marija cubric
Posts: 25
 |
| 29/05/2007 09:20 |
|
This is the first in series of postings in response to Peter Kandlbinder's draft comments & review posted on "It's not just Web 2.0, it's all about pedagogic design"
Peter K: "In Cubric’s case, the success of this trial with wikis comes down the tutor’s choice of questions, clear deadlines, regular submission of work and the careful monitoring of student’s progress by tutors. This
is, however, as true for the face-to-face classroom teaching as it is for blended learning."
Agree - process is the essence, wikis are there to support it; But why wikis? The main objective of using wikis in our case is in providing a shared area for all students contributions that can be reviewed as a “collective” rather than individual knowledge and that gives us the following additional benefits:
- Tutor is helped in discovering those areas of "troublesome knowledge" (Perkins, 1999) that need to be re-visited and re-addressed
- Students get a chance to learn from other students
- It is easier/faster to review the work by the tutor (group rather than individual feedback)
- Students are encouraged to "collaborate" and get prepared for the new business models where "collaboration is expectation rather than exception" (Richardson, 2006)
- Everyone can see everything, therefore less tempting to cheat
- Support international students by providing examples of good (English) writing
- Foster development of non-cognitive transferable skills (research, organizational, negotiation etc)
...
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Kandlbinder
Posts: 4
|
| 31/05/2007 02:28 |
|
Hi Marija,
You list a a number of good reasons for collaborative learning but don't suggest anything that is specific to wikis. If we consider the cost of establishing and maintaining a wiki (which can come to many thousands of pounds if you add up student computer hardware, networking charges, servers, technical expertise and maintenance) there must be some benefit in requiring students to go online.
If we go back to the old Clark (1991) and Kozma (1991) debate, the benefits are often suggests as either a cheaper delivery of learning (usually through reduced travel costs) or students learning something new. In your case, you seem to be arguing that your students are learning something new by writing in a wiki.
I realise it can be hard to identify exactly what is being learnt when experimenting with a new technology but I imagine that it has something to do with authorship and the writing process. A wiki would reduce the concern about getting the first draft perfect and provides opportunities for multiple perspectives to be woven into the text, making the writing more public and formative. I see this as potentially helpful in a transition stage for students learning a new form of academic writing. Have you seen any benefits flow into the students other assignments? |
|
|
|
|
marija cubric
Posts: 25
|
| 31/05/2007 17:04 |
|
Hi Peter
Agree that everything done with wikis can be done w/out wikis (F2F or traditional VLE) but it is questionable how efficient or useful that other way will be regarding "everyone can see everything" (not sure how will this work F2F?; Wiki facilities openess and transparency of criteria and "hidden" knowledge (buried in e-mails and F2F discussions)
Re: writing process - I like Glogowski's term "transactional writing" (write, reflect on comments, re-write cycle) that is common to blogs, wikis, discussion groups
"Have you seen any benefits flow into the students other assignments?" All assignments were wiki-based apart from the first one therefore, not applicable ... |
|
|
|
|
|
