Beyond Control?

A recent ALT Conference ran under the banner of 'Beyond Control', and I remember writing the editorial for the research proceedings along the lines that the net generation (whoever they are) has been operating largely outside the boundaries of instutional technology provision for some time. More and more students own their own laptops and mobile phones, and they do not take kindly to being told how they should use the Internet. Last week's e-learning conference in Plymouth had a similar title 'Crossing Boundaries' which also elicited a similar set of themed papers on student activities that are conducted largely outside of institutional boundaries. One of my recent publications dealing with this subject is a chapter that appears in the book 'Effective Blended Learning Practices' Edited by Elizabeth Stacey and Phillipa Gerbic. There is limited access to it on Google Books, but it's another of those overpriced IGI Global books I'm afraid. At £135.50 I don't expect many to buy it, but there are some valuable chapters contained therein and I would like to share one or two of those ideas with you here. In my chapter I critically review some of the recent uses of the Learning Management System (LMS) in universities and ask who the systems have been designed for. Is it the institution or the student? Here's an abstract:

The Learning Management System is not always popular with students, for a number of reasons. Students report that they experience difficulties with technical issues (Weller et al, 2005), lack of familiarity with the system (McGill & Hobbs, 2007), and discussion overload (Kear & Heap, 2007), and this is not an exhaustive list. Furthermore, the LMS is facing competition for student ‘online time’ from a more attractive and rapidly growing rival – social networking. Where the LMS invariably has the appearance of an institutional system – branded logo, controlled log-in and passwords, uninspiring topography and bland presentation – the more popular social networking tools ..... are more colourful and attractive, can be more or less tailored to personal preferences, and are beyond the control and surveillance of the university.


The point I wish to underline is the institution imposes the LMS on staff and students with little consultation with the true stakeholders. This leads me to believe that the LMS is primarily there for the benefit of the institution rather than for the student. It is there to impose control, but the battle for control is being lost, because...


...today’s generation of students expect and seek out highly interactive experiences, involving muti-tasking, self-selection of learning material and fast-moving engagement with their enviroment which centres upon play, user-generation of content and collaboration. We might conclude that the insitutional LMS is simply failing to keep pace which the new demands from the network generation, so students are migrating to social networking sites to supplement their on-line experiences.


The institutional LMS is failing because its design curtails creativity and constrains students (and tutors) to think in a particular way. There is no latitude for informal learning either, because this is not what an LMS does. So students are populating social networking and Web 2.0 tools in greater numbers every week, and all of their activities are beyond the reach of the institution. Universities can if they wish, ban access to Facebook, YouTube and other popular sites across their networks, but students will still find ways to continue to gossip, share images, tag and otherwise interact beyond the control of the institute. They will do it because they enjoy it, and because it also provides something that the institutional LMS can never do: Social networks provide a place where students can relax, have fun and chat with friends who are inside and outside of the university they are studying in. My conclusion?


It is highly likely that a compromise will be required if blended technology supported learning is to improve its track record. Future deployments of online learning environments are likely to have elements of both systems within the architecture of the LMS.


Image source

Feat of Clay

The fact that many A list celebrities are now jumping on the band wagon and using Twitter for shameless self-promotion may just signal the start of the demise of Twitter. You can spot them a mile off - they are the ones who have hundreds of thousands of followers, but they are following ... yep, no-one. According to Everitt Rogers, all innovations and ideas tend to follow an adoption cycle that starts with the innovators, gradually reaching a critical mass through the early adoptors and then the early majority. It begins to run downhill when the late majority adopt it and it is no longer new and exciting, and everyone has it. Once it has sufficiently penetrated into society, telling signs are for example, that the technology begins to appear for sale in the Argos catalogue. Yesterday the BBC Technology News pages carried the headline 'Can Twitter survive the Hype-Cycle? In a tacit homage to Gartner's theory, it's an interesting piece which asks some serious questions about the future of the microblogging tool.

Well, Twitter won't be appearing in any store catalogues, but it might just be reaching its zenith in terms of use and popularity. Over at e-Learning Stuff, James Clay has pulled off no mean feat of insight by identifying 10 reasons why Twitter will eventually wither and die, and interestingly none of them are to do with the invasion of the likes of Oprah (an anagram of Harpo) and Ashton Kutcher (supply your own anagram) - although he does make reference to false celebrities. In amongst all the hyperbole about Twitter, it is refreshing to hear a counterpoint, even if it may read uncomfortably for some.

Although I enjoy using Twitter, and have tried out some nice little ideas about how to harness its potential in my own classrooms (see for example my earlier post entitled Teaching with Twitter), it may just, I fear, begin to go the way of some other social software tools. Yesterday I closed down my Bebo account, having failed to use it for more than 86 weeks. I currently use my Facebook account about once every 2 weeks and came perilously close yesterday to closing that down too, in a judicious spate of spring cleaning. As the late, great George Harrison once said: 'All things must pass'.

Image source

Breaking eggs

One of my recent book chapters starts with the statement 'You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.' It's my opening gambit in a chapter called 'Destructive Creativity on the Social Web' in which I discuss the volatile and contentious nature of wiki content generation. I argue that wiki content generation is both creative and destructive, and you need both to ensure quality. My chapter appears in an edited volume by Stylianos Hatzipanagos and Steven Warburton on Social Software and Developing Community Ontologies. The book is a weighty tome of almost 600 pages, and contains 32 chapters by some of the leading thinkers of educational Web 2.0: Terry Anderson, Grainne Conole, Jon Dron, Marc Eisenstadt, Mark Lee, Andrew Ravenscroft, Martin Weller, Scott Wilson, the list goes on to more than 80 contributors. The list of reviewers is also a 'Who's Who' of the e-learning luminati. Stylianos and Steve really are to be congratulated for putting together such an impressive line-up of chapters, reviewers and editors.

The book covers a lot of ground including the use of blogs and wikis in education, social structures, knowledge media, information literacies, ambient pedagogies, social presence and interactivity. It is a solid reference manual for best practice of social software tools in teaching and learning. There are some good reads within it, but you probably wouldn't want to purchase a copy at £183.95. As is the case with all IGI Reference books it is very overpriced. Now I know you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, but if the price doesn't put you off in this credit crunch economy, you may be unimpressed by the bland and somewhat dour jacket. I received my copy free as a thankyou for sitting on the Editorial Advisory Board, so I am priviledged to get full access. I note with interest that within a few short days of the book being released, it was already available in part on Google Books, so you can at least sample some of the contents. Here's the abstract for my chapter, which discusses wiki cultures and Darwikianism (the survival of the fittest - or most accurate - wiki pages):

The use of group oriented software, or groupware, encourages students to generate their own content and can foster supportive and dynamic communties of learning. One form of open architecture groupware known as the Wiki is freely available online in several versions, and enables tutors to quickly set up online spaces which can be edited by students, at any time and from any location. Online social spaces of this nature can be used to encourage creative writing and to engage students in critical discourse through focused discussion, but Wikis also have disruptive potential and can cause dissent and disharmony within the group. This chapter aims to highlight some uses of the wiki as a social writing tool, reporting on student perceptions of the limitations and benefits. The chapter also focuses on the tension between creative and destructive uses of wikis in mainstream higher education. The use of interview data gathered from a study conducted with a group of student teachers in 2007 is included to support the key messages of this chapter.

Image source

Reflections on a great event

For me, it's time to start reflecting on this year's Plymouth e-Learning Conference. I'm incredibly tired and slept like a brick last night, but I awakened very satisfied at the level of success we achieved with this year's conference. With 218 delegates registered from 17 different countries, I think it is safe to say that PeLC has staked its claim on the international e-learning conference map. When I have trawled around a little over the next few days, I will compile a showcase of all those pictures, blogs and other web artefacts related to the conference.

The conference theme worked well I think. Crossing Boundaries certainly lived up to its promise, and clearly resonated with most of those present at the event. The choice of keynote speakers was also spot on. Mike Blamires set the scene perfectly with his Day 1 presentation on educational boundaries entitled 'Children grow to fill the spaces we create for them' and managed to engage all of his audience through interactive workshop style activities and rich feedback. Here is the link to the video of Mike Blamires keynote speech with a welcome from Michael Totterdell, Pro-vice Chancellor of the University of Plymouth.

Graham Attwell spoke on Day 2 in his normal controversial and anarchic style and challenged the audience to re-evaluate what they considered to be best practice in education. Here is the video of his keynote speech, complete with questions from the audience. Both keynote speakers promoted much debate from those present during ensuing sessions, and also evoked a storm of tweets from inside and outside the venue. At one point on Firday morning #pelc09 trended on Twitter at No 3, and some reports say it even reached as high as No. 2 for a short while at least.

The catering was praised too - the Devon Cream tea went down well as usual and the local produce buffets were very good. Only the quality of the coffee was criticised and even then only in a good humoured way. But I take these criticisms seriously and I will see what I can do about that next year at PeLC 2010, I promise.

The venue was appreciated by just about everyone - the Roland Levinsky building is a masterpiece of engineering and design, and with its contemporary art gallery attached and open to all, provided some welcome distractions just when they were needed. Technically there were some issues, but as with all conferences of a technical nature we became something of a hostage to fortune, and I know things will be better next year.

The quality of the 80 papers and workshops was high - everyone I spoke to remarked that the presentations were engaging, rooted in sound theory and offering excellent case studies and research data in support. State of the art demonstrations such as the 3D Visual Immersion Cinema were very well received prompting some delegates to discuss their experiences for hours afterwards. The crowning glory for some, experience wise at least, was the choice of the National Marine Aquarium as our conference dinner venue. A splendid spectacle it was, with stunning views of the huge aquarium tanks containing sharks, sea turtles and other aquatic life, and the food and service were most excellent too.

As conference chair I would like to thank all those who took part, either as presenters or simply attendees at the conference. I would also like to thank my admin, technical and reception support teams, and the student ambassadors who played such a key role in the success of PeLC09. The review panel who did a tremendous job sorting through and selecting the best papers from all those that were submitted deserve a vote of thanks, as do the organising committee who worked hard to ensure the event was successful. A special big up for our designer Mark Lyndon whose stunning images graced our publicity materials and website - thanks Mark. Lastly, a special mention for my co-chair Mark Townsend, who will be leaving us this year and for whom this will be his last conference. We will all miss you greatly Mark, and we wish you every success in the next chapter of your career. Here's to PeLC 2010 - Learning without Limits! See you in Plymouth on April 8-9, 2010.

My PeLC picture collection

James Clay's PeLC picture collection

Peter Micheuz's PeLC picture collection

Three chord wonder

Thanks to an invitation from Thomas Bernhardt over at Educamp in Bremen, I actually managed to present my Edupunk talk earlier today. Using Skype, I presented a 20 minute talk which covered the history and philosophy of Edupunk, it's analogies to the Punk Rock culture of the 1970s, and a few comments on corporate profiteering, the state of institutional VLEs and the 'Do It Yourself' approach to teaching and learning.

There were some very incisive questions from those present in Germany, and some equally delving questions and comments from others listening and viewing from elsewhere in the world across the live streaming media links. One interesting comment was that Edupunk seems to be all about taking part rather than excellence. I agree - all you needed to be a punk rocker was attitude, and if necessary, the ability to play three chords on a guitar. Edupunk encourages learners to take part - and contribute something, even if it is wrong. I pointed out that at one point, 30 years ago, I only knew 3 chords myself. Now I know several more, and play in a more sophisticated manner than I did when I was in my teens and early twenties. The same applies to learners. They learn to participate, and eventually can become quite proficient in learning within collaborative environments. They just need to be given the opportunities to gain confidence and make mistakes without being penalised. Traditional education doesn't offer enough of these opportunities.

Another comment opened up a discussion on creativity and destructiveness and the notion of 'anarchy'. Here is a recent article we published on the destructive creativity of Web 2.0. My take on this is that Edupunk is not a destructive kind of anarchy. That kind is where 'smashing the system' is replaced by nothing better. No, Edupunk promises to do for education what Punk did for music. Punk gave the British music industry a much need shot in the arm and saved it from stagnation. I also said that sometimes you need to be destructive in order to be creative. Writing contributions to a wiki takes on this form. When you have posted a wiki contribution, it is no longer your own, but becomes the property of the user group - and they are then at liberty to do what they want with it. Edit it, add to it, or even delete it completely.

I very much enjoyed participating in Educamp. Skype worked well, and those participating were as equally passionate about learning as me. Thanks Thomas for the invitation!

Image source

Opening the gates

One of my recent publications is entitled: 'E's of Access: e-Learning and Widening Participation in Education. It turns up in an edited volume on Participation and Inclusion in Education, and I was asked by the editors to write a reflective author piece at the end. I would like to share it with you:

I have been priviledged to be an eye-witness to the rapid evolution of new learning technologies over the past thiry years, and have watched as we have been ushered into the Information Age. Throughout my career I have taken on the role of change agent - it has been my job to introduce emerging digital technologies into the classroom and to train teachers to get the best out of them. It now appears that just about everything found within the classroom can be delivered or managed through digital technology. However, this has come at a price.

I was there when the first personal computers were introduced into schools, and heard some teachers express their fears about being 'replaced'. To assuage their fears I remember quoting the celebrated science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke, who declared 'Any teacher who can be replaced by a computer ... should be.' It hit home, and the teachers realized that computers were there to support them, not supplant them. I believe also that this was the first time I myself began clearly to appreciate that learning technologies (what we also refer to as information and communication technologies or ICTs) were merly tools to enable and facilitate learning. They are very sophisticated and powerful tools, but still tools nevertheless. I was also there when the World Wide Web was birthed, and watched as it quickly became the 'killer application' that would replace many other well-established learning resources. Now I am witnessing the deep and far-reaching impact of mobile and wireless technologies, social networking services and classroom-based technologies such as the interactive whiteboard. As I observe, I notice that professional practice, teacher roles and student experiences are all being transformed.

These changes are all-pervasive and, to many teachers, just as disconcerting as the time the first computers were introduced into the classroom. When I first entered the world of learning technologies, I knew very little, and my learning curve was steep. I felt like an outsider looking in, and worked hard to 'learn my trade'. Thirty years on, the learning curve is still rising, and I find that I have to run hard in order to keep up with the pace of the change. I am expected to, because I am an ICT specialist, an insider. This leads to a number of problems, one of which is my need to continually update myself on 'what is new'. Because I am now 'inside' I often risk losing sight of the 'big picture' as I focus on new technologies. I constantly have to remind myself that ICTs are still only tools and that the 'learning' comes before 'technology' for a very good reason. They are tools that have inherent advantages and disadvantages, and they still have the power to exclude or include. They are tools that evoke a number of emotional responses from students and staff alike, some positive and some less so.

ICTs are tools for learning and for teaching, tools that enable better communication, quicker access to resources and, ultimately, tools that have the potential to include everyone in the wonderful experience of learning something new. Although I am now an insider, I know that there are many who feel themselves to be outsiders. Whatever the 'e' stands for in e-learning, it certainly stands for 'eclectic' for there have never been so many methods of delivery available to the teacher as there are today. If there is a strap line to my chapter, it is this: as well as the power to widen participation, e-learning has the potential to marginalize some students and teachers, and it is the wise practitioner who realizes this and manages to use technology appropriately.

Wheeler, S. (2009) 'E's of Access: e-Learning and widening participation in education. In S. Gibson and J. Haynes (Eds.) Perspectives on Participation and Inclusion: Engaging Education. London: Continuum. pp 134-146.

Image source

e-Learning 3.0

I'm excited by the future. It's something I have always looked forward to! But what will e-learning look like in a few years time? When Stephen Downes laid down his manifesto for e-Learning 2.0 in 2005, he tapped into the zeitgeist of emerging social technologies and theorised a number of possibilities. Four years on technology is moving ever more rapidly, and a reappraisal of learning within digital spaces is overdue.


In conversation earlier today on Twitter with Sue Waters and Darcy Moore, we discussed what learning would look like in a Web 3.0 world, and how it might differ from current learning. This led me to revisit some thinking I have been doing recently about what for the sake of convenience I will call 'e-Learning 3.0'. I will try to encapsulate some of these thoughts here, attempt some (hopefully not too dangerous) predictions, and hopefully promote some discussion. I believe that e-Learning 3.0 will have at least four key drivers:

1. Distributed computing


2. Extended smart mobile technology


3. Collaborative intelligent filtering


4. 3D visualisation and interaction
   

Firstly, in a Web 3.0 world we will not only tap into the semantic web with all it promises, but e-Learning 3.0 will transgress the boundaries of traditional institutions, and there will be an increase in self-organised learning. Why? Because we will gain easier access to the tools and services that enable us to personalise our learning, and these will be aggregated more easily too. Additionally, with new cloud computing and increased reliability of data storage and retrieval, the mashup is a viable replacement for the portal which will lead to less reliance on centralised provision. This in turn may hasten the death of the ailing institutional VLE.

Secondly, many commentators such as Derek Baird believe that Learning 3.0 is all about mobile technologies. Mobiles will play a big part in the story of e-Learning 3.0. There will need to be ubiquitous access to tools, services and learning resources, including people - peer learning group, subject specialists and expert support. With smart phone devices and better connectivity through constantly improving line-of-sight (satellite and wireless) networking services, there is little to stop learners everywhere from accessing what they need on the move, from virtually anywhere on the planet. Digital divides of the future will not focus on 'have and have not' socio-economic divides, but will more likely be 'will and will not' psychological divides, and 'can and cannot' skills divides.

Thirdly, truly collaborative learning will be possible in all contexts. Through predictive filtering and massively multi-user participative features, e-Learning 3.0 will make collaborating across distance much easier. With the best will in the world, very little collaborative learning occurs through the use of wikis and blogs, whilst social networks generally connect people but often superficially, and can also isolate. In a recent post entitled Is Twitter the semantic web?, I speculated on Twitter's functionality and suggested that through its primitive filtering tools such as RT, DM, @ and #tagging, we are witnessing some of the early semantic features that enable users to work smarter and more collaboratively. Intelligent agents will take this a lot farther.

Finally, 3D visualisation will become more readily available. Quicker processing speeds and higher screen resolutions will provide opportunities for smoother avatar-driven 3D interaction. Multi-gesture devices which will operate in 3D space will also become more widely available, reminiscent of the opening scenes of the science fiction film Minority Report. Touch surface interfaces are already here (I have one on my laptop) and multi-touch versions too (my iPhone has one) which will ultimately signal the demise of the mouse and keyboard. See David Beers blog for more on these ideas. 3D multi-touch interfaces will make a whole range of tasks easier including file management, fine motor-skill interaction, exploration of virtual spaces and manipulation of virtual objects.

If Web 1.0 was the 'Write Web' and Web 2.0 is the 'Read/Write Web', then Web 3.0 will be the 'Read/Write/Collaborate Web'. But it will not only promote learning that is more richly collaborative, it will also enable learners to come closer to 'anytime anyplace' learning and will provide intelligent solutions to web searching, document management and organisation of content.

These are my thoughts on what I think e-Learning 3.0 will look like. Some may think I am barking up the wrong tree, and others may think I'm simply barking. Inevitably some will disagree with some of what I think, whilst others may point out some glaring omissions. Fine - this is just my first stab at this. Let's discuss and see what we can come up with to extend and/or perfect this wish list - collaboratively.





Image source

The boy done good

One of my third year students, Dan Kennedy, has had his first article published in a new journal. The Plymouth Student Educator, a peer-reviewed online journal has been created to showcase the best of University of Plymouth students' work. Students need to score more than 70 for their assignments to be even considered for review, and then their work must go through just as vigorous a process of scrutiny as they would if they submitted their work to any other academic journal. Dan's article is entitled: 'Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs): here to stay, or on the brink of demise?' It is a provocative take on the current state of play of the VLE, and he comes to some interesting conclusions. Here's the abstract:

Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) are popular with many educational institutions, ranging from primary schools to universities. This paper is meant as an introduction to VLEs and the pedagogical issues surrounding them. It explores what they are, as well as the benefits and potential problems arising from their use. Recent literature and personal blogs are used to understand how the VLE as a concept is understood. The role of the VLE appears to be changing. Most students’ proficiency in using the internet productively has increased dramatically; Web 2.0 tools have provided further ways in which to engage and communicate with students. Indeed, these tools are being bolted on to VLEs in an attempt to exploit this, with limited success. Some are promoting Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) instead – a personal construct taking advantage of a range of tools to benefit ones own learning. Educators and institutions that are either using, or considering implementing a VLE in their teaching will find this paper especially useful.

Reference: Kennedy, D. (2009) Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs): here to stay, or on the brink of demise? The Plymouth Student Educator 1, (1), 53-61

I'm very pleased for Dan. The boy done good.

Image source

... for tomorrow we DIY

My recent post on Edupunk 'Can Anybody Hear Me?' and my interpretation of it has provoked some debate I see. Recently, Frances Bell wrote a blog post entitled 'Learning to Love the Term Edupunk' where she raised concerns over the term and highlighted some issues over its use.

Frances posted a comment on my blog today, and I will take the opportunity here to respond to the two questions she posed:

Question 1: We have the advantage with Edupunk of being able to look at what happened to Punk - anyone done this comparison?

My answer: A retrospective would be a great idea. What happened to Punk was that firstly it energised a stagnating music industry when it was desperately needed. Punk rockers took a DIY approach by releasing their own recordings and printing their own fanzines, bypassing the established industry. Punk rock brought an edgy, controversial and ultimately innovative form of content and drive. It was anti-establishment, sure. But it brought its own structure. Eventually Punk music distilled into New Wave, and opened the door for other music genres including Ska, Heavy Reggae, and New Romantics to achieve popular status. Punk's influences can still be felt even today in the arts, and music has never quite been the same since - so it has accomplished its purpose. I propose that the same analogy will apply to the DIY Edupunk philosophy. It will, and in some cases, already is, transforming some aspects of education and challenging established practices. Open source, I would suggest, was an early example at what we now know as Edupunk - Linux and Moodle have made the corporate giants sit up and take notice. Edupunk will distill too, into less rampant forms of education, but it will do its job by challenging the established practices and subverting some of the corporate profiteering that is currently rife. Music and education - two inalienable human rights, I think.

Question 2: You say edupunk ... "brings the punk band (the teacher) closer to the audience (learner group)". If the learners are the audience, we're back where we started. Edupunk is where learners live edupunk too.

My answer: I can see why some people may have problems with the analogy of 'audience' and 'band'. We are not back where we started, and we need to acknowledge that there are distinct roles teachers and learners play. What I was really trying to get at as someone who actually played in a 'Punk' style rock band in the early 80s was that we, like many other 'new wave' rock bands broke tradition and invited the audience to join us on the stage, and in some cases, we didn't use a stage at all. We wanted to narrow the distance. We even went down into the audience to join them during our performances - remember 'body slamming'? 'Fans' contributed to our fanzine, and there was no 'them and us' syndrome, which was prevalent with much of the mainstream music industry of the period. We mashed up the roles we took, and this is patently something that is also happening when an Edupunk approach to learning is applied - with learners taking control of their own learning, creating shared spaces, forming their own groups, communities and networks to teach themselves. Although this is not exclusively Edupunk, the ethos plays a key role in its success. This approach is reminiscent of Illich's Deschooling thesis, where he called for the removal of 'funnels' which promoted transmission approaches to education in favour of 'webs' which enabled rhizomatic approaches to learning which were eminently more person-centred.

So some people have a problem with Edupunk as a term. It represents bricolage, anarchy and subversion and a challenge to the establishment. We have Jim Groom to thank for the term, I guess, but at the moment I can't think of another term that fits better or conjures up more appropriate analogies. What do you think?

Image source

Blogging is good for you

Hot on the heels of last month's furore over health issues and social networking, comes a study suggesting that those who blog enjoy better social relationships. The consternation you may recall was due to unfounded statements by respected psychologists Susan Greenfield and Aric Sigman about how the use of Facebook and other social web tools could cause psychological problems including ADHD and autism in young people. The pro-blog findings come in a psychological study conducted by the delightfully named Ko and Kuo. British Psychological Society journal The Psychologist takes up the story:

Ko and Kuo surveyed 692 university students who blogged and found that those who used their blogs more to share information about their feelings, emotions and experiences also tended to report a greater sense of social belonging and superior well-being. The study is limited by its cross-sectional design, but Ko and Kuo further noted that the audiences for the students' blogs were largely made up of their real-life friends and class-mates. 'Blogging does not diminish substantial relationships in real life but, on the contrary, helps to enhance bloggers' existing relationships through social bonding' they said.

In another slap in the face for Susan Greenfield, a Which report led by neuroscientist Chris Baird suggests that the brain-training games she endorses are supported by only very weak evidence over their effectiveness. 'People who buy brain-trainers to keep their minds in shape may be just as well off leading active social lives or surfing the internet.' Which Magazine says on its website.

See, it isn't that hard to do a little research to establish the strength of a claim. Maybe certain other psychologists will do the same in future before they start making their wild claims. There, now I've got that off my chest, I feel strangely better.

Article Source: The Psychologist, 22 (4), 293.

Image Source

Can anybody hear me?

To say I'm disappointed is an understatement. I was due to speak at the roundtable event tonight for Educamp, alongside Martin Ebner, and as those of you who were listening discovered, the technology failed me at exactly the right moment. What can you do? I came in two hours early, tested out the system. The institutional network locked me out. I called my tech guys, who did a stirling job trying to find out what the problem was. No access to Elluminate. Proxy error or firewall problem. They couldn't resolve it. Eventually, bless 'em, they logged me into a specialised system - known as the access grid - which was open with no networking restrictions. It worked. Hooray! I was able to upload my slides, and even tested out the radio microphone I was given. The sound quality was good. All set to go. I walked back up the stairs to my desk for a quick cup of tea before the session started.

Back down in the access grid, I waited for my cue to speak.... the microphone was dead. Like an idiot, I frantically tried to get the sound working. The tech guys had gone home. I was on my own. More than 3 dozen people were waiting to hear me speak and I couldn't make myself heard. Could I try sign language? Useless. Maybe semaphore? Waste of time. Chat messaging on Elluminate was working OK, but not the best medium for presenting a live talk. Morse code would have worked if I knew how to read/write it (and if the audience knew it too). Other forms of language came to mind during the technology failure, none of which are actually printable here. Could I try ESP? How about crab language? Grand Opera? I tried rebooting the computer. Big mistake ... I lost Elluminate completely (again).

Oh the irony! I'm suspicious that the institutional gremlins conspired against me, because my topic was none other than ... Edupunk! Here's my slideshow 'How Edupunk can save the World.' And here are the points I wanted to make:

1) Edupunk is a philosophy deeply rooted in the belief that educators can 'do it themselves', and use tools that are open, 'free' and non-proprietary. It's a movement against the commoditization of learning and against corporate profiteering. It is not just about selecting open tools and technologies. It is also about the freedom to choose the methods of teaching that are open and student centred. I would even go as far as to claim that Edupunk teachers should be challenging the curricula they are required to teach, and especially the assessment methods that are imposed from on high. These are the structures that constrain education and stop learners from achieving their full potential.

2) Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and in particular Learning Management Systems (LMSs) contribute toward restrictive practices in education and constrain both learner and teacher to operate within a model of learning that is insitutionally beneficial, but does little for the learner themselves. VLEs are generally difficult to use, with far too much effort needed to be put into understanding how the system works, to the detriment of the time and effort spent actually learning.

3) An exemplification of Edupunk philosophy is the rise of the personal learning environment (PLE) in which the learner selects his/her own tools and technologies to apply in formal and informal learning. Typical PLEs will incorporate a social networking service, reflective and collaborative tools, e-mail and a mobile device. I use a mashup of wiki (shell to aggregate all tools and provide a collaborative space), blogs (reflective tool and mind amplification space) and Twitter (microblog to update and inform and also to receive ideas and contact from others with a similar interest to me). I also use my wireless laptop and iPhone as communication/end tools.

4) Edupunk is more than 'do it yourself'. It is also a counterculture against corporate control and exploitation of learning, and brings the punk band (the teacher) closer to the audience (learner group). It is unashamedly anarchic and harks back to the concept of 'deschooling society' first proposed by Ivan Illich in the 1970s. Illich famously argued that we don't need funnels (directional learning through institutional control) but webs (multi-directional, hyperlinked learning that can be tailored by the individual to her/his own needs). Rhizomatic approaches to learning fall into this kind of philosophy.

There. That is what I would have said if the technology had allowed me. I got it off my chest. It's a shame that my rant on Edupunk has to end up here as a two-dimensional diatribe, rather than as a round table discussion with a live audience. On this occasion the technology amplified the distance, but hopefully this blog post will narrow the distance again, and that readers will contribute to a semblance of debate through the comments box below. Over to you...

Image Source

Invasion of the privacy snatchers

There is a lot of press coverage at the moment about invasion of privacy, and much discussion on how it can be protected (privacy, not the invasion of it). We have been told about how Facebook and other social networking tools 'own and use' our personal data. Several news items in the last 24 hours have dealt with reactions to the use of technology to snoop on, record or track ordinary people. First there are the very naughty boys at Google who have upset the normally placid residents of a sleepy English village.

Those living in the quiet village of Broughton were alerted to the presence of the Street View Google car as it trundled into their outskirts with its robot 360 degree camera atop. They stopped the car, challenged the driver, gave him a lecture about their privacy, and politely persuaded him to leave the same way he had come. The press and media of course, got hold of the story - and with their characteristic understatedness have dubbed the incident the 'Battle of Broughton'. Now the village of Broughton and its residents have been invaded by dozens more cameras, lighting rigs, satellite vans, intrepid reporters and film crews, all intent on protecting the privacy of the villagers, by broadcasting their faces and identities to the world.

In another news item reported on the same day, Members of the European Parliament (that hotbed of democracy and decency), have called for organisations that track web use, to themselves be tracked and surveilled. The expression 'who watches the watchers?' begins to take on an entirely new complexion. The news item says that the Euro MPs have called for organisations who transgress to be blacklisted.

These reports 'would name and shame organisations carrying out illegal or disproportionate amounts of surveillance' says the news item. Does that perchance also include the UK government then? After all, the British people are the most observed and surveilled people on the planet. There are per capita more closed circuit TV cameras on the streets of Britain than there are in any other nation. For it's encore, the UK government is considering putting trackers into cars to check how many miles each of us do every month. And they are putting sensors inside wheelie-bins to see how much rubbish we throw away every week. Next they will no doubt want to measure how much toilet paper in inches each of us use. Eeew.

The invasion of the privacy snatchers has started. But it's not those naughty boys from Google we should be worrying about. It's the government that gets in no matter who you vote for...

Image Source (inspired by @MarkPower)

Turning the screws on Twitter

Twitter has taken on a life of its own, in more ways than one. In January I wrote an innocuous looking post called Teaching with Twitter. It lay dormant for a few weeks before going viral. There were intermittent surges of interest, when a few other blogs and websites commented on it. Then the BBC News Website picked it up last week during the breaking news about the proposed new Primary curriculum here in the UK. They picked up the same link again this morning - this time because MPs are talking about 'a simpler curriculum' which features greater use of social media - and now my blog traffic is going through the roof. Whilst it is gratifying to see that people are taking a keen interest in the idea of microblogging, social networks and general use of the Web for teaching and learning, I can't help but feel a little uneasy.

Several posts I saw yesterday deserve another airing here to illustrate the point I wish to make. Neil Witt, one of my colleagues here at the University of Plymouth warned yesterday in his blog that Twitter is in danger of being overhyped. Neil argues that tools such as Twitter do not replace good teaching, but should be used to enhance it: "Surely it’s about giving students the skills to make judgements on information, to realise what they can trust and to make best use of resources". Another useful post which added to the debate comes courtesy of Sarah Horrigan who writes about what she terms 'Twetiquette'. She lists 7 key 'rules' she would like to see adopted for better practice Twitter use. Sarah complains about the potential misuse of Twitter. Two of her pet hates are people protecting their profiles so you can't see who is following you, and being followed by a service or company when it has not been requested. She makes some interesting points, but Sarah - the genie is now out of the bottle - and you have just coined a new term whether you like it or not!

Finally, a post from TechCrunch caught my eye yesterday. In a post entitled 'Is Twitter becoming the new Myspace?' the author lists some similarities between uses of the two services:

• There is a competition for followers similar to collecting “friends” on MySpace


• Anonymity is normal on both Twitter and Myspace, unlike Facebook


• Fake profiles are proliferating


• Real celebrity profiles are also proliferating, but they are often maintained by someone else for marketing, leading to spam


• Finally, the one most evident visually—services like Twitback, Twitterbacks and Twitterimage help you customize your profiles. You can compare Britney Spear’s profiles on Twitter, MySpace and Facebook respectively

Any teacher worth their salt will see some of the potential difficulties Twitter is running into, and the implications for child protection are clear. Twitter for example will block anyone under 13 (although this doesn't stop most young users from faking their Date of Birth). Teachers and parents are rightly concerned about how children use the Internet to gain access to content and people. Leaving aside the privacy and safety issues for one moment, if used appropriately in the classroom, I think tools like Twitter can provide a great deal of added value. Here are just three things I see Twitter bringing to the classroom:

1) Episodic Backchannelling: During any event, whether it is a lesson, a school concert or a sports day, children of all ages can create and send 140 character tweets on what is happening right there and then, their opinions on it, and its implications. Doing so will not only engage them more deeply in the event, but may cause them to think more critically about what they are witnessing.

2) Critical Writing: Because Twitter only allows 140 characters, children will need to think very carefully about what they will tweet. They will need to be concise, and possibly creative in the way they compose and present their tweet.

3) Social Filtering: Twitter can be used in a closed manner, with protection of updates and blocking of users. This can provide a secure bubble of activity where children are protected from being followed by outsiders, and where the teacher can maintain a reasonable level of control over discussions. The use of #tags and DMs (Direct messages) can also provide a useful filtered environment for specific themes.

I'm currently engaged in research with some colleagues here investigating how we can use Twitter in higher education. I would of course, be very interested to hear from teachers in the primary and secondary sectors who would like to study the uses of Twitter in their own professional contexts. The jury is still out on Twitter. Want to be one of the members of the panel?

Image Source