“the thing about the online discussion is freedom of speech and everyone has the right to have their own opinion(…)”

Meeh, freedom of speech in this case has nothing to do with what’s happened here. Especially mentioning the fact of an ‘online discussion’ doesn’t change the simple fact of absolutely uncalled for verbal aggression on the Flamer’s part.

Surely, we get used to the idea of hiding behind a safe veil of the internet and our physical remoteness from the first time we use the web to chat, IM, give opinions, criticize. We are seduced to think we are invincible every time we vent our anger at someone we only acknowledge as a virtual, not physical being. Just like in a game.

It is sometimes easy to forget that the person sitting on the other side of the screen is exactly like me, with feelings and aspirations, etc.

I am thinking of an allusion to a game, more than that, I am thinking specifically of the latest GTA games or any of the Sims game. You meet other virtual beings and play by imitating real life to a certain extent. But you come to a point when you want to try something you’d never try in your life: set new boundaries, break the game’s laws, drive on the wrong side of the road, abuse a pedestrian, not feed your dog, etc. And when you are tired you switch off the game or restart it.

Adding to certain valid points on the discussion board, I am also thinking that Louise’s (the tutor’s) reaction was really over-the-top. Honestly, since she is well able to deal with exactly the same situation face-to-face, why now shouldn’t she just say calmly sth like “I’m sorry but this really is your task to find out. I can’t help you anymore.” Job done. bob's your uncle. No hard feelings.

Leaving the tutor's reaction aside, the likely truth is that once such ‘advice’ is given to a student, such ‘invitations’ for help will never cease...

I must revisit my initial idea of peer-feedback, after some very constructive critical comments on the discussion board. Indeed, the ‘thumbs up and down’ idea could be subject to abuse with colleagues giving each other more positive notes than to other members of the board.

But I will still maintain that some peer-feedback would be of use. One focusing only on positive feedback, where the ready-given responses to feeds/entries could be as such:

“How would you rate the above entry in terms of its relevance to the discussion topic?

·        OK

·        Very relevant/useful

I am beginning to realize the problem a lot of people have with online marking, responses or criticism is that, unlike spoken words given here and now, the online feedback stays there permanently. We don’t want to hear of our flaws (in deeds or in thinking), and if we already do, then the right course of action is to reflect and move on. Negative online feedback is a painful remainder that on that particular occasion we were wrong.

Ok I am rather sheepishly bring my seeping epistimological wound into my own blog where I can lick it quietly.  Sorry I know that is gross but you know what I mean - we had enough fur and feathers flying in the forum, that even though everything has settled down nicely I feel a bit nervous about rubbing my hands together and saying...

 "So, epistemology eh?"

It began here:

Me:  But in this case, I just don't see this because, it is for the purposes of our current discussion unknowable - the nature of truth and reality. It seems like quibbling to discuss this when a certain functional acceptance of true and false is necessary to get simple tasks (like writing dissertations and cooking chickens) done. Especially as much of it seems like semantics. Truth like greek love and eskimo snow has many different forms, and one of us picks one and an other picks another and then we have a discussion - which is essentially meaningless because we are talking about different things.

Hamish:  In writing your dissertation you will be planning to come to some conclusions, I assume? It is really rather expected. De rigueur, you might say. So you will be making truth claims. That is the nature of it. You need to know then, what it is you are doing. You are not doing journalism. You need to understand what you are saying and, impostantly, what you are *not* say, or able to say. That is what we are about. And it is challenging.
 

This is the thing, and I fear I may have exaggerated my lack of understanding along the way somehow, but I get what Epistemology is, and how it differs from Ontonology.  (I have no idea why I am capitalising them, maybe I have a German ancestor, or possibly just giving them the respect of Very Important Words I Don't quite Feel I Can Relax Around.)  Anyway, the thing is I am not sure why we have to bother with them in order to do research. Lol, I could hear the collective gasp of horror from everyone who has every done research ever after I typed that. Shall I explain here that I have never done research ever or leave that for another blog post.  Ok, ABP.  I really want to be convinced, by the way - I am very much lawful good when I play dungeons and dragons.  I would love to conform, I just can't fake it.

Anyway, according to the whims of epistemology I need to get off the fence and have an opinion about knowledge.

When I make a truth claim about something either (and these are the main current contenders, not an exhaustive list, and assuming my research is good) the meaning I am offering up:

a) it is there, in stuff, and is therefore something I have discovered - and had I not discovered it, it would still be there

b) it is in my head when I 'look at' stuff and I inflict it on whatever I am assigning meaning to, but it is not inherent in the thing itself

c) it is constructed in the relationship between me and stuff

If I  believe the former I am an Objectivist, if I believe the one in the middle I am a Subjectivist and if I believe the latter I am a Constructivist which is apparently the coolest position to hold at the time of writing - and you can see why, it is like the democrat of the epistemological world.

I look at those 3 choices and think "no I don't want to be any of them because I can see that all are equally possible and equally unknowable" and if I am picking one, then it is because I have to, or because it comes with good research tools and therefore I will be an agnostic when it comes to knowledge kthanx.

What makes it worse is that you have to pick one (and I get it that you don't have to be 'it' forever, you can select a stance for a particular research interest) because the rest of anything to do with research is totally dependant on this issue.  If you don't have an epistemological stance you can't have a theoretical perspective, if you don't have a theoretical perspective you can't have a methodology, and yes... Crotty concedes rather magnanimously you can have methods because they are rather promiscuous critters who will hang out with anyone, but if you have a bunch of methods without the other parts then pretty much everyone is going to be tittering behind their hands when you hand in your dissertation.  

I feel like I am being told that in order to read a Bible I need to be a Christian, and if I fancy taking a peak at a Qur'an I must convert to Islam (but don't worry I can go back to being Christian when I have finished).  And when I wail "but I am agnostic" I feel like my inner voice says, "oh well then why not adopt a Buddhist Approach, because that is essentially agnostic, it is not like they believe in God, and then you can read  the Tripitaka, which is pretty cool, it has the fire sermon in it and everything.  Go on, be a Buddhist, it will make Hamish happy.

Apparently we have been recommended to keep a blog for Research Methods.  I feel like I have had so many blogs my MSc in E-learning, but in fact it has been 2 main ones, this for IDEL and a Wordpress blog for Digital Cultures.  I didn't know I could access either still until Damien mentioned Holyrood Park blogs and I went there hit a few links and found this old girl sitting here all neglected like Miss Havisham. 

Seems appropriate that my IDEL blog gets to be my Research Methods blog.  If I had my time again I would continue to keep a blog after IDEL through every course, as I think that would have been invaluable.  Just thought I would mention that in case there are any IDELers wandering past, lol.  

Anyway, Research Methods... yikes.   A month ago I was in the blissful state of just worrying about the maths, little did I know that that worry would be utterly subsumed by my need to worry about everything else.  I am currently in the zone where everything I say on the DB seems to be wrong, or off the mark somewhat - so it will be a relief to come here and mutter to myself in my inappropriately humorous, journalistic manner.  I have struggled with being insufficiently academic from the beginning - I bet there is a blog about it back there somewhere - and hoped that one day something would click and I would have access to an appropriate mode of discourse (whether this would be a new way of thinking or simply a new way of presenting my ideas I don't know), but now I am going to do myself the favour of not worrying about it.  Hopefully I will be able to muster enough faux gravitas for my dissertation but ultimately I accept it is not me.  I am not academic.  Nuff said.

That isn't to say I haven't loved it.  I fully appreciate every piece of wisdom that has gone in.  I just don't seem to have much control over how it comes out, lol.  And before I give the impression that 'this is the end my friend' it isn't... I have one more course after Research Methods before I can consider myself a Master *snort* oh yeah, and the small thing of the dissertation. 

Lolz.

 Anyway, as ever this blog will be public and comments are welcome from all and sundry, especially the sundry.

Week one of 'Introduction to digital environments for learning' is drawing to a close.  An interesting activity, and in many ways challenging as the different student types discussed had a lot in common, so it wasn't always easy to come up with something new.

Having found time to finish reading 'e-tivities' by Gilly Salmon this morning, I find that the last few pages of the book to be relevant to this exercise.  The book is divided in to two similar length parts, starting with an introduction to e-tivites and makes use of Gillys five-stage framework.  Part two concentrates on resources for practitioners and is divided down in to a number of digestable sections, each a couple of pages in length.  Many of the sections  look at issues raised in the course discussions such as: 'Promoting collaborative groups', 'on line emotions' and 'Patterns of participation'. The patterns of participation section is particularly relevant as it discusses the characteristics of most (if not all) of those partisipants studied, alongside a number of others that give a fuller picture of the social mechanics of discussion boards.

I found the book a challenging read so it has taken some time for me to complete it.  However the resources section makes this a worthwhile read for anyone looking at online learning from any perspective.

Salmon, G. (2002) e-tivities (the key to online learning). Abingdon: RoutledgeFalmer.

Having looked over all the case studies for week one, I find they appear to have more in common than not.  There is a general consensus that preparing the students in advance is key, to this I add that the staff need to be prepared well too.

It can be difficult to find somthing original to say once the threads have got underway, I guess this leads to some original thinking at times.

The big day has arrived, so I have had a go at the week one activities.  There are only a few contributions so far, so I have dived in in the hope that I am on the right track and that it will encourage others to dive in too.  The pace of contribution will probably quicken towards the end of the week as everyone consciously tries not to be identified with any of the characters in the case study!

I tried to buy an ebook reader today but Waterstones were out of stock of the model I chose, the assistant told me they had two on the stock system but they were both faulty customer returns...  I hope such a device will make referring to articles easier as I won't have to flick from session to session on the computer.

Well, I guess this is where it all begins.  I am looking forward to being on the receiving end of education for a change. 

Not a totally good day of e-teaching, a faulty projector and downloaded youtube videos that decided not to play.

a test post to ensure integration with bubbl.us.

a bubbl.us brainstorm can be given as a read-only url: see here for an example - this works best for larger diagrams

alternatively, for smaller diagrams, exporting it from bubbl.us. as a jpeg, it can then be uploaded to your holyroodpark.net files and then inserted as an image like so (recommending a size of approx 500x500):