EME 6414 - MJW

  I thought the article by Caswell, Henson, Jensen, and Wiley was useful as it detailed how OERs can facilitate equitable access to education on a global scale. Open courseware has the potential to make information currently available to the haves and make it available to have nots which is a very powerful concept. The technology exists to connect people with information to that they can improve themselves and their communities.

  I learnt a lot this week about the nature and behaviours associated with online communities. Working on the assignment (concept version) while addressing the week’s readings and activities certainly amplified a few concepts for me. I was interested to consider the intersection between what functionality online platforms offer and the way they shape interaction through their functionality. It was also interesting to consider how individuals respond and engagement with these communication forums online. What is increasingly apparent is the focus on individualism and how much autonomy and power the individual has to direct their own path. I think this goes both ways, the individual should also accept a higher degree of responsibility for how they comprehend and engage with the environment, participants and context.

I learnt a few new things this week relative to digital badges, crowdsourcing and tagging. I think they all have utility relative to online learning environments and they are certainly reflective of Web2.0 technologies. I think both crowdsourcing and tagging can be applied effectively to establish useful links between individuals that can then lead to deeper understanding and a broader context for the application of critical thinking skills.

This week I reviewed the article by Randall & West (2020) relative to the significance of open badges. I was interesting to read about how this concept is perceived by school leaders. A point of note for myself is to investigate the difference between microcredentials and digital badges (perhaps the contexts in which they can be accessed is a point of difference). It is clear that they can clearly signal achievement and capability which is of value. It was no surprise that endorsements from professional organisations supported credibility. I think the point raise about the excessive data was a valid one and has the potential to cloud the decision making process relative to individuals. I think they definitely reflect web2.0 technologies as they are flexible, portable and evidence based.

This week I reviewed the article by Wilson (2018) relative to crowdsourcing and self-instruction. I hadn’t previously considered crowdsourcing from the perspective outlined in the article, the perspective that sees the students as co-creators of learning resources and content (similar to produsage). This approach certainly supports active and self-directed learning methodologies as the students develop materials and integrate them into the curriculum. Crowdsourcing also supports peer-to-peer learning and collaboration between students, particularly relative to the creation of content. I also quite like distributed learning environments as they facilitate deeper research with a focus on the endstate (i.e., content creation that aligns with the learning objectives). The approaches outlined in this article align well constructivism and connectivism. I think these approaches develop critical thinking and research skills which are an imperative in today’s society.

  There was a strong focus this week on informal and formal learning for me. The beauty of social media platforms is that offer opportunities for both depending on the target audience, context, triggers for learning and the objectives of the learning activity. The functionality of social media platforms is powerful in terms of addressing a range of leaning needs; however, it also requires skills operators who can select the right platform and structure the learning content coherent (relative to the platform) in order to achieve the stated objectives.