Hi Peter,
Well it's early days but we've run this for staff and for students and they both seem enthused. Amongst the things we have done is to generate the pie-charts showing the participant-generated ideas and then taken them online for further dialogue.
For example, we did it with a group of support staff from different institutions at a conference workshop. They ran through their concerns as a support community and generated their pie-chart. That visual representation was then posted to their online discussion group so that those unable to attend the session were able to consider their own views and practices against those represented in the shared pie-chart.
Thinking about learning community development, we have also ran sessions for one group and then shown them the charts from another group elsewhere. That group might be a different year group of students or the same year group at a different institution. You can do all kinds of comparisons at the whole-group level and it makes for a very concrete approach to knowledge-building and discussions.
We also found the tutors had a whole new window on their class in terms of the issues that concerned them and the extent to which they were felt by the group. And of course we were able to chart the journey of the whole group over time. For example we are able to show changes in concerns over each year of a course for a given group.
The aim is to develop a networked database of these pie-charts to function as self-study and collaborative discussion resources. We have a small library of them at the moment but not enough to be anything substantial just yet.
Returning to your question there is a lot you can do with these products on and offline and we are only just uncovering them - pedagogically and methodologically. Does that answer your question?
Nicholas Bowskill
Posts made by Nicholas Bowskill
Hi Deirdre,
Those were the same kind of interests we had when we looked at clickers. The initial feeling was that this was a tool/technology for offering quizzes and that at best they could be accompanied by discussion before or after the MCQ.
We also noted in the literature that the tough part for the tutors was developing precise questions. They took time, effort and thought for the tutor so it seemed those qualities made them ideal tasks for learners.
Also the discussions lead somewhere. I think this is an important point. Students are not just feeding back so the tutor can confirm her/his point. Here they are contributing to the pool of options that are transformed into a pie-chart through the act of voting.
Suddenly we have a representation of the collective concerns or ideas of a whole class - qualitative and quantitative data that allows whole group group-situated research. It's certainly a move away from memorising information. Would you agree?
Nick
Those were the same kind of interests we had when we looked at clickers. The initial feeling was that this was a tool/technology for offering quizzes and that at best they could be accompanied by discussion before or after the MCQ.
We also noted in the literature that the tough part for the tutors was developing precise questions. They took time, effort and thought for the tutor so it seemed those qualities made them ideal tasks for learners.
Also the discussions lead somewhere. I think this is an important point. Students are not just feeding back so the tutor can confirm her/his point. Here they are contributing to the pool of options that are transformed into a pie-chart through the act of voting.
Suddenly we have a representation of the collective concerns or ideas of a whole class - qualitative and quantitative data that allows whole group group-situated research. It's certainly a move away from memorising information. Would you agree?
Nick
Hi Sylvia, Thanks for that and apologies for the other video. It's hosted at another institution so they may have shuffled things about on their server. Please use the new link Sylvia very kindly located.
cheers,
Nick
cheers,
Nick
Thanks Sylvia, and welcome to this seminar on Shared Thinking. I hope some of you have had a chance to look at the video overview of the research by way of initial orientation.
There are a number of themes and ideas that might be interesting to discuss here:
1. The use of voting technologies (clickers, audience response systems etc)
2. The idea of the class working as a whole group in an enquiry based model
3. The idea of collaborative reflection with a visual and representative end-point
4. The idea of diversity as the vehicle for learning (rather than seeking consensus).
5. The idea of student-generated questions as part of learning
Perhaps this could serve as an agenda or a menu from which to approach this new practice. We could also consider this collaborative approach to reflection alongside other approaches discussed recently such as portfolios etc. What would you prefer to consider here? Or what are your questions about this kind of approach?
There are a number of themes and ideas that might be interesting to discuss here:
1. The use of voting technologies (clickers, audience response systems etc)
2. The idea of the class working as a whole group in an enquiry based model
3. The idea of collaborative reflection with a visual and representative end-point
4. The idea of diversity as the vehicle for learning (rather than seeking consensus).
5. The idea of student-generated questions as part of learning
Perhaps this could serve as an agenda or a menu from which to approach this new practice. We could also consider this collaborative approach to reflection alongside other approaches discussed recently such as portfolios etc. What would you prefer to consider here? Or what are your questions about this kind of approach?
One other question: WHY portfolios? electronic or otherwise I haven't seen anything to convince me of the *need* for them in genuine learning terms. There are other ways of supporting or being reflective.
And what is understood here by the term 'reflection'? On what? By whom? For what purpose? For whose benefit? How often? With whom?
This looks remarkably like a corporate rather than a learning agenda if these things are not discussed critically.
So, are e-portfolios the global burger outlet of education - consistent, cost-effective, 'quality' in its own context, accessible anywhere, a good business, sometimes enjoyable - but ultimately rather less than healthy and less nourishing for those being served?
Nick Bowskill
Faculty of Education
University of Glasgow
And what is understood here by the term 'reflection'? On what? By whom? For what purpose? For whose benefit? How often? With whom?
This looks remarkably like a corporate rather than a learning agenda if these things are not discussed critically.
So, are e-portfolios the global burger outlet of education - consistent, cost-effective, 'quality' in its own context, accessible anywhere, a good business, sometimes enjoyable - but ultimately rather less than healthy and less nourishing for those being served?
Nick Bowskill
Faculty of Education
University of Glasgow