At the beginning of my post, I would like to briefly start reviewing the article for this week, I mean last week.
Jenkins (2006) in an article "Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for 21st Century", indicates three points which education faces some challenging with regard to new media. Participation gap, transparency problem, and ethics challenge are three points of them. Amongst them, I particularly focused on second point, transparency gap.
Jenkins points out the issue that there is difference between master of game rules and recognize the ways those rules structure our perception of reality(p.4). Taking this point into account, one question could be risen up, that is, can students really assess the quality of information?
It is hard to define the quality itself though, some might argue that Googling to obtain data and discover new findings are only superficial, and nothing do with learning.
However, I myself, think Google or many web contents saved my academic life so far (quiet), and also suppose that as long as we can distinguish between rich contents and not qualifies information, Internet based learning should be encouraged for next generation because this definitely facilitate our learning in terms of time and space for sharing.
2008年9月21日日曜日
2008年9月11日木曜日
WK2: Course Management 1.0 in a Web 2.0
As the wave of opened learning environment thought to be influential, this idea of opened environment impacts upon course management. Once LMS manages students' schedule and also reflects how much they learned, now CMS provides not only management, but also contents itself. At this time, CMS is used as asynchronous communication tool.
This week's readings seems to have positive attitude toward web 2.0 environment. Each reading argues the importance of collaboration and sharing as Prof. Brown addresses web 2.0 reflects learning paradigm while web 1.0 does teaching paradigm.
However, as I read through articles, I questioned to some ideas.
The article, "Mind over Matter", applied learning theory to opened learning environment. That is "Deeper learning", which states students can learn best when they are socialized, active, in contextual, engaging and owned. For instance, e-mail and discussion board helps shy students to participate and also effects positively on diverse so they are socialized. Additionally, graphical representation integrates new ideas to preexisting knowledge and hyperlink shows relevance.
There, I could not see clear vision that e-mail facilitates socializing or hyperlink can connect with another ideas(relevance) so students learn in context.
I agree with these ideas for some extent; however, this appears to be just applying theory.
From this article, I could not see the connection between web 2.0's activities and learning theory.
I believe the key is to know how actually learned through activities as Brown states.
Therefore, I would like to know whether or not e-mail actually help socializing, for instance.
Cite work:
Carmean, C., & Haefner, J. (2002, November/December). Mind over matter: Transforming course management systems into effective learning environments. Educause Review, 37(6), 27-34. Retrieved September 7, 2008, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0261.pdf
This week's readings seems to have positive attitude toward web 2.0 environment. Each reading argues the importance of collaboration and sharing as Prof. Brown addresses web 2.0 reflects learning paradigm while web 1.0 does teaching paradigm.
However, as I read through articles, I questioned to some ideas.
The article, "Mind over Matter", applied learning theory to opened learning environment. That is "Deeper learning", which states students can learn best when they are socialized, active, in contextual, engaging and owned. For instance, e-mail and discussion board helps shy students to participate and also effects positively on diverse so they are socialized. Additionally, graphical representation integrates new ideas to preexisting knowledge and hyperlink shows relevance.
There, I could not see clear vision that e-mail facilitates socializing or hyperlink can connect with another ideas(relevance) so students learn in context.
I agree with these ideas for some extent; however, this appears to be just applying theory.
From this article, I could not see the connection between web 2.0's activities and learning theory.
I believe the key is to know how actually learned through activities as Brown states.
Therefore, I would like to know whether or not e-mail actually help socializing, for instance.
Cite work:
Carmean, C., & Haefner, J. (2002, November/December). Mind over matter: Transforming course management systems into effective learning environments. Educause Review, 37(6), 27-34. Retrieved September 7, 2008, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0261.pdf
登録:
投稿 (Atom)