Este foi o resultado do fluxograma produzido pelo grupo relativo ás etapas de uma investigação.
I will review the learning object created by Lourdes, Marco and Teresa F. I must confess I had great expectations about this object, taking into account how the group was releasing its intended work.
The theme “Transparency on Online Learning” was arranged in an extremely intelligent.
The learning object presents us with the various learning spaces which has been running this unit, with a special emphasis on the Moodle platform, highlighting the personal profile page and discussion forums.
The trip takes place in various web tools, for example blogs, Toonlet or Twitter. The authors gave a special emphasis on Twitter, not only on the user personal page, but also the possibility of using hastags to follow a particular subject, in this case #mpel3.
Although I’ve enjoyed this learning object, I think the job would be perfect if instead of having made a video placed on youtube you have done an object that would allow greater interaction, for example VoiceThread.
Finally, I want to thank the prominence they gave me in the work. I’m starting to feel like a star. Read more at www.moodle.univ-ab.pt |
The learning objects that I will comment on are the joint work of Monica Velosa and Sandra Brás and the individual work of Luis Rodrigues.
Both work are quite different but with a common goal. Personally I think Facebook can enhance a space for communities of practice in the context of formal or non-formal or even formal learning. So I think that was an excellent idea to create a Facebook group, which they called “online teaching”, and that goes direct to one of the teacher goals, when Professor Paulsen said that he wanted objects with a greater degree of interactivity.
In about a week the group reached an impressive number of 288 users at the time of writing this review. I’m very impressed… |
The work of Luis became an analysis of the work of George Siemens on “The art of blogging.”
Despite the excellent research work and presentations made, but having regard to the proposal outlined by the teacher, I clearly prefer the work done on VoiceThread, because it allows a high degree of interaction.
However, I think Luis could used various web tools available in the net, to promote and share his work in order to collect interesting contributions to the appreciation of the work.Read more at www.moodle.univ-ab.pt |
In this article Morten Paulsen describes his theory of “Cooperative Online Learning”.
Professor Paulsen starts to identify the difference between individual collaborative and cooperative learning.
He focuses the Cooperative Learning Thoery in three pillars:
1. Voluntary, but attractive participation
2. Means promoting individual flexibility
3. Means promoting affinity to learning community
Transparency is also very important in Online Learning. With the Web 2.0 and Social Software Cooperative Learning gets a new level.
Professor Paulsen talks about his experience at NKI and how he implemented a great number of courses without losing quality.
In NKI they developed a tool to evaluate online courses. With this tool they could improve their online teaching. | Dr. Morten Flate Paulsen is Professor of Online Education at NITH and Director of Development at NKI Distance Education (www.nki.no) in Norway. In the article he presents his theory of “Cooperative learning”. The article describes how he developed a virtual learning environment that allows students to have optimal individual freedom within online learning communities. This article demonstrates that cooperative learning can be implemented successfully through a set of instruments or means. Paulsen reports positive results from surveys and experiences with cooperative learning, and relate these to issues like web 2.0, transparency, learning partners and individual progression plans.
|
Figure 1. Individual, cooperative and collaborative learning environments
|
The Theory of Cooperative Freedom is based on the following three pillars:
1. Voluntary, but attractive participation
2. Means promoting individual flexibility
3. Means promoting affinity to learning community
|
This post written and organized by Alan Levine has been used in the course designed by George Siemens and Steph Downes (CCK09) and served to initiate the discussion in the work week on “Transparency and Cooperation”.
Alan Levine divides this series in Amazing Stories of Photos, Jobs & Careers, Diagrams, Travel, Helping Others, Open Organizations, Publishing, and finally Connections
It ran a series of impressive stories about transparency, openness and sharing on the network.
The videos presented ranging from the own Alan Levine, from some of the most important personalities of the use of technology in educational settings such as by D’Arcy Norman, Stepehn Downes, Alec Couros, Sue Waters, George Siemens and Terry Anderson.
It is a work that must be included in any reference on this topic. While the Open Education movement focuses on institutional issues, a large ocean exists of powerful individual accomplishments simply from tapping into content that is open for sharing and re-use. As colorful as old covers of “Amazing Stories” magazine, this presentation shares moving, personal stories that would not have been previously possible, enabled by open licensed materials and personal networks. Beyond my own tales, others have been culled from the net, and you can share your own.
http://openedconference.org/archives/427 |
The Amazing Unknown Flower (Alan Levine) |
My one-question interview was made to Johanna Hane.
She did an excellent job, but still very experimental, on Google Wave potential impact on education and collaboration.
You should note that she used GoogleWave itself to develop is work, taking advantage of the collaboration of all those who wanted to contribute.
Today this public wave has 168 users and remains open to contributions …
Here is my question:
* What is your perspective, taking into account the study, on the potential use of Google Wave in contexts of online education?
| My answer would be that Googe Wave can help students that only meet online share their ideas, and discuss course topics in both synchonous and asynchronous conversations. |
| Another advantage is the possibility of play-back. |
| Moreover, students can use a wave to collect all their information on a certain topic of discussion. |
| Google Wave is an excellent tool for online education, and the users are free to develop it along their own needs. However, I think we also need to be a little careful not to embrace this with open arms, but to try it out ourselves and find out if it is appropriate for the things we would like to accomplish. As I wrote in my paper, I also think that there are a couple of things that need to be improved before Google Wave could be released to “the public”, but I do not want to speculate on the finished product (if there will ever be one…)Read more at www.moodle.univ-ab.pt |
I chose as one of the texts for my annotated bibliography, Google Wave - A revolutionary CSCL tool or an overestimated hype?
A work done collaboratively and coordinated by Johanna Hanne, using Google Wave and that tries to realize its potential to support teaching.
| I
used twitter in the basic U.S. History II survey course at U.T. Dallas in the
spring 2009 semester. |
| I wanted to find a way to incorporate more student-centered learning
techniques and involve the students more fully into the material. |
| I had heard of Twitter, but I
had not used it myself. |
| We
experimented with a variety of different strategies for encouraging the most
constructive discussions through twitter in the classroom. |
| Twitter is somewhat limiting. Tweets have to be less than 140 characters so
students are not able to go into a lot of detail in their comments. But I
instructed them to post more than one tweet if necessary. |
| I think the twitter experiment was successful primarily because it encouraged
students to engage who otherwise would not.Read more at www.utdallas.edu |
| Twitter is primarily a communication tool and has often been described as filling the gap between email and instant messaging (IM). It is interesting that it occupies this middle ground. |
| Twitter communication can be in both of these two different camps. It is a platform that can fluidly handle both synchronous and asynchronous messaging. |
| My favourite metaphor for how we use Twitter is the idea that it is a river that is constantly flowing. |
| In my opinion there is great potential in the use of Twitter to support teaching and learning. It is unique in this role because it is all about conversation on a larger scale. |
| Currently most users consider Twitter to be just a networking tool, this opinion was confirmed when I recently asked if it could be a teaching and learning tool. To make the transition into the classroom and having a direct influence on learning will take more people planning to use it and a growing weight of examples and successes to explore.Read more at tbarrett.edublogs.org |
The aim of this post is to write a brief review on the learning objects published by Sandra Brás and Marcos Freitas + Lurdes Martins. I think both make an excellent analysis of Prof. Morten Paulsen “Online Cooperative Learning”. Two differente kinds of work but both meet the objectives.
Sandra built a dialogue between two distance learners about cooperation while Marcos and Lurdes made a video about transparency in cooperative learning.
I liked both but I have something to say about the video. I think the image of Lourdes is too exposed during the video. In a total of 5:40, Lurdes appears 1:15 at the beginning and the end almost 1:00. I think the most important highlight should be the message and so the focus should be more in the slides’s wealth.
In my opinion if was the author that was talking about the issue it would be relevant, moreover I believe that they should have reduced the intervention of Lurdes.
In conclusion I think that we have two good learning objects about Online Cooperative Learning. Read more at www.moodle.univ-ab.pt |
|
Register to comment: