Hi,
I think my earlier response to Charles (my apologies to you) was
rambling and inadequate in some respects. I tried to come up with
something clearer and more succinct to articulate different views of
distributed learning. Here are 4 variants that may be useful.
1. An understanding reached between 2 people that mediates what
follows - as per Vygotsky's ZPD
2. An understanding held by one person and shared out with others
(someone shares their belief with a group)
3. An understanding held amongst group members about individual
practices etc (such as the way that each doctor or lawyer might
operate according to a set of commonly held rules)
4. An understanding held amongst a group as to how to work as a group
The above are taken from another paper by Gavriel Solomon that
included a few more examples. I'll try and find it. Hopefully this
should be clear enough as to indicate multiple interpretations
possible. These can all be seen as forms of distributed learning. It
doesn't have to be a description of people scattered across the
internet/globe. It may be useful for thinking beyond e-learning to
shift the focus onto the nature of what is being attempted by
development activities - including blended learning. No particular
technology defines effectiveness or autonomy. That's surely a design
issue and a theoretical issue.
Best wishes
Nick
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Beaty, Liz <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 9 June 2012 09:37
Subject: RE: Blended is one thing - what about 'distributed'?[Scanned-Clean]
To: Nick Bowskill <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]"
<[log in to unmask]>
An interesting set of comments -
I think we are aiming to describe the way that new communications
technology and particularly the internet allows connections across
time and space that can influence course design and create different
communities of learners. We can do more to "blend" the co-presence
and asynchronous across multiple experiential areas and involve
different people and resources in support of learning. Even
institutional hegemony breaks down somewhat and the learner becomes
the focus of the learning with different student identities. However,
traditional patterns including qualifications, ownership of resources
and funding systems together with lack of imagination tend to
reinforce the status quo.
At UoC we are distributed across a number of campuses and sites some
of which are alongside other educational providers. We are also
heavily involved in workplace learning as many of our programmes offer
professionally based qualifications. In other areas we offer learning
in and from the environment (including outdoor and experiential
learning opportunities). Our programmes include the model of distance
learning plus intensive f2f workshops. None of this is unusual but
our natural and intentional "distribution" produces a required
flexibility in our operating model.
The point, I suppose, is that new technology supports new blends of
communication and presence offering potential for more flexible and
bespoke programme designs. The learner is mobile and learning can be
supported through many types of communication facilitated by
increasingly personalised technology.
Blended, distributed, networked, mobile - all may refer to programme
design but while the first two start from the institutional offering
the third and fourth tend to put the learner in the driving seat.
Best wishes
Liz
-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nick Bowskill
Sent: 08 June 2012 21:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Blended is one thing - what about 'distributed'?[Scanned-Clean]
Hi Charles,
Sorry to be a while getting back to you. Being half term family
matters took over. However, you do raise a rich and interesting point
about the notion of distributed learning. I should say at the start I
may not be the best person to ask.
I used the term 'distributed' as an attempt to get away from the focus
on e-learning as technology. Even so, there is much to say on this.
I'll try not to overdo it in this message. The issue could be
considered to focus on the relationship between individual and social
learning. In other words, how much is mediated in or developed by the
group? And how much is psychological and within the individual? These
are familiar questions but in this sense, I feel that the notion of
e-learning is not simply a matter of thinking about the whereabouts of
people and how to connect them.
Much must surely depend upon the nature/conception of the knowledge
and the purpose of the inquiry. As others have said much also depends
upon the theoretical frameworks we apply to such issues. In my view,
and reflecting upon comments by others on this list, social
constructivism and sociocultural lenses do not exhaust the theoretical
possibilities but they may be useful.
One freely available paper is by Gavriel Solomon and here is a link
below. It discusses on social learning in ways that might facilitate
further discussion here about these various terms. What do others
think about the paper and about the usefulness of distributed
learning, e-learning and social learning? It seemed to me that the
idea of 'blended learning' may be useful to indicate mixed
media/modes. I would regard that as an instrumentalist perspective.
Would it also be useful to discuss the way it organises relationships
between social and individual learning?
http://enlearn.pbworks.com/f/Salomon+%26+Perkins+(1998).pdf
Best wishes,
Nick
On 8 June 2012 13:47, Neame ,Charles <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks Nick, for your useful and interesting comments. Your reference to "distributed learning" got me wondering, in a Friday afternoon kind of way, what various understandings we may all have of the notion of "distribution"... I find myself currently in discussions about the "the distributed academy" and am not at all sure what that means...
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Charles
>
> Dr. Charles Neame
> The Glasgow School of Art
> 167 Renfrew Street
> Glasgow
> G3 6RQ
>
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Tel: 0141 353 4560
> Mob: 07968 076674
> www.gsa.ac.uk
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
> Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nick Bowskill
> Sent: 07 June 2012 19:09
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: What is "blended" in blended learning?[Scanned-Clean]
>
> Dear Phil,
> Thank you for those papers.They were useful and enjoyable. I accept
> that the term e-learning is problematic. I might also argue that the
> notion of classroom learning is no less awkward.
>
> I read through both papers with interest and had a sense a particular
> conception of e-learning as packaged/programmed materials within VLEs
> etc. In both papers there appeared to be a particular view of
> e-learning that seemed valid within its own parameters. Perhaps I
> might offer a broader view of the field that understands e-learning in
> different ways (with implications for the idea of blended learning).
>
> I would suggest anyone wishing to broaden that 'programmed' and
> 'screen-based' view of e-learning might look at work by Charles Crook
> on collaborative learning with computers in the classroom. I would
> also suggest the work of David McConnell on the same collaboration
> within the networked space. These are books that each pre-date both
> your papers and provide a very different way of thinking about the
> role of technology and learning. They discuss the idea of technology
> in both co-present interaction and in spaces in which learners are
> distributed. I highlight these papers to suggest some ways of framing
> the field differently.
>
> I also think you may be interested to explore the literature on the
> use of new classroom technologies. This literature further blurs the
> boundaries between between co-present and distributed learning where
> both are supported by technology. It calls into question conventional
> notions of 'the classroom.' Similarly, the advent of mobile and
> augmented reality technology render the early conceptions of
> 'programmed learning' as a very particular conceptualisation.
>
> In other words technology is as much inside as outside the classroom.
> This adds further complication to the general notion of 'blended
> learning.' It may be that like classroom learning, e-learning is
> always a term in need of clarification. Both begin as general. Both
> are problematic.
>
> It is my honour to be Programme Manager for the SEDA online workshop
> 'Developing the Developers' which should be running again in September
> time. Everyone is very welcome to participate in this as a way of
> exploring a wider notion of e-learning. Last time, for example, we had
> the pleasure of an online 'guest' tutor from a University in Egypt.
> She participated and hosted an interesting session on inter-cultural
> aspects of e-learning . Again, this is worth mentioning to indicate a
> much broader and richer notion of learning that involves technology.
>
> My point is that with the ubiquity of technology all terms need negotiation.
> I would also argue that we need to re-think 'staff development' within
> such an understanding.
>
>
> Regards,
> Nick
>
> --------------------------------------
> Nicholas Bowskill,
> Faculty of Education,
> University of Glasgow
>
> Shared Thinking - a Collectivist Pedagogy
>
> Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info
>
>
>
>
>
> On 7 June 2012 16:59, Phil Race <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Thanks, Isa and Anders.
>> I've never liked (nor used) the term 'blended learning'. I think it's
>> meant to mean 'joined up thinking' regarding putting together online
>> learning and face-to-face teaching.
>> Nor do I like the term e-learning any more. Most of it is just
>> i-learning (i.e. information online, not learning on line). Since
>> 'edentate' means 'without teeth', perhaps elearning means 'without learning'!.
>> Way back in 2005 in the 1st edition of my 'making learning happen' I
>> published a chapter 'putting the learning into e-learning'. I attach
>> a fuller version of this than the one there was room for in the book.
>> In my
>> 2010 edition, where wasn't room for an updated version of this chapter.
>> However, back in 2007, with Ruth Pickford in 'making teaching work'
>> we had another go, at 'making e-learning work'. I attach this too.
>> I still make the point that when e-learning has 'grown up' we won't
>> talk about it as anything 'different' from normal learning, and I
>> think we won't need 'blended' learning either.
>> all best wishes,
>> Phil
>> www.phil-race.co.uk
>>
>> On 7 June 2012 12:03, Isa Jahnke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear European researchers and academic workers,
>>>
>>> the term "blended learning" is a usually a mix of .... ? Sure,
>>> easy....or not? Actually, what does "mixed" mean, in what ways/how?
>>> Have you ever asked yourself if there is any "unblended" learning?
>>>
>>> For a research study we are looking for European perspectives on
>>> "blended learning". Is there anything like that? We also want to
>>> create a list with blended learning authors in order to make diverse approaches visible.
>>>
>>> 1. What is "blend" in "blended learning" for you? (e.g.,
>>> components, type of blend, or just your definition) (1)
>>> 2. Could you possibly recommend a favorite paper on "blended
>>> learning", or an author, conference or other favorite resource? (2)
>>> 3. Do you have any feeling or hypothesis about differences between
>>> European and North American research on "blended learning"? (3)
>>>
>>> We would we very happy if you could help us by answering the three
>>> questions, as a reply to this email, why not right away? :-) It
>>> would be great when you could reply not later than June/14, 2012. We
>>> will create a list of all answers and send it back to all people who replied.
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot,
>>> Isa Jahnke & Anders Norberg
>>>
>>> Email
>>> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Professor Dr. Isa Jahnke
>>> ICT, media and learning
>>> Umeå University
>>> Dep of Applied Educational Science
>>> Interactive Media and Learning (IML)
>>> SE-90187 Umeå
>>> Sweden
>>> Phone +46(0)90 / 786-9798
>>> Mobile +46(0)70 / 227 887 0
>>> email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Web: http://www.isa-jahnke.de
>>> http://www.facebook.com/isajahnke
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> __________________________________
>> Professor Phil Race
>> BSc PhD PGCE FCIPD SFHEA NTF
>> Visiting Professor: University of Plymouth, and University Campus,
>> Suffolk Emeritus Professor: Leeds Metropolitan University Adjunct
>> Professor: James Cook University, Northern Queensland Adjunct
>> Professsor: University of Central Queensland
>>
>> (home address is in Newcastle-upon-Tyne - please email me for this
>> if you need to send anything by post). Normally best contact me by
>> email - I'm rarely at my phone! Please note that I've now changed my
>> mobile phone number
>> - email me if you need the new one.
>>
>> Website: www.phil-race.co.uk
>> ______________________________________________
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------
> Nicholas Bowskill,
> Faculty of Education,
> University of Glasgow
>
> Shared Thinking - a Collectivist Pedagogy
>
> Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info
>
> The Glasgow School of Art is a charity registered in Scotland, charity number SC012490.
--
--------------------------------------
Nicholas Bowskill,
Faculty of Education,
University of Glasgow
Shared Thinking - a Collectivist Pedagogy
Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info
University of Cumbria is a Company Limited by Guarantee, Registered in
England & Wales No. 06033238. Registered Office: University of
Cumbria, Fusehill Street, Carlisle, CA1 2HH. Telephone 01228 616234.
Confidentiality: This email and its attachments are intended for the
above named only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in
error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show
them to anyone; please reply to this email and highlight the error.
Security Warning: Please note that this email has been created in the
knowledge that Internet email is not a 100% secure communications
medium. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of
security when emailing us.
Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this email and
attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with
good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually
virus free.
--
--------------------------------------
Nicholas Bowskill,
Faculty of Education,
University of Glasgow
Shared Thinking - a Collectivist Pedagogy
Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info
|