Learning Objects and Web 2.0: Technologies in Search of Pedagogy
Download as PPT, PDF1 like796 views
The document discusses learning objects and Web 2.0 technologies from the perspective of an outsider to educational technology. It argues that learning objects and Web 2.0 are technologies in search of educational purpose that emerged without an initial educational goal. While these technologies could enable learner-centered education, formal education systems are primarily credential-driven and developing and sharing online content faces barriers. The document suggests a pragmatic approach is needed to harness technical benefits without requiring a full pedagogical transformation, and that educational change should be driven by identified needs rather than new technologies.
Learning Objects and Web 2.0: Technologies in Search of Pedagogy
- 1. Mark Bullen LALCO 2008 Aguascalientes, México
- 2. Introduction Not a learning objects expert Expertise in DE, e-learning Sophisticated user Perspectives of an outsider
- 3. Premise Learning objects emerged from the WWW Social software and Web 2.0 are also products of the Internet Neither began with an educational purpose Both are technologies in search of educational purpose
- 4. Premise Underlying ideology is learner-centered and, in many ways, anti-institutional Driven by a non-formal view of learning Opposed to the prevailing content, teacher and institution-centered notions of education
- 5. Premise Need to approach these technologies critically and skeptically
- 6. Learning Objects: Beyond Technology More than creating reusable digital learning resources About creating a truly learner-centered educational system More than a technological innovation: a pedagogical innovation
- 7. The Reality of Institutional Education An idealistic view of education Two problems: Formal education is credential-driven Depends on widespread development and sharing of objects
- 8. Our Educational System Primarily formal Driven by credentials Learners tend to be instrumental
- 9. Development and Sharing Who is developing learning objects? Who is sharing learning objects Who is using learning objects? Examples UBC: Master of Educational Technology UBC: German Reading course BCIT: Faculty collective agreement
- 10. Development & Sharing Open access Opening Up Education – Iiyoshi & Kumar The jury is still out on the sustainability of OEC (C. Mackie) Faculty lose revenue, career rewards Content requires refinement Copyright clearance No tangible benefit to creator or creator’s institution
- 11. Learning Objects: Beyond Technology A technology in search of educational purpose Pedagogical innovation ignores reality Significant barriers to a learning objects pedagogy
- 12. A Functionalist Approach to Learning Objects Technical benefits of sharing can be harnessed without subscribing to the new pedagogy Reusability can be applied on an institutional or program level Trades and vocational training In other words we can have the technical innovation without the pedagogical innovation Global sharing, OEC approach is unrealistic
- 13. Web 2.0: From Transmission to Participation From learning objects to Web 2.0 Similar story Learning objects about exploiting the distributive capability of the Internet Web 2.0 about exploiting the networking and collaborative capabilitie
- 14. Web 2.0: From Transmission to Participation User-generated content The power (or wisdom) of the crowd Data on an epic scale Architecture of participation Network effects Openness
- 15. Web 2.0: From Transmission to Participation Web 2.0 not educational Collaborative, social and networked nature attract educators Wikis, blogs, RSS, social networking sites allow for easy generation and sharing of content But too often technology is driving the pedagogy
- 16. Web 2.0: From Transmission to Participation Need to separate experimentation from sound instructional planning Web 2.0 favors collaboration but there are times when transmission is necessary Wisdom of the crowd is given equal status to wisdom of the wise
- 17. Web 2.0: From Transmission to Participation Disintermediation of information is seen as a victory for the individual
- 18. The Net Generation Myth Web 2.0 use in education driven by net generation hype Research-based evidence is lacking In fact research tends to show the opposite: that current generation is not technologically savvy
- 19. Conclusion Pedagogy before technology Educational change must be driven by need Need must be clearly identified Change should not be driven by the technology