Posts Tagged ‘teaching’

Teaching as conversation

In my previous post, Defining Learning, I defined learning as a social process.  One of the interesting things about social processes is that it is made up of conversations.  We hear so much about ‘conversation’ now, but learning has always been this way, even though many of our learning systems seem to be centred around monologues where the teacher teaches and the learners learn, but do so quietly. But even when learners are seemingly passive, they are often engaged in processes similar to conversation, the so-called ‘self-talk’.  But I get ahead of myself.

Having defined learning, I start to unpack the ‘conjoined activities’ of teaching and learning because neither is done in a vacuum and although both can occur without the other.

Read more of Teaching as conversation

Related posts

Tags: , ,

On being more interesting

Over the last few days, I have been looking at sections of my PhD to help me understand some of the processes that are happening with attempts to censor/filter the Internet as proposed by the Australian Government.  One of the particular issues I have is not so much whether censorship is bad (I believe it is) or whether free speech trumps it (perhaps in a limited way), but what opportunities we forego in an attempt to protect children from ‘inadvertent’ exposure to ‘stuff we don’t like’. I use ‘we’, there, to mean society in general or at least the vocal portions of it. Read more of On being more interesting

Tags: , ,

Surfing at work isn’t automatically bad

For my course, Business Informatics, we have an assignment based on excel skills that attempts to develop, not only the ability to use a spreadsheet, but to understand some business processes.

For the last few semesters, we have used the idea of an online, affiliate marketing/advertising type of analysis, where students had to decide which items to remove from the listing based on observable patterns in a very small data set.  The idea is to test whether they can create a formula as well as whether they paid attention to any of the lecture material on new business models, etc.  Mostly they didn’t, but some always got it.  They had to do things like add GST, multiply number sold by price and subtract cost, sort according to income, really basic stuff.

This year, we’ve decided to be a bit more topical, because, let’s face it, selling online is old.  One of the things that comes up frequently is the use of social networking sites and how they ‘rob’ time from employers and other bizarre notions.  We want students to analyse time spent at different tasks (mostly online) and determine whether these sites should be blocked, because Management have ‘expressed concern’ about usage patterns.

This was partly suggested by a student from last semester who mentioned, in the lecture on social networking, that her company had decided to block FaceBook because in the last month, people had spent 500 hours on the site.  Of course, they panicked about that, leading them to block it.  We discussed the issue for a while and I eventually asked how many people worked at her place of employ.  Well, it was about 1000.  So, on average, each employe spent half an hour PER MONTH on FaceBook.  This is obviously (note the sarcasm) a Big Problem.  Or not.

So, to assist future managers when confronted by such big numbers with making a decision, we are going to get them to make a decision based on some not entirely real data[1].  The basic problem I’m having is coming up with sites that people who actually work would actually visit for their actual work.

This is the list so far.

www.facebook.com, www.youtube.com, www.techdirt.com, scholar.google.com, news.com.au, gmail.com, www.bom.gov.au, www.comsec.com.au, orkut.com, macheist.com, realestate.com.au, digg.com, yahoo.com.au, seek.com.au, twitter.com, bne.com.au, icanhascheezburger, boingboing.com, microsoft.com, apple.com.au, bank.com.au, abc.net.au, ning.com, squidoo.com, flickr.com, imdb.com, paypal.com.au, dominos.com.au, huffingtonpost.com, goldencasket.com, whitepages.com.au, blogger.com, thinkgeek.com, articulate.com, wordpress.com, yellow.com.au, picnik.com, itunes.com, iinet.net.au, lifehacker.com, tvguide.com.au, delicious.com, pcworld.idg.com.au, ted.com, instructables.com, virginmobile.com.au, ourbrisbane.com.au, learningrails.com, www.griffith.edu.au, www.cqu.edu.au, www.uq.edu.au, www.qut.edu.au,  www.ebay.com.au

But it doesn’t seem too real, because there has to be things that people not working in academia would possibly visit in the course of their work and, let’s face it, with the exception of a few, most of them are fairly academic or, a bit on the geeky side.

The second problem I have is to actually work out how such a data set would look, and it will probably be large.  The students will still have to do averages, some basic calculations, the pivot table and a couple of graphs.

I wouldn’t mind adding a second set of data about how much individuals achieve in a month and fudge that data to show that the people who actually achieve the most, also spent the most time on social networking, because that’s what we do!

So, any network enginers out there? Do you have any ideas how this kind of data set would look?

  1. but when have universities been concerned with *real data* – oops more sarcasm []

Tags: ,

Shifting teaching and learning

Now that it’s the end of one semester and there is a large break til the beginning of the next, I really want to think about what I want to achieve in teaching and learning over the next year.  I have so many ideas, some based on the work I do with Luke on wiki learning environments, some based on pod and vodcasting and some based on online testing environments.

There are a number of things I have to do to get the first year students more engaged in learning about new technologies.  I got the same kind of feedback I normally get from the last group, specifically, I don’t teach them facts that they can regurgitate so I must be a poor teacher.  Admittedly, my evals have improved even if I still don’t focus on facts.  Part of the reason for the improvements were not really my doing, but are the results of imput from another colleague into the structure of the assessment details.  The document we now have is a good pro forma for future years with everything laid out in a clear manner.  Thus students cannot and do not complain that they do not know what they have to do.

Limited attendance

But I still have fairly limited attendance at lectures.  The course is always given the biggest lecture theatre which doesn’t really make for a good learning environment and students expect to be lectured at and are often surprised when they are also entertained.  Which is probably where the perceived lack of facts originates.  All the facts are bound up in stories, so much so that the often don’t realise they are learning until the exam.  But, I know there will always be this small cohort of students who don’t want to be entertained, who equate learning with boredom.  So, I’ve been thinking of attempting to video a short lecturette around the ‘facts’ which students can download and watch but still do the longer entertaining lecture for the majority.  It has the added bonus that I don’t have to bore myself and those in the room with me.

Idea 1: short videos about the ‘topic’ of the week without all the entertaining and contextual information.  I will probably need to convince my HoD to give me a new, better computer.  Wish me luck with that one.

Competency development

I don’t care what anyone says – we do not have net saavy students in Australia.  We do not have tech saavy students in Australia.  We do have many students from different cultural backgrounds who have rarely, if ever, interacted in a constructivist/constructionist environment.  We need to develop competencies in both the technologies and the learning environment.  Herein lies some of the disengagement of local students and much of the confusion of international students.  We have two competencies in the course

  1. Technology/computer competencies
  2. Research competencies.

We have been using an external provider for the tech/comp competencies, but I’m not altogether happy with that.  They have take so long to fix some of the bugs that we found two years ago, while they were busy updating for Vista compatability, all the while ignoring any lip service to Mac compatability that I really don’t know that I want to continue subjecting students to it. The alternative would be to develop my own competency online test within the facilites we have.  This would align the tech/comp competencies with the research competencies that are provided in house.  I think initially I would need to provide a test case based on filtering out students who are competent with computers. If they pass this in house competency test (at 80 or 90%) then they do not have to fight with the external providers version. At the moment, all students have to do the competency and this does seem to annoy the few students who are saavy.  It would also allow us to focus our attention on the students who need more help.

Idea 2: Develop a pre-test for tech/comp competencies

I think I’ll leave the wiki reflection for another time.  I have to unpack the differences between the limited wiki and the full wiki and see where the engagement happens.

Tags: ,

Senator Conroy doesn’t want you to see …

this pair of nice boobies[1].

A pair of blue-footed boobies in the Galapgos Islands

A pair of blue-footed boobies in the Galapagos Islands by Eugene on Flickr

It seems the planned Australian Filter has hit mainstream news.  Not that I watch much of that, but it’s been bubbling around the intarwebs for a while.

I always think about the false positives that are going to happen.  The biggest area, in my mind, that will be affected is the birds.  No more nice boobies.  Admittedly, there are a few bird names that kids giggle over.

It reminds me of when I was much younger and we only had books.  We used to look words up in the dictionary.  You can be sure I would have been googling words, but we were fairly limited.  I mean, I remember looking up the word ‘fart‘ only to find it’s definition was sadly lacking and puritan: an explosion between the legs.  WTF?  I mean, there’s way more to it than that, but that was the only definition we had.

The other incident that springs to mind when I think about this is when I was working in a regional uni and introducing school kids to this new fangled internet. It would have been 1998/9.  I was watching a group of young girls looking up the Spice Girls.  Innocent enough, but the search also returned ‘spicy girls’ – not exactly what they were looking for.  After they clicked on one link and got something that was, to them, rather disappointing, the student teacher who was working directly with them totally freaked out.  I think she almost wanted to put herself between these innocent children and these images.  As I was standing behind the group at the time, I leaned over to the girls and said something like, oh bother, that’s not what you want, hit the back button.  The kids were very happy to comply because they didn’t want that, they had more sense than the student teacher!  It wasn’t a big deal to them.  They knew what they wanted!

It still peeves me that that woman will be transferring her puritan ideals to a whole new group of children.  Please think of the children, let them grow and explore.  Let them find the information they need to become well adjusted.  Don’t block their access to everything!

  1. I find it ironic that these boobies have no heads []

Tags: , ,

Theme by RoseCityGardens.com
Modified by Me!