learner generated contexts

Shock of the Old 2008

A Coincidence of Motivations leading to

Agile Configurations

Fred Garnett FRSA

The Learner Generated Context Group

http://learnergeneratedcontexts.pbwiki.com/



Learner Generated Contexts

Topics

Learner-Generated Contexts Group

A Coincidence of Motivations;

Learning & pedagogies

Open Context Model; Issues and Questions

Agile Configurations;

Developing an Architecture of Participation

Developmental e-maturity

E-learning and Public Value

Adaptive Institutions; Issues and Questions


A Coincidence of Motivations looking to Agile Configurations;

“What can existing pedagogical theories and frameworks tell us about the effective deployment of personal and collaborative tools in teaching and learning? Are new theories and frameworks needed?

What issues must be addressed to achieve this?

1.Co-incidence of Motivations; to enable the co-design of learning

2.Agile Configurations; to enable the supporting adaptive institutions

Learner-Generated Contexts Group; Professors, Learner-centred Design, Researcher in narratives and learning; “mediacitizens” (participative media), Participant Community Informatics, “obuchenie” researcher, interactive learning space designer, multi-media designer, OFSTED Inspector, philosophical theoretician, software developers, m-learning researcher, policy wonks, ecologist.


“The Future is already here

It is us unevenly distributed”

(William Gibson)


Our working definition of Learner Generated Contexts;

Learning is a social process occurring across a continuum of contexts

Learning must be “Fit for Context”;

Learner Generated Contexts are a;

“Coincidence of Motivations leading to Agile Configurations”

“A Learner Generated Context can be defined as a context created by people interacting together with a common, self-defined learning goal. The key aspect of Learner Generated Contexts is that they are generated through the enterprise of those who would previously have been consumers in a context created for them”


What follows from this?

1.Developing context-based models as the organising principle for designing learning (see Open Context model - JIME)

2. Re-aligning the relationship between learning & institutionalisation

3. Challenging the relationship between consumption and creation in the formal learning process

And in so doing find ways to re-negotiate the issues concerning roles, expertise, knowledge, pedagogy, accreditation, power, technology, participation and democracy


Learning & pedagogies; a developmental view

Pedagogy; develops the learners understanding of a subject

Andragogy; develops an understanding of how to negotiate the learning process

Heutagogy; develops an understanding that you are empowered to look at the learning context afresh and take decisions in that context

What do these approaches mean?

Can we integrate them as the Open Context Model of Learning?


Learning & pedagogies; the age differential

e-learning is communicative, collaborative, process-based

Changes the role of pedagogy; need andragogy & heutagogy

Delivered in the PAH Continuum; Pedagogy Andragogy Heutagogy

Locus of Control teacher learner learner

Educational sector schools adult education doctoral research

Cognition Level cognitive metacognitive epistemic

Knowledge Production Context

Subject understanding Process negotiation Context shaping


Learning & pedagogies;

The Open Context Model; (a collaborative pedagogy?)


The Open Context Model; Issues and Questions

Teachers; (Facilitation)

1. Can use model to develop & co-design learning goals & strategies

2. Decide whether to integrate participatory tools into learning

Learners (Empowerment)

1. Develop Learning to Learn skills

2. Show teachers how to use participatory tools

3. Understand knowledge creation issues

Institutions (Flexibility)

1. Provide appropriate CPD strategies

2. Developing Adaptive e-mature institutions



E-learning & Public Value;

Outcomes designed for “public value” as well as individual targets;

Outcomes seen as services of value to learners, users and the public;

Transparency of conception, delivery and review of strategy; outcomes negotiated between users, providers and wider groups (collaborative co-creation);

Trust being both the precondition for strategy development and implementation and deriving from good service provision;

Networks central to pulling together practitioners, managers and key client/constituent groups.

Shared outcomes collaboratively negotiated across networks


A “developmental” e-maturity framework (EMFFE)

Two-year project working with 15 Pilot Colleges

5x5 Model of e-maturity iterated over 3 cycles mapped to drivers

Leadership, Contexts, Resources, Support, Learning & Teaching

Reviewed and applied to WBL, PCDL, OeL

3. Networked, 4. pro-active network, 5. integrated external networks

Lessons learnt; better (integrated) strategic planning, enables technology planning, better inspection prep and response, integrates learning and management

Key use as a self-assessment resource



Using e-maturity frameworks as a developmental tool will enable institutions to improve their flexibility (EMFFE)

Develop knowledge networks and organisational strategies

Introduce enhanced public value measures of outcomes, services, transparency, trust, networks and negotiated collaborative outcomes

Use these elements to introduce co-creation and co-design of learning

Develop self-assessment and self-review strategies

as part of e-mature collaborative networks educational institutions will be able to influence the policy landscape

“adaptive institutions working across collaborative networks”


Examples from our practice


Developing an Institutional Architecture of Participation

Issues and Questions;

1. How do we create a developmental approach to e-maturity?

2. How do we develop a co-creation and co-design model of learning?

3. Have we learnt enough from JISC Designing for Learning?

4. Can we develop KPIs and system measures that capture learning?

5. How do we re-engineer institutions to use the affordances of technology?

6. Can we integrate internal and external networks (eg 14-19 Diploma, Colleges, Offender Learning, ELGG, web 2.0)?

7. Can we self-regulate education?

8. How can we work with learners to help achieve this?


References;

1.http://learnergeneratedcontexts.pbwiki.com/

2.http://learnergeneratedcontexts.pbwiki.com/jime/

3.http://ematurityframework.pbwiki.com/

4.http://www.lboro.ac.uk/library/eLit2006/

5.http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html

6.http://web.forret.com/tools/mememap.asp (meme map tool)

7.An Open Context Based Model of Learning; Luckin et al JIME 2008

8.Developing an organisational architecture of participation; Garnett et al BJET May 2008


Shock of the Old 2008

A Coincidence of Motivations leading to Agile Configurations

Fred Garnett FRSA

[email protected]


learner generated contexts

Technology

learning context

context learner

continuum of contexts

learning researcher

learning process heutagogy

open context model of

formal learning process

learnercentred design