leicester 2011

Jon Dron and Terry Anderson

Fun and Fear in Open Spaces

Image from kurtxio

Media ZooUniversity of

Leicester

Issues in DistanceEducation Series

aupress.cawww.irrodl.org

Unpaid ADVERTISEMENT

Values

We can (and must) continuously improve the quality, effectiveness, appeal, cost and time efficiency of the learning experience.

Student control and freedom is integral to 21st Century life-long education and learning.

Education for elites is not sufficient for planetary survival

4

Pervasive Openness

University as a More Open Community

5

2

agoraphobia

2

the fear of open spaces

3

agoraphilia

3

the love of open spaces

Which networks do you use and find useful? Why?

Any others?

setnet

group

collective

Social forms

The Learning Management Systemsor VLE

• Fixed periods of engagement• limited learner control• teaching-led• Closed• Private

group

Athabasca Landing

5A Wordle view of Landing rationale

An open space to share...

Anyone can share

anything with anyone.

Open in time and in space.

15

Multiple rationales

15

set

net

group

collective

CoursesCommitteesResearch groupsStudy groupsCentres and departments

Sustaining tiesMaking tiesAd hoc networksKnowledge diffusionSocial capitalSocial presence

CooperationSharingSerendipityInterest -orientationSense-makingCollective intelligenceIntentional discovery

“Your Friends Make you Fat”

Fowler & Christakis (2007)A study of Obesity http://www.world-science.net/othernews/070725_obesity.htm

They can also make you smart!

Fowler & Christakis (2007)A study of Obesity http://www.world-science.net/othernews/070725_obesity.htm

The Closed Garden versus Facebook

• Boutique networks• Differentiating work, from school, from fun• Context is king• social networking a

feature, not a destination

18

A Guided Tour of the Landing https://landing.athabascau.ca

Athabasca Landing

Tool InstancesUsers: 2657Messages: 21762Files: 3561Blog posts: 3348Wire posts: 1921Bookmarked items: 1550Discussion topics: 1305Pages: 853Photos: 788Top-level pages: 530Event Calendar: 171Albums: 109Bookmark Folder: 87Polls: 69

New Users Added per Month

Monthly Blog Posts

Landing Groups

•271 Groups

•Average of 9 .39 members each

•42% of population a member of one or more groups

•Of these, members of 8 groups (on average)

Social networking a feature, not a destination

• 35% of people followed by someone else (long tail shown here)

• 22% following someone else

• 17% reciprocal• 4% members of nets and not groups

• 24% in groups but not nets

Content creation and the long tail

• 28% are content creators

• 61% of content created by 1% of those

• 33% by next 10%

• 90% of the 28% of people creating content create 6% of it

24

A soft space

25

Public vs private

• It all depends on context and purpose...

25

PUBLIC SET NET GROUP

Blogs 36% 50% 2% 11%

Wikis (8.5% private)

18% 45% 2% 26%

Bookmarks 9% 65% 0.5% 24%

Images 6% 75% 6% 10%

26

Public vs private

26

27

Groups

• Safety• familiarity (in education)• formality• trust• scaffolding• structure• Reliability• Group think• Cliques, hidden curriculum

27

group

Scariness

28

Networks

• Connectivity• strength of weak ties• blurred boundaries• shifting contexts• risk• insecurity• partial openness• (appear) unstructured

28

net

Scariness

29

Sets

• anonymity• Openness• Aggregated traces• analytics• Danger• Imposed structure• loss of identity• unreliability

29

set

Scariness

30

Why open?

• Greater interaction and feedback• Transparency• Social capital• Self-promotion• Altruism• Course requirements• Good ideas

•Fear of ....

• loss of face

• loss of privacy

• legal issues

• loss of control

• permanence

• freeloaders

• being unkind (especially wikis)

• exposure

• the unknown

Why not open?

Original MetricsTo increase the ease and effectiveness with

which people at AU can create, sustain and

discover relationships and work

collaboratively, both professionally and

personally

Quantitative

Spread of social networks (number of users)

Profile Use

Qualitative

Interviews

Focus groups

Original MetricsTo increase the ease with which

information and knowledge can be

shared outside formal channels

Quantitative

Number and change in wire useage

Creation of groups

Number of blog posts

Use by university leaders

Qualitative

Interviews

Focus groups

Original MetricsIntegrate of services with existing

provisions

Quantitative

Successful integration of software

with Moodle, external blogs, twitter,

Wonderland, Zimbra, library, etc

Effectiveness of single sign on

Original MetricsTo enable the use of such services in

formal as well as informal education

and research

Quantitative

Use in formal courses

Use by research groups

Creation of ‘learning’ groups

(task, subject focused)

Number of “beyond the course”

learning groups

Qualitative

Interviews

Focus groups

32

Strategies for openness in social spaces

• Selective access control• Context control• Use of defaults• Establishment of norms• Valorisation of open content• Help and resources• Open discussion• Policies and rules

Final Questionable Implication

39

equivalencytheorem.info

40

41

The Interaction Equivalency (EQuiv) Websitehttp://equivalencytheorem.info/

42

Anderson, T. (2003 )Getting the Mix Right Again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction.

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230

OERu

• Can OERs + Student Networking eliminate the cost of teachers??

43

OERu as a Disruptive Technology

Clayton Christiansen 2012

• “The pessimist complains about the wind, the optimist expects it to change, the realist adjusts the sails.” William Arthur Ward (1921 – 1994)

Your comments and questions are most

welcomed

https://landing.athabascau.ca/pg/profile/jond

https://landing.athabascau.ca/pg/profile/terrya