Bronwyn Stuckey

A colleague researching podcasting in higher education in the USA came across a teacher who was supporting students to use podcasts as the rehearsal of their face-to-face tutorial presentations. They would podcast it it the week or so before and their peers would critique it and offer advice as to which content required visual input or support. Then they would confidently present the live presentation the following week built on the best of class/community advice. Now coming from a community of practice background  I really like this kind of stuff!!!

Gilly Salmon (Professor of eLearning at Leicester) introduced podcasts in her faculty. She didn't want to do the traditional download of a lecture. What she did was take a $40 piece of software and existing tools and ask faculty to make a 10 minute podcast.

The podcast involves 3 parts:

• up-to-date world news relevant to learning that week
• feedback and feedforward on learning and collaborative team work that week
• a fun part (e.g., joke or rap)

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-06/uol-htl060206.php

While the University of Leicester are podcasting lectures: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/5044374.stm

I think this other application is far more exciting and provides many benefits to the learner and a renewed connection the domain and practices of the real world for learners and teachers.

Hi Bronwyn Stuckey here in sunny Sydney Australia. Late introducing myself :-( but I have been reading along .  I work as a consultant these days and visiting scholar. I am involved in a number of online learning and research projects that use Web2.0 tools and in some areas podcasting. I am always keen to expand my ideas on using these tools in ways that truly benefit the learners and learning.

I was involved in a discussion today with an academic colleague and he questioned what level of cognition was involved in most aspects of popular gaming. I have played a few of these games (World of Warcraft, Narnia, Prince of Persia etc) and I have to agree that the low level, repetitive "rat killing" tasks many games involve are hardly about intellectual engagement. I know the games are engaging and that to some extent problem solving is happening (life is problem solving) but I do  have to say that the repetition of tasks (to gain points or status) was not mentally stimulating - for me it sometimes becomes like playing a poker machine (slot machine) where I am waiting to lose and glad to disengage.

I have to say that I work on the implementation of a 3-D multi-user game designed at Indiana University (Have used Active Worlds and Second Life) so I am not negative about games (being somewhat provocative here)  but I wonder if sometimes we confuse engagement with learning. Are students dedicated to gaming actually learning? OK games like Civilization and Roller Coater Tycoon - that approach being simulations - do have learning goals but is this true for all games?

Can we claim to be learning because we are engaged?

To me it is about light and shade - creating a variety of pace and commitment in our time together. The little game did several things for me:

• brought me back into the space
  I have played before and knew I could attend and have some presence - committing only a short time even with my hectic week
• Back here I scanned the other things - requiring more commitment of time on my part - but noted them with interest.
• The game held up the pace of conversation for a short time
  I think I saw the deep discussion pause for a while which gave me a way back in after a while away. I could catch up while you played.
• The relaxed nature of the game gave me an insight into personality and perspective of people (humour, sensibilitiy etc - with guard down).