Designing and evaluating social media for learning: shaping social networking into social learning?
Post on 27-Sep-2016
Embed Size (px)
Designing and evaluating social media forlearning: shaping social networking intosocial learning?jcal_484 177..182
Introduction: current status of social mediaand learning
Although the adoption of social media (or Web 2.0 tech-nologies) within our everyday lives is relatively recent,many have attempted to embrace these technologies andrelated digital literacies for learning in educationalinstitutions and the workplace. The state of the art in thisrespect before 2010 was reflected in two key publica-tions edited by the editors of this Special Issue. Thesewere a special issue in this journal on social software,Web 2.0, and learning (Ravenscroft 2009), and a Hand-book of Research on Social Software & DevelopingCommunity Ontologies (Hatzipanagos & Warburton2009). These covered a wide range of perspectives andprojects that collectively conveyed the energy andenthusiasm for embracing more open and participativeapproaches to learning, mainly through applying andadapting existing social media technologies, such asweblogs (blogs), wikis, and popular social networkingtools (e.g. Facebook). This collection of work alsouncovered some deep misalignments and paradoxes inthe context of traditional education:
There is also the clear tension between the tradition oflearning as a highly structured and organized experience,involving clear levels of authority, and, the more collabo-rative, volatile and anarchic nature of the social web.(Ravenscroft 2009, p. 5)
One particular factor in this respect was nicely pointedout by Clark et al. (2009):
More needs to be understood about the transferability ofWeb 2.0 skill sets and ways in which these can be used tosupport formal learning. (Clark et al. 2009, p. 56)
This initial and somewhat fractured discourse is whatthis Special Issue aims to develop significantly as wearguably move to the next generation of initiatives thataim to support learning with social media. One of thekey challenges in this respect that is represented by twoarticles in the Special Issue (Fitzgerald, Ravenscroft
et al.) is to clarify and distinguish what we consider tobe informal and formal learning, and what we considerto be important about relationships between the two.This is important because the claim that is often madeabout social media is that it is an effective bridgebetween informal and formal learning.
Reconciling informal and formal learningthrough design
One of the key ongoing agendas, across the Europeaneducational landscape in particular, is finding ways tocapture meaningful informal learning experiences byexplicitly linking these to formal structures, and provid-ing frameworks within which informal learning canthen be validated and accredited (Cedefop Report2007). The idea is to harness individually motivated andinterest-driven informal learning within wider and morestandardized educational practices and organizations.This is recognized as especially pertinent given theprominence of the lifelong learning agenda and thediverse nature of student profiles, from adult, voca-tional, part-time, distance, digital natives, and so on.Social media technologies can offer significant poten-tial if they can support informal and formal learningpractices within the same digital space through thesharing of common digital literacies. Similarly, spe-cially designed social software can focus on semi-formal learning practices (e.g. Ravenscroft et al. 2008)that deliberately bridge informal and formal dimensionsof the learning process.
Nevertheless, given the pace of change in the possiblesocial media configurations, or digital ecosystems,that can be deployed in support of informal and formallearning, it is clear that we need to focus on a morefuture-proof concept than the technologies themselves,which will assist us in both better understanding andrealizing learning, or new forms of learning. So theframe adopted in this Special Issue collection is theargument that design is a suitably rich, flexible, and
2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd Journal of Computer Assisted Learning (2012), 28, 177182 177
yet formal enough concept to help us engineer, or atleast favour, better learning with social media while alsosupporting a better understanding of the underlyingsocial processes at play. The articles by Fitzgerald andRavenscroft are particularly clear in illustrating thistheme of using design frameworks to specificallypromote informal learning with social media, in twocontrasting contexts, creating user-generated contentfor location-based learning and informal learning andknowledge maturing in the workplace, respectively.This stance (of focusing on design) is also partly a reac-tion to research in the technology-enhanced learning(TEL) field that has been overly predicated on technolo-gies, as this reliance is no longer feasible given the con-tinued speed of technology development.
The interplay of problematization, design,and evaluation
Interestingly, the fact that social media can potentiallyencompass social networking and social learning withinthe same technological spaces raises specific problemsas well as providing unique opportunities. If we con-ceive of design as increasingly becoming a process ofintervention within emerging or existing digital culturesthat are difficult to clearly define, as they are usuallyopen, participative, and constantly evolving, this raisessignificant problems in promoting clearly defined learn-ing processes and outcomes. Indeed, design becomes asmuch about understanding and promoting the desiredtechnology-mediated processes and practices as theimplementation of a specific technology or orchestra-tion of technologies to address a defined problem oropportunity. Further, deploying and embedding socialmedia innovations then changes the nature of the under-lying learning and communicative practices that are atplay. We argue that the way to address these complexi-ties is to have a more explicit and closer linkage amongproblematization,1 design, and evaluation. This meansthat we need to pay careful attention to addressing theinterplay of (1) understanding the learning problem andcontext, and how it evolves; (2) designing social mediainterventions; and (3) ongoing evaluations. Within thisapproach, these three processes (problematization,design and evaluation) constantly feed into one anotherin an ongoing spiral-like fashion and are not discretephases of a staged design process. These perspectivescan all be articulated within a holistic design approach
that conjoins Design-based Research with ActionResearch. The articles in this collection advance ourunderstanding of social media and learning throughbeing applicable to features of this frame of Design-based Research in Action, where design and evaluationof social media are seen as clearly interconnected pro-cesses. This stance is clearly illustrated through thedesign approach that is adopted by Ravenscroft et al.Similarly, the emphasis on problematization (of thelearning situation) is shown by Huang & Lo in relationto a thorough examination of what makes bloggingattractive to bloggers?, and the link between problema-tization and evaluation is systematically articulated byJimoyiannis andAngelaina in relation to their investiga-tion of engagement and learning within educationalblogs.
Towards a more critical discourse andnewmethodologies
The implications of the challenges and perspectives thatare raised earlier are that we need to move away fromthe hype and overblown expectations about socialmedia and learning, and instead adopt a more criticaldiscourse. This discourse needs to include thoroughempirical examinations of social media for learning,and accommodate new or revised methodologies for thedevelopment, deployment, and evaluation of socialmedia for learning.
The first article by Friesen and Lowe provides a pow-erful critique of the alleged promise of exploiting themost commonplace and popular social media, such asGoogle and Facebook. They do this through adaptingthe work of the media theorist, Raymond Williams, whooriginally wrote about the relationship between adver-tising and television. They argue that Williams (1974)notions of information design, architecture, and algo-rithm that applied to television also apply to commercialsocial media (such as Google and Facebook). Theseauthors point out:
In recent years, new Web-based social media have beenportrayed as placing the learner at the centre of networksof knowledge and expertise that potentially lead to newforms of learning and education despite the fact that thesemedia themselves make no educational promises.
They follow this by pointing out that not only aresocial media not designed for learning and education,but that the commercial model behind popular social
2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
media actually prohibits learning because they funda-mentally promote conviviality and deliberatelyexclude fostering the capacity for debate and disagree-ment. The latter is considered fundamental to learningand has a long pedigree from dialogic (e.g. Bahktin1986; Wegerif 2007) and dialectic (e.g. Ravenscroftet al. 2007; Ravenscroft & McAlister 2008) perspec-tives and social constructivist approaches to learning(e.g. Vygotsky 1978; Wertsch 1991). Although recentwork (Ravenscroft 2010) has deliberately addressed thisapparent contradiction between social media-drivenconnectivist theory (Siemens 2006) and social construc-tivism, a specific and important point is clearly and reso-nantly made by Friesen and Lowe:
We work toward this conclusion by making the case thatsocial networking offers only a truncated capacity tofoster disagreement and debate because dominant pro-grammes and models primarily foster conviviality andliking.