Activity 3.1 - personal & professional development objectives

What have I learned about my strengths and weaknesses?

Weaknesses?
On the whole I'm most vulnerable in a few key areas... researching new developments, issues and academic findings stands out as the most pressing one. When I think about it, I'm more of a "handson" learner .. and thus I tend to avoid it or at the very least only "do" it when something becomes topical enough that it requires learning more about it in formal ways. I'm not one to devote time to do it on a regular basis (and I'm now really curious how others address the same need for it) but the exercise of doing a detailed review of my job description made it pretty obvious that my current strategy won't be enough. I also realized the importance of promoting effective community building - something that I highly value and yet I haven't committed time and resources to learning more on how to effectively realize it in ages and certainly not much in the way of realizing it online.

It's now looking pretty obvious that in addressing these two shortcomings, my game as an Education Technology Specialist is raised .. and it should help feed the other "stronger cards in my hand".

Strengths?
I really wanted to avoid declaring myself an expert of anything. I'm not fond of the term because I don't consider it something that anyone should really be"annointing themselves with. Perhaps with the formal recognition of my peers on the same topic, I would feel more comfortable using the term.. but that hasn't happened anywhere often enough nor with much fanfare for me to do it. I've only learned since being hired how I have a reputation for making and using learning objects effectively. As a result, I managed to convince myself that perhaps I could be bold enough to apply the term "expert" for my effective use of technology / projects in teaching and learning. But only after carefully reviewing it and even still, I'm bound to be brown nosed by someone else out there. My grounds? A now 20 year period of relatively uninterrupted experience with and increased understandng of the use of technology in teaching and learning.

The matter of comparing myself with my peers brought up a number of other interesting problems and unearthed another set of issues. Our rather small department hardly gives me much of anyone to compare myself with and to go outside the University, I'd be hard pressed to know others of our ilke who I could meet to compare notes. Which raises the issue of professional "isolation" and the need to make a conscious effort to overcome this. Thus the only really viable option seems to be online communities. This theme is emerging more and more.

Activity 3.4 - choosing an ePortfolio system

Recall as part of the University's mission, that our student's expect to graduate as bilingual, it literate, global citizens and leaders. The eportfolio concept offers our undergraduates a number of opportunites to evidence their development in these core areas. As possible examples,

• language development via the collection of speaking and writing samples
• IT development via the production and assembly of evidence and in the design of the eportfolio to hold them
• global citizenship realized via the use of ICT tools to facilitate constructive dialogue with people from other cultures around the world
• leadership skill development via documentation of reflection on community based issues and their choice of actions

To support this we should expect to provide students with an eportfolio strategy that addresses the following four key points.

promoting reflection
Fundamental to any strategy's selection will be its ability to promote more than the collection of evidence but a reflection activity cycle (Richards) and host the lifelong and lifewide benefits that it brings (Moon, Richards). To realize this, students may need templates with guided focus questions that encourage them to inter relate concepts learned across their courses of study and to revist these themes throughout their undergrad studies.

flexibility vs structure
It should be flexibile enough to address changing student needs, levels of competency and choice. Undergraduates collecting evidence for the first time may require the highly structured environment as noted above(Stefani, 2005). Yet as students progress, they may wish to customize or even opt out of this structured environment to use the eportfolio strategy to meet other needs as they prepare to move on from their undergrad studies (Jafari).

Ease of Use
During their stay, students may differ widely in their interest in IT skills development. Note they may also need to communicate in both Arabic (L1) and English (L2) . Thus to support the portfolio strategy's development, it needs to facilitate the use of IT at these varying levels of interest and it must do so in two languages (Jafari) Thus the chosen eportfolio strategy needs to be easy enough to master and realizable in such a manner that it does not draw the student away from its prime purpose - to support documentation of evidence and to facilitate reflection.

collaboration
Per work by Vuorikari and Batson, the eportfolio strategy should facilitate interaction and sharing of knowledge with ones peers, advisors and instructors. To do so provides students with both immediate support and learning opportunites via the exchanges with peers. These have also been found to encourage the much sought after higher order learning, thinking and knowledge construction (Richards).

The current review of "off the shelf" eportfolio products leads me to conclude that few come close to addressing the mix of needs listed above. Many provide forms of structure but without much room for student customization at later stages of development (i.e. graduation). Little or no mention is also made of their ability to support the use of languages other than English.

In lieu of these shortcomings, I recommend investigating the use of the growing prevelance of web 2.0 tools such as blogs, wikis and aggregators. All such utilities are readily available and often for free. Some like blogs inherently support reflection, others like wikis support easy editing, high degrees of customization and personalization. Yet can be readily supported via the use of the same strategies noted above. Via the use of aggregators, mashups of these various tools and their contents are also possible (Batson, 2008) thus making them a much more attractive proposition.

Sources

Batson, Trent (2008) ‘ePortfolios: Hot Once Again’, Campus Technology, [online] Available from: http://campustechnology.com/articles/60933/ (Accessed 26 September 2008).

Jafari, Ali (2004) ‘The “Sticky” ePortfolio System: Tackling Challenges and Identifying Attribute’, Educause Review, [online] Available from: http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/TheStickyePortfolioSystem/40485?time=1222282897 (Accessed 24 September 2008).

Moon, Jenny (2001) ‘PDP working paper 4: reflection in higher education learning’, document, [online] Available from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/resources/resourcedatabase/id72_Reflection_in_Higher_Education_Learning.rtf (Accessed 2 October 2008).

Richards, Cameron (2005) ‘Activity-reflection e-portfolios: An approach to the problem of effectively integrating ICTs in teaching and learning’, Murdoch University - Teaching & Learning Forum 2005, [online] Available from: http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2005/refereed/richards.html (Accessed 5 October 2008).

Stefani, Lorraine (2005) ‘The Role of CPD in Teaching Quality Enhancement’, pdf, Auckland, New Zealand , [online] Available from: http://64.233.183.104/u/LearningTechnology?q=cache:YRY_ajTIbh0J:www.alt.ac.uk/docs/lorraine_stefani_paper.doc+Stefani&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&ie=UTF-8 (Accessed 30 September 2008).

Vuorikari , R. (2006) ‘‘National policies and case studies on the use of portfolios in teacher training' - European Schoolnet 2006’, [online] Available from: http://insight.eun.org/shared/data/insight/documents/e_portfolio_teacher_training_final_10_05.pdf (Accessed 28 September 2008).

Reflections on TMA 2

I spent a wack of time on Part 2 ... integrating my understanding of our work in Acitivity 5.2 with the concepts of good practice in elearning.. and applying reflection to unearth them. An excellent assignment in my view because of how it caused me to really reflect on the level and quality of my interaction in the assignment. Perhaps pinpointing strengths and weaknesses in my reponses (or non responses) at various stages within .. and challenging my near knee jerk reaction to cry "foul" for the absence of a more comprehensive framework to guide the activity.

Key observation?

It must be a real difficult balancing act for an elearning course designer to realize a properly scaffolded assignment. The balance is between not providing too much structure so as to avoid guiding learners in a prescriptive fashion.. and not providing enough structure so as to minimize student guess work as to the purpose of the project assigned.

What I did with the reflective component in TMA 1. I did with the essay component of TMA 2. I made the mistake of underestimating the demands of the question ... Great question .. but not enough time for me to "weave" the assortment of themes the activity asked us to review - values, good practice, pd issues, pd strategies, evidence selection, reflection, collaboration, assessment, support tools .... to then reflect upon their relevance in my own context (my choice of contexts to use) to realize a comprehensive and well organized enough answer.

Key observation?

Caused me to conclude the need to have a comprehensive professional development plan that is self directed, "do"able and supported by solid evidence.... and to execute it to support other possibilites. I am keen to realize some sort of post H808 learning community to realize some sort of online community that supports peer review / collaboration. I think I may even be a candidate for the CMALT accreditation some time down the road..

Lessons learned from the TMA this time? Start even earlier with the ECA. Perhaps getting both the reflective component and eportfolio component behind me so that I can concentrate on the final essay.

Activity 7.3 - Assessing PDP

Sources

Burgess, Hilary (n.d.) ‘Assessment: 2. Self and peer assessment’, The Higher Education Academy: Social Work and Social Policy (SWAP), [online] Available from: http://sorubank.ege.edu.tr/~bouo/DLUE/Chapter-08/Chapter-8-makaleler/Assessment%202_%20Self%20and%20peer%20assessment.htm (Accessed 4 December 2008).

Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto ‘Teaching and Learning by Health Professionals:
Practical Issues and Approaches - Sample Learning Contract’, Department of Family and Community Medicine - University of Toronto, [online] Available from: http://dfcm19.med.utoronto.ca/GradStudies/CourseMaterials/t&l/learning_contract1.htm (Accessed 4 December 2008).

Make a note of any of these approaches that you think could be applied to your own context of practice.

I'm in favour of the "learning contract" idea and see the list of competencies that we've come up with from Unit 6 becoming very handy for developing such a contract. To support this would require a fairly standard framework (Burgess) that invites the inclusion of still more frameworks / rubrics that the PLOT tool suggests.

This is very similar to a learning contract idea that I saw implemented in an experiential / alternative education program that I was involved in as a Group Leader some 20 years ago (Katimavik in Canada). Here the participants (a small group of 12 young adults) carried out some personal and group reflection exercises .. and then designed their own mission / values statement .. then personal and/or group objectives. They also knew what resources were available to them so they could map out how they might achieve these objectives (i.e. hiring a nutritionist to learn how to eat properly). Assessment? There wasn't any formal assessment..

As I see it, we've potentially got the same thing going on here. We've looked at the mission / values associated with being a learning technologist.. and are asked to review these to come up with a set of objectives that are aligned with that mission / those values and then plot how we might achieve them .. preferably with input and support from fellow group or team members. Assessment? Part of it might include how successfully aligned one's personal development objectives line up with professional and personal values and principles.

On a related note, I've only recently been advocating the inclusion of pdps at my work as a means to aligning faculty and staff development with the University's mission to promote teaching excellence. I see this being realized so that limited resources are aligned to address University directives but at the same time, the professional or personal objectives of an individual.

In effect, the University's governing board outlines its own strategic goals, then invites the various colleges to interpret those goals as well as their own to create department specific "strategic plans". These in turn could be used by faculty and staff to produce their own pdps that address their specific professional needs but align them once again with those of their department. These could then be included as part of one's annual performance review.

Activity 6.4 - CMALT and LSN certification schemes - my observations

Sources

CMALT (n.d.) ‘CMALT Prospectus ’, [online] Available from: http://www.alt.ac.uk/docs/cmalt-prospectusv4.pdf (Accessed 30 November 2008).

The Learning and Skills Network (2007) ‘A Professional Development Framework for E-learning’, [online] Available from: https://oufe.open.ac.uk/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.learningtechnologies.ac.uk/files/0627161Framework.pdf (Accessed 2 December 2008).

Lessner, Ellen (2007) ‘CMALT experience - an individual perspective ’, [online] Available from: http://www.alt.ac.uk/docs/Ellen_Lessner_CMALT_experience_200711203.pdf (Accessed 2 December 2008).

Lisewski, Bernard and Joyce, Paul (n.d.) ‘Examining the five-stage e-moderating model: Designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession’, [online] Available from: http://learn.open.ac.uk/mod/resourcepage/view.php?id=90970&direct=1 (Accessed 24 November 2008).

Oliver, Martin (2002) ‘What do Learning Technologists do?’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 30(4), pp. 245-252.

Write a short 300 word account of what you have learned about the development and certification of elearning practitioners in this unit.

Much of the interest in accrediting learning technologists comes from a recognition of

• the isolation common to many learning technologists (including myself) (Oliver)(Lessner)
• the problems with credibility (i.e. academics not recognizing the expertise / competencies that a LT role can hold and instead reducing the position to a service provider or enabler; their practices are poorly understood (Oliver) (LSN) ; involves more than simply selecting from an off the shelf arsenal of products / services (Lisewski)
• the unique nature of the position (autonomy, without authority, yet still being promoted as a strategic change agent) .. (Oliver)

It appears that learning technologists have moved to address these (and other) issues first through the formation an association (ALT), and secondly through the set up of accreditation (CMALT or LSN). Such efforts also raise the profile of research in learning technology and the pursuit of professionalism by Learning Technologists.

While not directly stated, it's clear that this work ultimately improves credibility and respectability for the LT position. (CMALT prospectus) (LSN) .

My own review of competencies yielded some important insights.

The LSN competencies were subdivided by role - general practitioner, policy maker, expert adviser, developer, leader. This proved to be much more interesting because it pointed out to me just how many "hats" one can wear as an Learning Technologist .. and the need to switch those hats - i.e. from learner to adviser to leader.. Which lead me to suggest yet another challenging competency - the need to know when to switch those hats .... thus I'm deducing the need to be a fairly seasoned communicator in order to recognize that.

Based upon my interpretation and review of the competencies from CMALT, all six of my pdp objectives tied into atleast one of the CMALT Core competencies.. and in three pdp objectives a CMALT Specialist competency was identified. Noticeable was a focus on operational issues in 4 of the 6 objectives. This has me wondering if I am unknowingly "complying" with management's view of me as an learning technologist as "service provider"(?).

Reflections - Activity 6.3 - what does a learning technologist do?

Sources

Lisewski, Bernard and Joyce, Paul (n.d.) ‘Examining the five-stage e-moderating model:
Designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession’, [online] Available from: http://learn.open.ac.uk/mod/resourcepage/view.php?id=90970&direct=1 (Accessed 24 November 2008).

Oliver, Martin (2002) ‘What do Learning Technologists do?’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 30(4), pp. 245-252.

What do learning technologists do?
I've only been assuming this postion for a few months now and I can really relate to both the Oliver and Lisewski articles.

Yes... I see a big part of my job as a Education Technology Specialist (i.e. Learning Technologist) is having a certain amount of autonomy in how I interact with "clients", yet little if any authority to direct change, instead its a matter of presenting experiences, ideas and suggestions (expertise) to "guide" a "client" to another way to realize their instructional objectives. They typically seek me out formally (via email requesting an appointment) or informally (over lunch or a chat in the hall). Yet critical to it is fostering a non threatening relationship with potential "clients" so that they feel comfortable about discussing such things. It sounds curiously similar to a relationship that you might find between a patient and a therapist, where there's a need for "confidentiality", and the building of "trust" or building a non threatening, safe environment for open dialogue because in many cases, the potential client feels insecure about raising the issue. They often apologetically present themseleves as unfamiliar with something, feeling vulnerable in doing so, so that they realize they need to learn more, that they are depending on me for guidance.. yet ultimately the final decision on "if" they will move forward rests with them.

Curiously enough, I've never seen such a "soft skill" presented in any LT job description. While the expertise, experience and rhetorical discourse are important, I've discovered just how critical nurturing this sort of relationship is to realizing the next step - being "invited" to enter into such a dialogue and then present one's expertise or opinions to help inform opinion. Thus the point made about "investing considerable time in building goodwill and strong collaborations across the institution" (Oliver p 249)

I'm equally curious about how many others in the cohort share this observation.

I also see a strong need to be challenging things ... even those presented by my colleagues in the department. They have been tempting me to use "off the shelf" solutions (with best of intentions I might add) .. yet I've resisted on the very grounds mentioned by Lisewski - the need for them to be challenged as to their relevance to our context. At issue here, is the use of screen cams from Atomic Learning and my insistence on the need to use self authored screen cams using Jing. This on the grounds that Jing produced resources are easy to produce, easier to access and invite greater familiarity and thus more built in support for our end users - namely faculty. Atomic Learning videos are more difficult to get to (require password and then navigation to a set example), and are not context specific .. thus requiring the "target learner" to build the relevance and context themselves .... to understand the purpose of the support resource.

Activity 6.1 - eLearning as a profession

Sources

Higher Education Academy Professional Standards Consultation (n.d.) ‘Standards framework for teaching and supporting student learning in HE’, [online] Available from: http://www.alt.ac.uk/HEA_professional_standards_consultation_20051012.html (Accessed 16 November 2008).

ALT, (n.d.) ‘SECOND CONSULTATION ON THE PROPOSAL TO FORM
A LIFELONG LEARNING SECTOR SKILLS COUNCIL - Questionnaire’, [online] Available from: http://www.alt.ac.uk/docs/questionnaire_lluk_ALT.pdf (Accessed 16 November 2008).

What are the specifications for education and training couses aimed at elearning professionals?

Very difficult to find any definitions on this .. all of them seem to come out of the UK though by taking more time to mine the job descriptions for learning technologists in the US this might become easier to address.

From
Higher Education Academy Professional Standards Consultation
An elearning professional is someone who ...

• makes appropriate / judicious use of technology to realize learning outcomes
• has an indepth understanding of learning theory and its application to online learning design
• makes efforts to work with others to enhance and inform each other's practice, knowledge and experience
  

From Anonymous, (n.d.) ‘SECOND CONSULTATION ON THE PROPOSAL TO FORM A LIFELONG LEARNING SECTOR SKILLS COUNCIL - Questionnaire’

An elearning professional is someone who ..

• systematically applies a body of knowledge to the design, implementation and evaluation of learning resources
• uses principles of good learning theory, good instructional design and change management to support learning and provide learning resources
• is grounded in the use of technologies and their capabilities to support learning

Compare these specifications with your own education and training.

My own formal and informal education is a mix of visual arts training, museum management, adult education, english as a foreign language training and teaching and my current studies in the MA with the Open U. It's a very eclectic mix but I've also noticed that all of these educational / subject domains have been greatly affected by information technology. I have had to learn learning theory on at least three separate ocassions and maybe more - each from a different perspective (i.e. general, adult and online). Most of my own learning about effective use of technology has been informed by earlier courses in the Open U program. Much of the learning theory has been informed via reflection and integration into my own teaching practice, much of the appropriate selection of technology in education comes from direct experience and reflection on it. In almost all cases, the Open U program has served to more formally recognize my experience and efforts.

My formal qualifications .. constant theme?

Education. in environments that seem to promote or encourage innovation / dealing with change / promoting creativity .. and to do so under fairly close scrutiny by others (i.e. visual arts - public art displays, cultural sector - leveraging scarce time and money resources, adult education - targeted needs, efl - multi mode teaching leveraging scarce time and money resources to realize learning outcomes for students).

Compare this with the education and training of the H808 course team

I recognized that the team placed a certain amount of emphasis on experience with computer mediated communications and learning, the need to be current and connected with a community of practice, and the need to make one's work transparent (open to scrutiny and input from peers). I sense I've had two of the three drilled into me by work demands. The middle point is one that I grew to value while working in the cultural sector - the importance of networking with others to inform one's practice.

Other repeated themes? The need for ethics, standards to support one's work. The importance of striving for quality. The need to be part of a community of practice to constantly inform one's practice in a field whose context seems to be constantly changing.These sorts of values, curiously enough, were emparted in me via my work in alternative education while working in the cultural sector - where public scrutiny and validation were very important to ensuring "buy in".

Reflections - Activity 5.3 group work

From my vantage point, we have struggled to realize this task as a group.
Possible causes, we may have indirectly imposed a limitation on our selves by choosing to start and carry on discussions / exchanges via the FCC board. Curiously, a comfort level with using this, despite having had some exposure to the affordances of wikis and blogs; having them modelled to us in prior weeks. We overlooked choosing how to tackle the problem as a group;working out roles; breaking the task down into small tasks; not review and examine our strengths as members of the group; not coming on board at the same time .... all of it indicating to me that we did not reflect deeply enough on the most appropriate tool nor how to facilitate our task.. and thus undermined our own success or at least slowed it down dramatically.

My contribution to this? A dreadfully late move into 5.3 after spending too much time on 5.2. I felt a need to assert a role as a "Co-ordinator" / "Team

I'm in agreement with anything at this point that gives us some more structure .. such that it facilitates more collaboration. We have a lot of interesting and well developed ideas here but I find the current arrangement highly fragmented and difficult to follow (ie. not one or two but many discussion threads). I would really like to encourage that all of this information be put in one common place so that we can collate it, reflect on it - I would like to suggest the wiki that Nigel set up .. but I'm happy to have it anywhere. No ownership issues here, just acting as an elearning practitioner in identifying what in my opinion is the "best choice" of utility to realize the learning that we are being asked to do here ..

NOTE: I've become well aware about how this whole process is a lovely test of our ability to be elearning practitioners - using good practice in realizing this task involves

• understanding the limitations of online communications
• identifying the best of technology to realize learning
  
• identifying and applying the best strategies to overcome or manage limitations
  
• promoting collaboration / buy in amongst us
• realizing something meaningful / purposeful in the process

I'm even wondering if whatever principles we come up with can be tested against our success in realizing this activity. That would certainly point out their relevance.

Reflections - Unit 5 (opening section)

This caught my eye in the opening of Unit 5 .

"two factors that determine the effectiveness of a professional in any area of occupation are

• the quality of their sources of information - timeliness, pertinence, reliability
• their ability to apply intelligence to that information (determine what is relevant in each information source, and how best to make use of it)

Paul Lefrere & Robin Goodfellow

Thinking immediately of my work in the ELC a few years back when I used electronic surveys to identify faculty needs but I also made a point of reviewing and assessing the traditional delivery mode for workshops - face to face - largely on a hunch that the current strategy wasn't working. Identified the need for a rethink .. because attendance at past workshops was consistently poor .. yet the same needs were still being expressed in the surveys. This told me that there was a crying need for more flexibility to complement the faculty situation / environment.

I entertained the possibility of capitalizing on the constant availability of the network .. to devise a new strategy that was less proximity dependent (the need for a scheduled time and place to present IT support workshops). That led to the development of a four prong strategy consisting of tipsheets, screen cams, one to one tutoring.. all designed to complement the traditional "face to face" strategy.

The result? Subsequent online surveys noted tipsheets and screen cams as number one support method ... while face to face was still seen as highly desireable.. yet attendance remained abysmal (what people were voting for in a survey, they weren't prepared to vote for with their "feet").

What does it point out to me now .. the importance of challenging assumptions, making decisions when possible based upon data. The data is powerful for informing one's decisions and supporting their close scrutiny by others. However.. the data doesn't offer all the answers .. I realize more clearly now the need to review them in their context. For example, if I was to go on the choices made in the survey, we would still be using only the "face to face" strategy.

Reflections - TMA 1 time - not "tea time"

TMA 1 time - not "tea time"

Sources

Moon, Jenny (2001) ‘PDP working paper 4: reflection in higher education learning’, document, [online] Available from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/resources/resourcedatabase/id72_Reflection_in_Higher_Education_Learning.rtf (Accessed 2 October 2008).

Smith, Mark (1996) ‘reflection: What constitutes reflection - and what significance does it have for educators? The contributions of Dewey, Schon and Boud et al. assessed’, The Encyclopedia of Informal Education, [online] Available from: http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-reflect.htm (Accessed 2 October 2008).

As much as I struggled with TMA 1, I did find it a great exercise because I also found it a valuable learning experience. Part 1 - the academic essay - forced me (perhaps directed me is a better term) to "weave" the many concepts from Units 1 thorugh 4 (pdp, eportfolios, reflection) together in a coherent form that could be applied to a real life situation. An exercise in using the discourse of the topic, and personal engagement with these concepts to realize a possible practical application of them.

To my surprise, Part 2 - the reflective piece - proved to be the more challenging of the two. I think I made an assumption that this could be polished off quite easily and quickly.. but the moment I began to write things down, the process of reflecting on what had been learned already and how it might have impacted on my own personal development proved to be quite a mountain to climb. I started by confronting a bit of personal resistance to what was being asked - to identify what has really changed in my personal development after what still seems a remarkably short period of time (about 8 weeks). This seemed a tad bit over the top. I also confronted the personal need for quiet time to realize reflection (something that Moon noted - a part about slowing down activity) and yet was confronted by a deadline. Not a good mix - deadlines and personal reflection. Not a good mix at all.

It did dawn on me that I was practicing a reflective continuum here - reflecting on earlier reflections to see how things might have changed. How did I feel about the comments I made only a few weeks or even days ago?

What did I do to support this? I went back to my notes from readings on Richards and Moon to clarify for myself what constitutes "deep" reflection, even resorted to taking these notes, and putting them in front of me as a guide on how to attack the question. I've been pleasantly surprised by the outcome .. though I have to admit, I still have to plead some ignorance on how one can assess this sort of thing. The doubting Dewey mentions that is required to trigger reflection is certainly still there (Smith).

Reflection - Activity 3.1. My strengths & weaknesses

What have I learned about my strengths and weaknesses?

Weaknesses?
On the whole I'm most vulnerable in a few key areas... researching new developments, issues and academic findings stands out as the most pressing one. When I think about it, I'm more of a "handson" learner .. and thus I tend to avoid it or at the very least only "do" it when something becomes topical enough that it requires learning more about it in formal ways. I'm not one to devote time to do it on a regular basis (and I'm now really curious how others address the same need for it) but the exercise of doing a detailed review of my job description made it pretty obvious that my current strategy won't be enough. I also realized the importance of promoting effective community building - something that I highly value and yet I haven't committed time and resources to learning more on how to effectively realize it in ages and certainly not much in the way of realizing it online.

It's now looking pretty obvious that in addressing these two shortcomings, my game as an Education Technology Specialist is raised .. and it should help feed the other "stronger cards in my hand".

Strengths?
I really wanted to avoid declaring myself an expert of anything. I'm not fond of the term because I don't consider it something that anyone should really be"annointing themselves with. Perhaps with the formal recognition of my peers on the same topic, I would feel more comfortable using the term.. but that hasn't happened anywhere often enough nor with much fanfare for me to do it. I've only learned since being hired how I have a reputation for making and using learning objects effectively. As a result, I managed to convince myself that perhaps I could be bold enough to apply the term "expert" for my effective use of technology / projects in teaching and learning. But only after carefully reviewing it and even still, I'm bound to be brown nosed by someone else out there. My grounds? A now 20 year period of relatively uninterrupted experience with and increased understandng of the use of technology in teaching and learning.

The matter of comparing myself with my peers brought up a number of other interesting problems and unearthed another set of issues. Our rather small department hardly gives me much of anyone to compare myself with and to go outside the University, I'd be hard pressed to know others of our ilke who I could meet to compare notes. Which raises the issue of professional "isolation" and the need to make a conscious effort to overcome this. Thus the only really viable option seems to be online communities. This theme is emerging more and more.

Activity 3.3 Understanding eportfolio software (preview)

I'm speculating before I begin this review that the following features will be most important to me or to my hypothetical students..

1) ease of use
It has to be easy enough to learn. That can be achieved with built in support or readily available JIT tutorials.

2) flexibility yet structure
Dichotomy here, one wants flexibility yet there is a certain amount of structure needed, certainly for an absolute beginner who may need a set of guided questions. But a more experienced user may opt to drop this structure in favour of getting more freedom to design as they see fit.

3) interoperability / portability
If I'm going to invest so much time and energy into something and over an extended period of time.. then I need to feel confident that whatever I'm using will be transferable to another system.

4) support / modelling of benefits
For anyone just starting on this trek to build an eportfolio, their ability to "see" the benefits of an eportfolio and how those benefits can be easily realized is fundamental to realizing "buying in" ... That equates to providing clear models / examples and constantly available support. That support can come in many forms - interaction / collaboration with ones peers, and/or IT support agents.

Reflection - Providing Structure - "too much" or "too little"?

This matter about "structure" seems to be coming up serendipitously. At the same time I've reconnected with Vance Steven and his education blog.
http://advanceducation.blogspot.com/2008/09/connectivism-too-much-noise.html
He had recently commented on an item by George Siemens on

"how structure influences the ability for students to learn. Too much noise and learners are overwhelmed. Too much order and learners are not challenged. Some ambiguity in the learning process permits room for exploration and creativity." Noting that the course itself was 'traditionally' structured, he said "it's the conversation that's more chaotic...does that detract from the learning experience?"

THAT caught my eye... and so I read on.

I would say, too little noise, too little challenge definitely, but also too little emulation of what the real world is like. In fact, ambiguity is rampant and managing work and learning tasks involves filtering and reduction. If the work of filtering is done for you then the opportunity to learn is reduced, not only of the knowledge to be acquired, but of the heuristics to be applied in the real world.

I interpreted his point to mean that relatively unstructured "learning" environments are potential opportunities for students to learn how to manage these moments just as they/ we will be expected to do in the real world. So as educators we're left with yet another important decision to make when designing learning - how much structure is appropriate to provide for students at a given time? The problem becomes even more difficult to resolve in the context of elearning where we may not know the strengths / powers of our learners to overcome "planned" ambiguity until they tell us or somehow indicate it to us.

Reflection - Eureka moment? Reactive vs proactive approaches to my work

Mentally welcoming change(?)
Two days ago, I was having a chat with a colleague who had ventured by my office on a small matter. She was asking how I was adjusting to my new position. I shared the usual comments about adjustment but I also told her how I felt marooned in working almost entirely at my desk researching, preparing learning materials, setting up workshops and creating follow up support utilities (ie. blogs, surveys, tipsheets, and wikis) . Yet I noted a feeling of detachment in working on serving the needs of my colleagues. She suggested that I just take a "walk" around the place and get to meet others. She also pointed out to me that to stay put was only reinforcing the idea of the CTL being unapproachable. It seemed so brutally obvious, so brutally true .. but it hadn't occured to me to get up and explore.

Making change happen (?)
So I decided to pursue the matter and set aside some time yesterday to try it. I really had no idea how it would go. To my surprise it took me over three hours to do what I anticipated might take only one maximum. I figured that it could have gone on longer if it hadn't been for a previously scheduled commitment.

As I went around soliciting questions / answering questions.. I became aware of two things. The obvious first one was how important it was to get out and interact - response from others in seeing me was generally very positive. It also became apparent just how many people really were not aware of the role our small department had in supporting them. The second thing I became aware of came about from responding to the many impromptu querries they came up with.

An Aspect of Professionalism revealled?
In answering these I became aware of the depth of my own understanding of elearning. Aligning learning needs with the affordances presented via various web tools. How I was also going to present a possible tool, strategy, or resource to help meet their needs. It occured to me more afterwards, how I was quickly drawing on my past experience with these resources, with these similar questions, with implementing them.. but as well, the reading that I've had on them to put together what I thought were solid, "professional responses". Professional aspect being .. negating self interest (i.e. suggesting more than one strategy or option to address a need), sharing what I knew and in a way that made the material approachable, and making my focus that of the client's needs, not my own. The whole exercise has made me more aware of how important it is to project that to others .. to build trust and confidence .. if one hopes to help someone make a move towards change.

I'm also looking back on what I was doing before .. I was taking a reactive position to faculty needs - limiting it to responding to email, telephone calls, and the rare face to face visit to the office. What I learned here is the equal need for proactivity, reaching out to solicit needs .. and probably just as important, establishing face to face contact to build a report so people get to know me, trust me, build a relationship of confidence in me. It's now got me reflecting on how this can be realized in an online environment (another point of reflection).

Still more questions. Now sold on the need for proactivity ..

• How can I find a balance between the reactive approach thrust upon me each day and the proactive approach that I now know is so useful and important to my work?
• How can I manage to lessen the reactivity side .. and maximize the proactive?
• Am I raising expectations amongst those I met that I can be counted on to address any of their ICT integration needs or issues in the future?
  
• Can I anticipate a need to somehow manage these expectations? Do I need to worry about managing expectations right now?

Activity 2.4 - Criteria for reflective writing

Readings
Moon (2001)
Richards (2005)

Advice to students on good reflective writing.

You need to understand what reflection is first, what its importance is to helping you learn. You likely already do it in a "non academic" common sense way , to think about something in more detail but often in a free thought or unstructured way (i.e. without a specific purpose or reason to do so) (Moon, 2001).

However we want you to practice more academic based reflection. Why? Academic based reflection is more guided, more purposeful. Reflection here is seen as realizing a deeper understanding of things, to connect that understanding with other things you know or to even challenge what you may already know. It often involves a critical evaluation of what you know to come up with more "sound", more "grounded, perhaps more confident judgements (Habermas) of things you have experienced and have come to "know". The alternative is to simply understand things in a simple, unconnected, isolated manner (Moon - surface learning). It can be seen not as a static "one off" process but part of a cycle featuring action then thought; a process of acting then refining your understanding of what it is you've done .. to then possibly repeat that action but with adjustments made that are based on your new understanding of the action (Kolb - experiential learning) . That process can be repeated to become an "activity reflection" cycle (Richards) directed to improving your understanding of things which in turn help move you closer to realizing a desired goal, overcoming an obstacle or solving a problem.

Put into the context of reflective writing, writing takes on new meaning. Writing means summarizing something. The content for that summary might be a thought, theory, experience or feeling. The act of summarizing invites you to interpret and personalize this content further. Reflecting on this writing invites you to relate these ideas to previous experiences to further personalize them or give them more meaning. You may find yourself going back to the same writing again and again, each time reviewing and refining it because your ideas have been changed by new experiences or ideas that impact on your understanding of the initial idea. These may test or challenge your earlier views causing a complete rewrite of them or they may invite you to refine the wording of them still more. Over time, you realize a deeper understanding of your initial idea. All of the writing, reviewing and editing also becomes a record of something potentially more useful to you - a deeper understanding of your learning processes.

This reflective writing process can be broadened through the inclusion of your peers. Their review or questioning of your work can also draw your attention to common themes or contradictions in your ideas. These too can cause you to clarify or refine your understanding of ideas.

Activity 2.4 - My take on Penn State advice for reflection

My take on the Penn State example

There is evidence of the Hatton & Smith (Moon) format to scaffold reflective writing (reflective writing steps) . There is also the inclusion of a rubric to guide the student in what they might expect to realize as a "quality" end product.. (which suggests that this could still be assessed).

Yet in the beginning, much of it sounds like a "common sense approach" to reflection. This is being presented yet the rubric and scaffolding suggest otherwise which confuses the matter. For example, using terms like "think about your audience - it may be only yourself", "you are the one responsible for making decisions about your educational program". "What you write depends on your audience" yet "the audience is left up to you.. and can be you."

I would have liked to see a stronger introduction. One that promotes "buyin" perhaps via testimonials from past students, faculty members, etc. One that points out the benefits of the reflection activity .. but also suggests a variety of strategies that others have used to realize the quality end product that the rubric suggests. This would echo the two step approach put forward by Moon (2001). In this case, first introducing reflection with a definition, plus reasons / benefits and perhaps for it and some manner of experiencing it. Then following that with the set of very general questions already used in the "Reflective Writing Steps (Penn U) or perhaps by Lister (2006), both of which echo those suggested by Hatton & Smith (Moon). This becomes a scaffolding strategy to help someone who may still not understand the concept or how to realize it in an academic sense.

Moon's two step approach is the basis for the following.. From my vantage point, the key thing learned here is to make it very clear....
- what reflection is
- what form of reflection we're encouraging a person to pursue (academic)
- what the clear purpose / benefit of this activity is to the person
- present evidence to support that benefit
- present an opportunity for the person to experience it .. to improve their understanding
- scaffold the learner further with guided questions.

Activity 2.1. - reflection on Karen's Post

Books
Moon (2001)
Lister (2007)

Karen's note about relating this to professional practice got me to thinking about my own context. After reading Moon (2001) and then Lister (2007) I think that I've been encouraging reflection from my learners in the IT training that I give. I've recently put together a post workshop.. skills checklist. This checklist is given to my visitors (and those who are "no shows") a day or two after the presentation.. As simple as it sounds, I'm asking people if they can answer a series of "I can" statements .. yes no or unsure .. without anyone being present. I realize now that I'm expecting this to be a reflective exercise where they then can decide on their next move.. and to guide the next move back to us for follow up support. thus the reason for adding on the same sheet a set of contact names, numbers and email addresses from our department . But because I've only just started with the idea, I'm not sure if it works.. I'm also now thinking that each of those I can statements could be linked back to "learning objects" as another option for self study.

Activity 2.3. - Reflection & learning

Posting
Karen J.Ogilvie, Reflection - Karen's first thoughts, Sun Sept 28 5:20 pm

Readings
Moon, Jenny (2001)
H808, Assignment guide


My read of the H808 Course Guide and Assignment guide is that the reflective work that we do in the form of "core activities" will become important evidence to support our case for how we have realized "professional" or "personal" development via H808.

The strength of these "core activities" and their reflections will in many ways determine the strength of the work we do later on with the TMAs. I also see how each one of those reflection pieces is really a snap shot of my understanding of a concept at a certain point of time in the course. As we proceed further into the course, I'm anticipating the need to revisit these, to review / edit / revise them based on still more reflection.. I also anticipate discovering how my depth of understanding on certain issues / definitions has changed over time... and that this becomes an important objective of the course.

In theory, the contents and organization of the eportfolio should be a byproduct of these deep reflections. To draw from Schon, I'm also expecting to experience a form of "reflection in action" or "reflection on action" (depending on the "time constraints" I'm under) as we move to realizing an eportfolio. (H808 - Assignment guide - page 3 .. In your reflective commentaries your tutor will be looking for evidences that you have ...."

In reference to Moon, I can already see that reflection is going to occur through the active use of the "reflective continuum". That reflection needs to be academic rather than "common sense" in approach, meaning that we need to strive to put what we read/learn via the material into a clear personal context to improve the depth of understanding of it. The activities that direct us to deeper reflection include summarizing what we've read, integrating it with our personal situations or experiences (i.e. experiences, beliefs, etc.) then testing it with others. I can see myself using the framework developed by Hatton & Smith (Moon) as another means to realizing this depth.

Is the notion that some forms of reflection are better suited to some disciplines relevant to my own subject area or practice?
Yes.. First of I'm conscious of the need to reflect. How it impacts on my own learning. I see it as critical to improving the effectiveness of what I do. It typically takes on some urgency when something doesn't go as planned or was a flop. I then often review assumptions that I made in planning something. It could be about my learners, the context .. but I try to focus on the things that I have control over .. which can be somewhat defeating. I have to remind myself to also examine outside factors that may have contributed to a problem. The biggest problem I encounter with realizing reflection .. is making time to consciously do it and then the issue is to what degree have I done it - or to what depth that I can rely upon it or feel confident about acting upon it.

Choice of other media for reflective activity?
I real find summarizing and writing an ideal reflective activity .. and it's greatly facilitated by word processing. Blogs seem a good place to collect and collate the ideas too, especially for future review and reflection. I already find myself making "comments" to myself.. (which seems a bit odd - sort of like "talking" to yourself asynchronously). I've had experience with podcasting but unless I'd want to review how I said things (i.e. register cues) I can't imagine that it would add much of any value to my reflective process. If anything, I currently see their production and assembly even detracting from realizing meaningful reflection.

Though this last point is being challenged by Karen's note about how medical students she works with are producing video as a reflective activity. Topics include "how well they work with people, how they communicate to ultimately make descisions". How this same video is shared with peers to get feedback on "how well they carried out the task".

I asked ...

Curious? Is this a video that they take of themselves or is it a video that they have arranged be taken of themselves where they do a "voice over" reflective piece on afterwards? What value do you and the students "see" in having the video over writing things down in a journal. Do they not get bogged down with producing it .. or knowing that their peers will "see" them? Do the visual cues (body language) cloud the ability to review the reflection or do they act as sort of a "truth litmus" test for peers to judge and mention in their feedback? Tons of questions here. Sorry.

Activity 1.4 Drivers Template - Reflections on the process

Making Assumptions about my colleagues

I realized how I was immediately forced to make assumptions about my colleagues largely because I had very very little information about them .. what their abilities are, their experiences are, their attitudes towards ICT and elearning are. This was in the context of being asked to work with them online to realize a common task (which I wasn't quite sure if I understood the same way they did) and then to do so under time constraints (access to communication tools, differing time zones, differing work / domestic routines) . Problem is further compounded by the absence of immediate feedback that one would typically have access to when working in groups and making decisions in a face to face situation.

Importance of Introductions

As a result, the introductions posted earlier actually took on more importance for me. I went back to them to try to get a glimpse into who my colleagues were and how much they might know about ICT in general or specifically in this case, wikis.

Making Decisions

Extremely difficult to do .. impossible to arrive at consensus (at least on this occasion). Decisions on what to do, in what time frame, what communications tools to use, very little structure or framework in place to realistically arrive at a decision... etc. etc.
All were being made .. but I was very conscious of the need to make such decisions in such a way that they would hopefully realize buy in by my colleagues .

Assuming a leadership role

In the absence of any movement on the task, at least by a point when I expected something to have been initiated, I found myself in an odd position. I felt the need to lead on the task (i.e. setting up a wiki) . Even more odd was to be asserting not one decision as it turned out but a series of decisions without any sort of consensus .. yet time was moving on. It also made me conscious of the need (perhaps even a feeling of guilt) to share my rationale for making such a decision with my colleagues .. on the belief that to do so.. supported "buy in" by them .. to not do so projected a certain "arrogance" which isn't who I think I am. Certainly whatever I did choose to do .. needed to be done with what I now look back on as a set of guiding ethics - fairness, inclusion and respect for my cohorts - hopefully common to them and appreciated by them. This led to the set up of a thread on the wiki entitled "A confessional - why Wetpaint for a wiki?"

Awareness of the need to support

Once the series of decisions was made (i.e. setting up a wiki but not on the Open U system).. I found myself assuming more responsibility for it.. a need to set up support. Even the decision to use Wetpaint was founded on the belief that it would do a better job of facilitating collaboration and discussion amongst colleagues then the Open U wiki. That meant posting links to the wiki on the FC system ..posting a rationale for a possible next move, etc. Expecting a possible challenge from Anne Bradbury. Looking for and carefully observing input from my colleagues Peter and Lisa to see if I was on the right path. Producing new pages. Posting notes on the "utility" to be found on the Wetpaint wiki.

Still a sense that this could be improved upon..

Perhaps by reading the reflections of other members of my cohort .. I'll learn more about the effectiveness of this process and how it could be improved. I have realized for awhile now .. likely through my experience over the years .. the value of "feedback loops" and the need to incorporate them into any decisions on online efforts if I want to ensure their success. The number, type, frequency and immediacy of those responses by my colleagues served as valuable feedback on my decision making in the past.. and I expect that will continue into the future of this task.

Activity 1.1 - Introductory audio

How do you feel about the label - elearning professional?

About the label - elearning professional - I'm not clear about what it really means and I don't get much help from the prodcast either. It just gives rise to more questions. Kirkup comes the closest to how I would expect the term professional to be used. One's actions are grounded by ethical standards, but then on top of these are a set of values that have been drawn up by the profession itself, a code of practice collectively determined by the professionals (often via an association). They also strive to regulate themselves .. awarding professional credentials to those who meet a set of standards (predictably) determined by other "elders"(more experienced, learned professionals?) and recognizing those who go on to promote further progress in the profession..(again often via some sort of association).

But then Robin Goodfellow's small "p" vs big "P" definitions of professionalism and even more so Jones comment on how the term professional has been redefined today to mean something again quite different throw a wrench into all of this. Today's "modern" professonal or what sounds to me more like a "semi" professional is much less self regulated and instead more directed by those who "manage" them. I've only just recently been hired as an Educational Support Specialist and see this tension confronting me front and center - trying to bring a professional point of view (gleened from my MAODE studies) to addressing needs and issues where I work.. yet at the same time I'm directed by management to follow a very detailed agenda and sometimes one that even spells out what resources are to be used to realize it. In some ways I feel I'm being asked to assume the role of an elearning professional when convenient... then an elearning technician when convenient. "Quasi professional"?