January 2012 Archives

Welcome back (to Scott and Cole). Hopefully you had a productive week last week in your teams. Videos and blog posts were up and commented on, so now on to the tasks for the day. We need to look over the rubrics you developed for the course assignments, as well as the initial models for Occupy Learning. These will be critical as we move forward in the class. We also have a lot to discuss with Pea, Rogers, Mcluhan and Fiore, and Gee all being read since the last time we talked. We have completed blogs on community, identity and design, and this week you have to think about synthesis. It is a big week and we are excited to be back.

• A rubric for the team writings and comments: Each team will have time to present and discuss their rubrics. We will then ask you to cart one agreed upon final rubric that will be used.
• Each team will have time to present their videos. We will take time to react to them in general.
• Watch Town Hall on Instructional Space Intro
• Occupy Learning assignments

Five Worst Classrooms on Campus (Onward State)
Five Best Classrooms on Campus (Onward State)
Out of Class

• Readings are Wenger (pages 3-41) and danah boyd. Both readings are found on the Yammer site.
• Team post with a focus on synthesis. This means how you see the three themes of community, identity and design being connected.- Each team should have one.
• First Occupy assignment - Each team should have one.

In class the next week (week 5):

• Discuss Wenger and boyd and share your synthesis of the three themes.

Re: Pea & Rogers
One of the points that periodically surfaces in debates surrounding social networking tools and similar types of disruptive technology is that people have been engaged in the practice of social networking since time immemorial. So what's the big deal? Why all the attention? We would offer two: Design and Affordability. The tools have been designed in a way that make them accessible to ordinary people. And second, most of them are very affordable to a large percentage of consumers, and many are even free. These two, comparatively recent changes have enabled social networking to occur in many different, sometimes unpredictable ways. Even more important is how they have made the forms, paths, and manifestations visible to all that live within that web-based community. This visibility is what gives Roy Pea's work special significance as he prompts us to think about the underlying design of these networks. By foregrounding the design element of these networks, educators can begin to think about them as tools with specific affordances that can support learning goals. Yet doing so, requires a change in thinking, a change in how a teacher sees the classroom, the role of the students, and the role of him or her as the teacher. Acknowledging the role of social, disruptive technologies necessarily requires acknowledging that the impact of its application in the classroom. So how does this change happen? Rogers points to different enabling conditions or characteristics that facilitate its emergence: Relative Advantage, Compatibility, Complexity, Trialability, and Observability (p. 15-16). By seeing change as a series of characteristics such as these, teachers and designers develop a vocabulary for talking about the change in ways that help avoid overly simplistic binaries such as "for" or "against", or "early adopter" or "laggard." As we all remember from our Psych 101 texts, resorting to derisive labels tends only to induce defensive postures. If we turn back though to Roy Pea, we can point to the potential for these technologies to augment a learner's intelligence in a variety of different ways including computing, guided participation, inscriptional systems, and situated cognition (p. 58). Guided participation seems particularly appropriate because of its recognition of the fundamentally social nature of learning (e.g., Vygotsky's Zone of Proxmial Development) and the potential for these technologies to facilitate collaborative learning.

Another challenge in adopting this change quite understandably centers on the wide divergence of opinion of how it should be implemented. But it's not just about the output that is delivered by way of the implementation, it's also important to get at how the different individuals involved define and conceptualize that change. Bringing this out helps those involved see the heterophilous nature of these definitions and conceptualizations (Rogers p. 19) and how the attributes identified with these differences tend to extend across a pretty wide spectrum. Moreover, many of these differences are rooted in long-held views about the way in which teaching should be done and how students should demonstrate evidence of learning. Rather than getting mired in ideological battles based on rigid adherence to a right-wrong polarity, stakeholders should approach them with a designer's perspective and see them as a series of tradeoffs. Two important sets of tradeoffs that Pea calls our attention to are (1) access versus understanding and (2) static definitions versus evolving concepts. In a hypothetical education context, the first tradeoff might emerge in a debate that positions access to technology (e.g., iPads) and deep conceptual understanding as polar opposites. On the one hand, there are those who advocate the urgent need for technology and on the other are those who see it as a distraction to deep, purposeful learning. All too often, this is played out as an either-or scenario in which firmly held ideological views obstruct any possibility for seeing nuance. The second tradefoff emphasizes how thinking can become reified to the point where its relevance and purpose is no longer examined, but just accepted as virtually immutable. So, for example, learning is defined as how the teacher experienced when he was a child and the child sees learning the Periodic Table as completely irrelevant to her world of texting and Facebook. Needless to say, both of these underscore the importance of applying two fundamental maxims: context and purpose. What are the specific details of this learning context? What are the details related to socioeconomics, demographics, attitudes, technical infrastructure? What is it that we want these technologies to do? What demonstrable needs are they being designed to address? Overall, what Pea and Rogers do is help give us a vocabulary for describing these challenges in more nuanced ways.

In the spirit of design, we chose an interesting and colorful template to display our reflections.

With the advent of portable devices with GPS, a compass, and a network, we can now design a layer on top of the real world that can contain all kinds of new information, ideas, and experiences. This is called augmented reality. Click on this podcast link to hear more about RJDJ. This design may fulfill the desires of some, according to Pea, but Rogers may have some concerns about the diffusion rate of this new space and new reality.

99% Invisible-03- 99% Reality (only).mp3

Knowledge Commons space facilitates emergent groups (e.g., easily movable chairs)

Knowledge Commons: Interview 3 (apologies for the poor audio)

Knowledge Commons: Interview 2 (apologies for the poor audio)

Knowledge Commons: Interview 1 (apologies for the poor audio)

Purpose: Is this a lab space or teaching space? Do teachers even belong in here?

Atmosphere/Aesthetics

• Lighting - Too low, needs to be variable, recessed lighting


• Size of room - spacious, works


• Color - yellow walls (sun mimic), floor blue/green soothing - mixed reaction in group


• Wall treatment (paint & board use) - usable, function - whiteboards surround, 2 large flat screens (use unknown)


• Smell - none


• Textures - not distracting - mix of painted, woodlike, glass, and mesh (chairs) surfaces


• Floor covering - carpet - clean, patterned, helps with acoustics, tiled carpet easy to replace


• Work surfaces - clean, aesthetically appealing, natural look


• Seating
Photo: Chairs on wheels

• mobility to gather weakness - side mobility limited, does not encourage quick collaboration


• Acoustics - good, no echo - ceiling tiles and carpet help


• Furniture -
Photo: Work surfaces too linear, too rigid - encourages row seating behind a wall of computers, peer visibility limited

• Temperature & Ventilation - a bit dry/arid, temperature OK


• Cleanliness - New construction, fine, key boards clean

Social Atmosphere - Learning Style Facilitation

• Spatial arrangement - Group, individual, hierarchical - difficult for collaborative work due to long tables and computers. The computers arrangement in rows impedes collaborative work.


• Instructor space - Podium available and mobile but not an emphasized aspect (no typical 'front' to the space)


• Student space - dominates


• Technology - Apple iMacs 40 in the room; multiple projectors & 2 flat screens


• Versatility (ability to redesign the space) - low


• Accessible electricity - high (Photo)


• ADA Compliance - double doors, wide pathways


• Authentic to learning purpose and learner participants - depends on above

Framework for Occupy Learning
Design Consideration for Learning Spaces

Atmosphere/Aesthetics

• Lighting


• Size of room


• Color


• Wall treatment (paint & board use)


• Smell


• Textures


• Floor covering


• Work surfaces


• Seating


• Acoustics


• Furniture


• Temperature


• Ventilation


• Cleanliness

Social Atmosphere - Learning Style Facilitation

• Spatial arrangement - Group, individual, hierarchical


• Instructor space


• Student space


• Technology


• Versatility (ability to redesign the space)


• Accessible electricity


• ADA Compliance


• Authentic to learning purpose and learner participants

Team Dragon
Proposed Rubric for Team Writing & Comments
Target Performance - (A) performance

Participation:
All members of the group interact via Google Docs discussion board through individual reflection on the readings and comments to other group member's reflections.

Integration of Readings:
The Google discussion board contains evidence that each group member's overall comments for the week are informed by the assigned readings.

Consideration of Learning:
Individual and team posts will attempt to explore connections among the concepts addressed in the readings and applications to learning contexts.

Synthesis:
Each team will create a blog post based on the core ideas explored in the Google Doc group discussion for the topic.

Time Commitment:
(1) Team Discussion & Post: Individual members will contribute to the group Google Doc discussion prior to Thursday at 10 p.m. each week. The synthesis post will be uploaded to the course blog by 10 p.m. Friday.
(2) Individual comments on other team's blog post: A one paragraph post will be completed by Sunday 10 p.m.

Both Cole and Scott will not be able to be in class today, so we are asking you to work within your teams to construct a couple of artifacts. In addition to the weekly readings and team post, we want you to start working on the rubrics that we will begin to use to asses the weekly team-based posts and the associated comments. We are also interested in you creating a model post that we will use as a framework for the coming Occupy Learning artifacts. During what would be class time, each team will produce:

• A rubric for the team writings and comments
• A model Occupy Learning outcome using the KC classroom as the model. Plan to interview both of us, others in and around our classroom space, and perhaps each other. A goal is to make each of these multimedia in form, so be prepared to take pictures, shoot video, record audio, etc to illustrate what the room is really like. Think critically about what both the positive and negative aspects of the space are. Talk about potential areas for improvements. Think about the learning space itself. (keeping in mind that future will not be the rooms we will be working in). Also, make sure your team asks about what kinds of instruction the classroom supports.

Out of Class

• Readings are Pea and Rogers. Both readings are found on the Yammer site.
• Team post with a focus on design. - Each team should have one.
• Rubric for team based posts - Each team should have one.
• Sample Occupy web frameworks. - Each team should have one. This should illustrate a vision for how these artifacts should be shared.

In class the next week (week 4):

• Present videos
• Present the rubrics
• Present the framework
• Discuss Pea & Rogers (Diffusion)

...Multiple identities exist within a social community but not all identities are relevant simultaneously.

Innovative instructional designs recognize how students use technologies to present multiple identities. This process of constructing different identities involves skills such as synthesis and critical analysis (of the context). Through a critical analysis of the audience and purpose, they decide what kind of identity will help them be recognized (e.g., Gee 1999) by that Discourse Community from which they seek recognition.

Digital spaces have opened opportunities for further situated identity construction and provide affordances that have not existed before. Members of these online networks must learn the recognizable patterns of meaning making and interactions common to Gee's notion of a Discourse community defined above. For example, when people use social media tools (e.g. Facebook or Twitter), successful membership in the situated context directs them to use language in more truncated, abbreviated styles than would be used on other written language contexts. The constraints (or implicit rules guiding the use of the tool) conveys to the individual that if they want to achieve their desired impact or communication goal than they need to use fewer words than they would have if they were talking to someone face-to-face or writing a long-form communication (academic essay, research article, book).

However, recognizable membership usage for these situated identities is defined not only through the interaction of other members of the Discourse but also through the sponsor establishing the context for the communication. Even though individuals may gather and communicate via Facebook or Twitter, those individuals have to work within the constraints established by the sponsor of that literacy tool/medium. Groups may further define their patterns but the frame is often guided through the sponsor to a great extent. Whether an individual who seeks to adopt or construct an identity that includes a chosen Discourse has access to resources to make this connection is not fully explored in the readings.

Implicit in Discourses is the potential for varied access to what Gee calls social goods (p. 22). Although Gee does not specifically use the term 'power,' levels of status and roles of representation are addressed and include institutions as well as people. For example, the teacher speaking to parents speaks for her/himself as classroom teacher but also speaks as a representative of the school in the eyes of the larger local community. Yet whether the students who enter that classroom have the life experience or access to tools to enter a new Discourse is of great debate in educational circles.

"In the end, a Discourse is a "dance" that exists in the abstract as a coordinated pattern of words, deeds, values, beliefs, symbols, tools, objects, times, and places and in the here-and-now as a performance that is recognizable as just such a coordination" (Gee, 1999, p. 28).

Discourse membership is a social contract of sorts. To claim and successfully be a part of a Discourse you and the others in that Discourse community must recognize your ability to make and understand meanings in ways consistent with the community's communicative practices, values, and beliefs. Gee emphasizes the importance of this recognition as a means of successful membership ("sometimes... conscious, sometimes not" (p. 29)).
"The point is not how we "count" Discourses; the point is the performance, negotiation, and recognition work that goes into creating, sustaining, and transforming them, and the role of language (always with other things) in this process" (Gee, 1999, p. 30). As we engage in discussion of digital technologies and the language, texts, and ways of knowing in digital spaces, issues of access to construct or explore multiple identities is like to feed the discussion in future research.

"Survival is not possible if one approaches his environment, the social drama, with a fixed, unchangeable point of view-the witless repetitive response to the unperceived" (McLuhan, 1967, p. 4).

Identity is a composition of the self, constructed through social contexts and ways of being consistent with particular social and cultural Discourses (Gee, 1999). Individuals are likely to have multiple identities that are constructed across a variety of situated social contexts. A situated identity that successfully enacts membership in a particular Discourse constructs and interacts in ways that are meaningful for that Discourse. Meaningful ways include modes and mediums for communication (forms of language), "actions, interactions, ways of thinking, believing, valuing, and using various symbols, tools, and objects" that are socially recognizable and meaningful to other members of that Discourse who share that situated identity (Gee, 1999, p. 21). As identities are multiple for individuals engaging in varied situated contexts, so identities are also in various stages of formation and negotiation with others. Identities may complement each other, directly oppose others, or exist in temporally parallel but not integrated spaces. Multiple identities exist within a social community, but not all identities are relevant simultaneously.

This week's readings ("An Introduction to Discourse Analysis Theory and method" by Gee (1999), and The Medium is the Massage by McLuhan & Fiore (1967)) provided interesting fodder for an analysis of identity. In particular, Team Tiger (aka Group 2) focused on the following themes as they related to the concept of identity: d/Discourse Analysis, Recognition, Individualism/Authorship, and Context.

Language and communication impact identity. Gee shows (through Discourse Analysis) the ability to deconstruct a speaker's personality and values. In essence, we "enact" language for purposes of representing a particular identity, while at the same time, language constructs an identity for us. It provides the ability to share our inner thoughts and ideas, but also shapes how we can communicate these effectively.

Many members in our group found the ideas in Gee's "Real Indian" section particularly compelling. Roi has personally experienced the contextually-defined aspect of Japanese-American identity while navigating different spaces. Laura spent last summer living on an Ojibwe reservation and found it disconcerting that Gee did not mention (what she had experienced as being) the biggest deciding factor of "Real Indian" recognition--poverty. MJ posited that student groups also hold strong opinions and ideals that directly influence their identities. Recognizing, identifying, and understanding the implications of those interactions is something that is often not a focus for teachers, but should be.

While the two may seem dichotomous, it may be possible for collaboration to feed and nurture individualism. Individual identity [at least in the United States] is still the dominant definition of 'identity' and collective identity seems to take a back seat. However, the two can develop alongside each other. Just because more than one person contributes to a piece of work, individual input can still be important and recognized.

McLuhan & Fiore illustrates how context and content are inherently intertwined in The Medium is the Massage. Our senses cannot be turned off. They play a huge role in how we situate ourselves within our communities the roles that we play. With new technological advances (and their impact on how we receive communication), comes the "reshaping and restructuring patterns of social interdependence and every aspect of our personal life" (McLuhan & Fiore, 1966, pg. 3).

Identity influences (and is influenced by) multiple and interrelated factors. Gee and McLuhan & Fiore tease a few of these out--d/Discourse Analysis, Recognition, Individualism/Authorship, and Context. Understanding the links and their relationships help educators appreciate both students and the learning process.

Image is Girl Before a Mirror, Pablo Picasso, Boisgeloup, March 1932. Oil on canvas, 64 x 51 1/4" (162.3 x 130.2 cm). Gift of Mrs. Simon Guggenheim. © 2012 Estate of Pablo Picasso / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York

Community is a group of people who have shared values within the context of their common social purpose. The community members use a shared language that can be semiotic as well as verbal. In general, communities encourage and validate particular forms of participation. Participation can encompass disagreement, agreement, and all degrees in-between. Communities differ in their level of hierarchies of participation (e.g., some are flatter, some are more bureaucratic and hierarchical). Membership often depends on the adoption of certain social behavioral patterns that are established by the community as a whole.

Communities are socially constructed entities and, as such, their creations share a certain pattern of creation. In a community, independent actors come together in a shared space and develop a shared understanding.

We are asking you to do a little exploration into emerging technologies as teams. One of the better resources on the web for educators to tap into is Educause. They produce an excellent series called, "7 Things You Should Know About ..." It is essentially a series of short white papers that answer seven simple questions about a given technology. On lots of levels it the first place we stop when researching a new technology in a teaching or learning context. Find the seven things series by visiting the Educause site (http://www.educause.edu/7Things).

With that in mind, we'd like you to look at a few of the ones they have there that perk your interests as a team. Once you've organized your thoughts a bit about it we'd like you to create and share a short YouTube video that lets us know the following:

• What technologies did you review?
• Why?
• Are there novel ways you could see those technologies being put to use in education?
• Are there technologies you couldn't find at the Educause site that you'd like to learn more about?

If you don't have a YouTube account, just create one and record your video. If you don't have a webcam, all the machines in our classroom have one ... otherwise, most of the campus labs have webcams available. Once your video is recorded on YouTube, you'll use the Embed Code to create a new entry at the course site with your video in it. To embed a video follow these directions:

• Log into http://blogs.psu.edu and create a New Entry at the course blog.
• Switch from "Rich Text" to "Convert Line Breaks" in the Format drop down menu
• Write and format the text for the body of your entry. (Note: The easiest approach is to describe the video first, then insert it.)
• Look for the Embed code on the YouTube page and cut and paste it into the text body of the new entry. (The embed code begins as "