It's been interesting exploring the range of analytical tools and reading the key blog entries George shared lately. Like some I am learning about this movement and don't feel equipped to share insights or recap my understanding at this point. Being the analytical type, I hold back until I completely understand and have read all, which might take a few years! Smile. As a result, I am grateful for those who are sharing their thoughts and resources.
One thing that is concerning me about analysis of this magnitude is the validity and authenticity of the data. I am impressed with the volume of data the tools can manage but wonder about the compatibility, origin and validity of it.
I don't have the time to review the data presented so far but do plan to attend the LAK11 conference (I live in Calgary) where maybe I can explore this concern deeper.
Anyone else feel the same?
Gillian, thanks for your comments. I think we need to determine what learning is. Yes, an old question, but if we don't know what we are looking for we can't measure it. To me learning is not about the number of posts but what students do with it. I think we need to start with the end in mind - assessments - and rich assessments such as reflections, creations, arguments, etc. Going backwards, we can research the tools used by students to arrive at their understanding and work. If situated in the cloud and accessible, we can review the types of interactions, materials explored, and tools used.
It seems to me most people in here are saying the same thing. Student action in a LMS is only a part of their learning. With a diverse and wide spread networked world, we need to reconfigure how we capture and analyze data about student learning.