the web in the next week or so that were recorded in Lisbon and Cologne recently. I'm getting to be an old pro at this video lark now. I even managed to video myself smashing a can of baked beans down onto my finger to make a point for a student group. Look, don't ask - just click on the video link and watch it for yourself. That's the kind of stuff I get up to in the classroom when there's a camera to perform in front of.



Creative Commons License
Talking to camera by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 26, 2011

Sharp practice

During my keynote for the Zukunft Personal event in Cologne, I publicly announced that I would no longer publish my work in closed journals. In truth, the last time one of my papers was published in a pay-to-subscribe journal was quite some time ago. I'm not the first academic who has made this stand and hopefully I won't be the last. Many others now only publish their work in open access journals, and I intend to do the same. I will still also continue to write for professional journals and magazines such as Learning Technologies. I'm also going to continue writing these blog posts for as long as people like you find them useful, and continue to come back for more.

But my days of helping to fill the academic publishers' coffers are over.

For a long time I have felt very strongly that some academic publishers are operating a sharp practice by exploiting the goodwill of scholars. Large groups of lecturers and researchers act as journal authors and reviewers without payment, and then the publishers sell this content on to other academics at grossly inflated prices. Other highly knowledgeable academics give up their time, also for no payment, to review and advise editors on the content, and this can be painstaking work - read this by Martin Weller on the real cost of 'free reviewing'. This is not sustainable and must change. The publishing industry should no longer be allowed to operate such cynical, profiteering business models. The content they sell has been given to them for free by exceptionally skilled academics who have spent their valuable time and energy researching and writing their reports. The price we are expected to pay to read the work of our own community is unjustifiable. How much does it cost a publishing house to create and maintain an online journal? The cost of reading journal articles should be reduced or eradicated completely, or academics should vote with their feet. What would happen if we all pledged to no longer patronise the publishing houses in future? What would be their response if we all promised we would no longer publish our work in their journals? Actually, I articulated these very sentiments in What if they threw a party and none of us came? on my blog last year. If all academics withdrew their labour, the publishers would have to think again. Here are some of the facts and figures taken from the publishers' websites:

Taking out a personal subscription of a Taylor and Francis journal can be particularly expensive. Learning, Media and Technology (4 issues a year) comes in at around £70 per issue. Sister journal Technology, Pedagogy and Education (3 issues each year) is much cheaper at £18 per issue. Another T and F journal Interactive Learning Environments (currently 5 issues a year) works out at just over £26 per issue for an individual subscription. Taylor and Francis also offer individual online articles for download at just £21 per copy. Wiley's British Journal of Educational Technology will cost you between £232 (or £403 for the rest of world) for 6 issues. That's more than £38 (£67) for an issue, each of which is on average 175 pages in length. A slightly better deal is Elsevier's Computers in Education journal which at 8 issues a year works out at just £34 per issue for a personal subscription. Why the fluctuation in prices? Only the publishers can explain that one. I ask again, why do publishers charge such high prices for knowledge? If we continue to allow knowledge to be commoditised to such an extent that it is only available to the privileged few who can afford it, we are in effect, perpetuating an unjust society. In the long term, this can only damage the academic community.

Image by Pieter de Vries

Creative Commons License
Sharp practice by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 22, 2011

Business games

I gave a keynote speech at the Zukunft Personal - a massive HRM Expo and conference - today, in Cologne, Germany. One of my presentation themes in the main arena was 'openness'. My keynote went well and afterwards I was asked during the discussion whether companies would be wise to give their ideas away for free. I had previously explained that increasingly, many teachers and lecturers are sharing their content freely, because we are aware of the need to improve learning while reducing cost. Its not completely altruistic. Many of us are handsomely rewarded for this free giving. If the content is open for re-use and repurposing, it is almost always more widely and more quickly disseminated than it would be if it were closed. Some academics share their content through social media to get it 'out there' to the public more quickly, and in a more visible way, so that dialogue is encouraged and amplification can occur. Giving away content therefore makes sense to a lot of teachers and lecturers, because they want to gain a larger audience for their ideas.

But does it make good sense, my conference host asked, if commercial organisations were also to give away their products with no charge? Would this not result in lost revenue for those companies? The predominantly corporate sector audience waited expectantly for my answer. There were more suits on view than at Moss Bros. In my response, I echoed what I had earlier said in my Zukunft Personal keynote - Open Educational Resources are the start of a movement that is already transferring itself to the business sector. It is already happening not just in companies such as Google and Facebook, whose business model is to advertise on the back of free products in a pay-per-click strategy. I pointed out that some major players in the gaming industry are participating. One of the leaders in the game engine world is Unity, who sell their Unity Pro developer software package for $1500 but give away a lower level version of the same package for free. How can they afford to do this? The reason is quite clear. Unity wants games developers everywhere to use their software, and wants to encourage a community of interest to form around its products. It gives them a competitive edge over their rivals. Unity does so by not only offering free software but also an evaluation service on games that have been developed using their software. Last year the company announced its Union partnership scheme. If your game is deemed to be commercially viable, Unity will market it across a variety of platforms, and takes 20 per cent commission on all subsequent sales. Other gaming companies are following similar business models. How long will it be before companies in other sectors of business and industry begin to give their products away for free to become even more competitive in their niche sector?

Creative Commons License
Business games by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 17, 2011

Grand residence

The annual conference of the European Foundation for Quality in e-Learning did not disappoint. From the grand location of the conference at the Marquês de Pombal Palace, to the eclectic and fast moving conference papers, workshops and demonstrations, there was plenty to see and do during the two day Efquel Innovation Forum. A palace is defined as a 'grand residence', and this week the grand men and women of e-learning from all over Europe and farther afield took residence here to discuss, explore, expound and celebrate. The beautiful town of Oieras is a wonderful location for any event, and if you like good weather, sumptuous green surroundings and good food (seefood is the speciality) then I am sure you would agree. It is no wonder then that the Efquel crew return again and again to hold their conference in this picturesque Lisbon suburb. Morning keynotes from Wayne Mackintosh (see Wayne's World) and Asha Kanwar (Commonwealth of Learning) set the scene, leaving delegates with visions of free worldwide access to learning, thoughts of openness and inspiration from accounts of education initiatives in developing countries.

A welter of discussions, workshops and presentations followed, focusing on the accreditation, certification and internationalisation of learning followed, with subjects including open models, self evaluation, quality aspects for virtual schools, all before lunchtime. After lunch, it was business as usual with more sessions on topics such as how to integrate informal and open learning into higher education, the use of quality labels for e-learning and the benefits and limitations of academic gaming. The evening was closed off by a thought provoking keynote by Yves Punie, who address the challenges and opportunities for certification and assessment in future learning scenarios. Day one ended with a great al fresco evening in the grounds of the Palais, with live music and a short award ceremony.

My own keynote on digital learning futures started off day 2 of the forum, where I addressed some of the possible scenarios we see emerging in education, including open education practices, mobile learning, personalised learning, social media networking contexts and the use of augmented and mixed reality. As with all the sessions, there was a lively discussion, and this continued after the coffee break in other parallel sessions. I recall one brief discussion where one of the delegates, a journalist and self confessed e-learning non-expert, made the error of saying within my earshot that academic blogs were a poor substitute for peer reviewed traditional publishing. Talk about red rags and bulls. There was no blood on the carpet, but there could well have been. To say this view is misinformed would be an understatement. There are many blogs I would read in place of closed journal content. Blogging is more immediate (some traditional journals take many months to publish papers, which by then are well out of date) which also means it is timely and up to date. Blogging also enables immediate dialogue which means that readers can join in and discuss directly with the author. Blogging is also peer reviewed, but by multiple reviewers, not just two. Open and public forms of discourse need to be encouraged, not disparaged by ill-informed assumptions. This kind of debate that is the essence of what Efquel stands for, and I am grateful to have been invited to participate in this years event. My thanks go to the Efquel crew, and not least to Ulf-Daniel Ehlers, the conference chair, for allowing me to join in with a very memorable and inspirational event.

Creative Commons License
Grand residence by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 15, 2011

Wayne's world

Wayne Mackintosh's world vision of free learning for all is one that is shared by countless educators around the world. We all want to see quality learning provided, especially to the populations of the less well-off nations of the world. The difference though, is that he's going to make it happen. Born in South Africa, and now working in New Zealand, Wayne Mackintosh is chair of the WikiEducator Community Council, and is a strategy innovator with a passion for making learning futures happen. Trained as an accountant, he is in his own words, 'an educator by choice.' He has more than a passion. He also has the pragmatic wherewithal to realise his dream, cultivating many connections and in the process, helping to establish a powerful worldwide consortium of Open Education Anchor partners. These are universities across the globe who are willing to open up their courses and programmes to any learner for free. What's more, they have also agreed to provide free accreditation of learning in the form of degrees.

Speaking at the opening plenary of the Efquel Innovation Forum in Oeiras, Portugal, Wayne asked the delegates: Why do we ask people to pay more than they can afford for education? This is of course an important question to ask, even if it is unpalatable to many in the higher education sector. It's one that many institutions worldwide would be wise to begin asking themselves. Wayne didn't pull any punches in his keynote. Citing Sir John Daniel's iron triangle, he argued that the biggest challenge for free open worldwide education is to lower the cost while widening access and raising quality. We WILL provide free education for all, he declared. This will be done by creating a growing network of partners who have enough influence and reach to create the critical mass with which the Open Educational Resources movement will gain purchase. Recognition of prior learning, whether credentialed or experiential, will be a key part of the success in achieving this vision, he said. His key question was that we already have all the ingredients to provide free learning for all at university level, so why aren't we doing it?

There is a long way to go to achieve this vision, but Wayne warned that those who do not subscribe will be left behind. It is a red herring question, he assured us, to ask whether providing free and open education for all will put universities our of business and lose teachers their jobs. Another red herring, he suggested, was that open educational resources were poorer in quality than the traditional course delivery currently offered by most universities. If the quality is poorer, he remarked, then the institution is unlikely to risk its reputation by offering it.

Image source

Creative Commons License
Wayne's world by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 14, 2011

Fire and brimstone

I spoke earlier today at the Concede User Generated Conference in the venerable surroundings of the old Palace of the Marquis de Pombal, here in Oeiras, Lisbon. In my presentation, entitled The Good, the Blog and the Wiki, I tried to paint some broad brushstrokes on how students (and their teachers) are creating and sharing content that supports their learning, both socially and academically, through a range of social media. I pointed out some of the tensions that exist between what the institution requires (course accreditation, structure, security and other formalised activities) and what the individual does (chaotic and unstructured, informal and rule-free). I gave some examples from my own recent research with students using blogs and wikis in authentic learning contexts. The talk seemed to go down well, but one of my remarks, about creativity seemed to ruffle a feather or two. I suggested that in school, we are taught to follow rules and that colouring outside the lines is frowned upon. I was of course, referring to the inherent need that all institutions seem to have of establishing order, compliance and ultimately, a lack of freedom to experiment, take risks and make mistakes.

One of the speakers who followed me remarked that 'colouring outside the lines' never helped anyone gain any course credit. As there was no time to challenge her in a question session, I responded on Twitter by stating that colouring outside the lines actually helps many students to go beyond the course requirements. I also remarked that if we don't teach in creative ways, then no wonder our students are bored and demotivated. I fail to comprehend how some people, having spent a lifetime in education, are still reluctant to give their students licence to experiment, ask the what if questions, and ... yes, colour outside the lines. If you facilitate freedom to learn, students will - and do respond, and it is often astounding what they can achieve when given such freedom.

And so we move from the mildly irritating to the absolutely bizarre.... Earlier today one of my colleagues here at the Concede conference (Anthony Camilleri) found an outrageous blog post entitled Blogging is sinful and hampers your research productivity and tweeted the link after my keynote. Now, you can take this blog post one of two ways. You could surmise that the author is being deliberately provocative and is taking a stance that is ultimately indefensible, simply to provoke debate. The somewhat archaic language and the hectoring tones are possibly a give away. All power to him if he is promoting debate. On the other hand, and this is the disturbing part - he may actually be deadly serious when he declares:

Scholars who write blogs obviously try to avoid the harshness of the peer review system and to air their half-baked thoughts through a less demanding publication channel than a peer reviewed journal. This modern opportunity creates a public bad of immense proportions as it invites an endless stream of reactions from other colleagues who do not want to live up to the publish or perish reality that even starts to exist in the sleepy European social sciences. 

Sinful, I ask you.... Good grief. I for one have never been shy of criticism, even of the harshest kind, from some over opinionated journal reviewers. I blog because of the immediacy of the medium - I can publish my ideas and questions instantly, and can receive back 'reactions' from my peers that are valued, relevant and timely. The publish or perish reality above is not a reality at all - it's more likely to be publish and be jammed with the backlog some traditional journals suffer from. You can consider yourself most fortunate if you manage to get your article published in under a year from submission to publication. The absolute irony that should not escape you is that the author is using a blog as his platform to preach this anti-blogging madness. What he is doing in a great Elmer Gantry parody, is using archaic words such as Purgatory and Hell, and rhetoric likely to bring tears to the eyes of a puritan, to hammer home his particular brand of Fire and Brimstone fervour. Either way, it's a seriously inflammatory post designed to get your back up, and it's worth a read of the brief article just to take sample a flavour of some of the lunacy the anti-social media brigade like to peddle.

Image source

Creative Commons License
Fire and brimstone by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 10, 2011

From atoms to bits

The final keynote speech at ALT-C 2011 was given by Professor John Naughton, who read directly from his notes with his head down, and used no visual media to support his at times somewhat mumbling and occasionally difficult to hear presentation. The message however, was quite compelling. The key theme in his 'the elusive technological future' speech, was that the future has already overtaken the music, advertising and publishing worlds, because they were completely unprepared for what was coming. He summoned up the words of author William Gibson, who famously said 'the future is already here - it's just not evenly distributed' to drive his argument.

In a taciturn style, Naughton cited Napster and other music sharing sites as disruptive innovations that changed our world and the way we do business. He harnessed the 'atoms and bits' argument (first offered by Nic Negroponte in his book Being Digital) as an illustration of the rapid progress of web based delivery of content, direct from the originator to the consumer. He gave evidence that the digital future has supplanted the analogue quickly, remorselessly and unexpectedly. For Naughton, Craigslist had caused a dramatic and irreversible downturn in newspaper advertising revenue, and Wikipedia was hammering the nails into the proverbial coffin of the encyclopedia industry. Whilst this was perhaps a little sweeping and dramatic, Naughton's message still resonated with his audience. The almost unspoken question was whether the digital future would soon overtake the world of education. Are teachers and lecturers prepared for the brave new world of the digital? Are we still wasting time and energy shipping atoms when we should be dealing in bits?

Creative Commons License
From atoms to bits by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


September 09, 2011

Turning up the volume

We have enjoyed an interesting, intense and invigorating few days at the ALT-C event in Leeds this week. It was wonderful to encounter face to face so many people who I have previously got to know on Twitter. The days were filled with papers and demonstrations, symposia and workshops, some excellent, some thought provoking, and a few that could perhaps do with a little more development.... 


There were some interesting new features at ALT-C this year too. A fair amount of my time was taken up working with James Clay and Darren Moon (LSE) on the live streaming TV channel ALT-C Live Beta, which I helped to present. Throughout the conference, a small studio was used to interview delegates, speakers and guests, and James occasionally foraged among the crowd during the breaks to capture some of the vox pop ambience of the conference. The results of these hours of live video will be available on demand very soon on YouTube for all to revisit. For now you can view some of the interviews on this site. ALT-C Live Beta was an experiment that I feel worked extremely well and one that I hope can be a feature at future events. The content from the interviews in particular is rich and varied, and worth a revisit, and I am sure it has already been instrumental in amplifying the conference. Congratulations to James and Darren for adding an extra new dimension to the conference, and thank you both for involving me.

On the final day of ALT-C, in the first session I was pleasantly surprised to see a room full of delegates attending my own future pedagogy session. On the morning after the Conference Gala Dinner - commonly referred to as 'the graveyard slot', you are lucky to have half a dozen resilient punters present. On this occasion, surprisingly, every chair was taken. Three papers were presented, and a lively discussion ensued. Below is my own slide presentation on group blogging, entitled Learning Together Online.

Learning together online

Creative Commons License
Turning up the volume by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

via Learning with 'e's


<< Back Next >>