First I would like to begin with my expectations of the course - as the name suggests, I expected to get acquainted with new environments throughout the Internet that we hadn't used before, and the theory behind them. I also expected the course to have the usual pattern - each task (or set of tasks) would take one week, as we are used to.
The reality outcome was too much theory and a few environments (including PiratePad, Flashmeeting, PLENK 2010), which seemed familiar from other courses. Course tasks had to be planned quickly to your daily schedule, since deadlines and tasks appeared quite vaguely and if missed, you lost points. As an average Estonian MA student, I work and this makes such schedule very difficult to manage.
All in all I would not trash the whole course - I think the group got new theoretical knowledge which can help them in many fields and tasks later. The course should have had a backbone in order to plan the activities and studies. I am sure that a student nowadays learns better from doing things than from reading and reflecting, so a few practical tasks would have come in handy with this course as well. The most memorable courses for me have been practical ones with certain tasks. Although I liked the thought of having the course in my computer, not being physically present in Tallinn.
And what puzzled me was that one lecturer disappeared at the beginning and the other one was left all alone with all the tasks to read. At least it seemed so after the group started "rioting" on the deadlines. Thanks to the understanding nature of Terje, the group got a smoother schedule.
About my contribution - since this year has had many changes, I was not able to work as thoroughly as in the last two semesters, and I disregarded a few tasks from the plan. Regarding my personal schedule, I did my best to pass the course. If the course would have taken place the next semester, I would have done better.
19.12.10
Task 13. Re-designing and re-instrumentalising activities.
The task was to think about an activity and (how it) can be amended with the help of digital technology.
Let's take watching television, an everyday activity.
Television in Estonia has been available since the year 1955, but it made its way to public already in 1928. The first television sets became available in the UK, US, and Soviet Union. In 1956 first television sets could be bought in Tallinn, the capital of Estonia.
TV transmission was first black and white, but now it is colourful, digital and can be easily viewed from any corner of the world. Estonia got its colourful picture inside the TV set already in 1975, but the world could view colourful images already in 1940.
I was born in the 1980's and as far as I can remember, we have always had a television set, a colourful one, and we fought over using rights of the TV with my two brothers. Television watching was possible only through one TV set and it was controlled manually, you had to stand up, go to the television set and push or turn the buttons.
The 1990's became the turning point in our family, where the remote control came and also virtual console games could be played through the television screen with the help of remote control joysticks and guns. Super Mario was my personal favourite.
When I first started to learn about the computers in 1996, it was not so thrilling with computers having only DOS systems and graphics were minimal, but in 1998 when our family got its first personal computer, my world changed - I got hooked with the "thing", later accompanied with Internet, and my interest in digital technology rose.
Nowadays these two gadgets can easily be mixed, since one can view computer images through a TV screen or vice versa, digital technology has helped us a lot. You do not necessarily have to have a TV set at home to view television.
I would describe my TV viewing habits then and now:
In the 1980s when I wanted to watch TV, I turned it on manually and sat on the couch watching children's programmes. If necessary, I stood up from the couch and turned up the volume or changed the channel manually. In the next decade it was possible to watch satellite TV in our family, and channels like MTV, VIVA and the like became popular for me. I also liked Cartoon Network. In the middle of the decade it was possible to change channels with a remote control without standing up. Occasionally there were mishaps in transmission.
The 2000s did not bring much change until the impossible happened - my TV set fell down and I lost the possibility of watching TV. I chose another alternative and downloaded illegaly all the serials that I was watching at that time and spent night hours watching them. When the hard disc broke, I did not care and am not a fan of TV anymore.
But there are some films and shows I enjoy watching via my computer, which has different TV archives and can be watched legally. Since television became digital on the 1st of July in 2010 in Estonia, the official Estonian channels can be viewed through your computer screen. If you cannot watch your favourite shows it is easier to record them and watch later straight from your computer. No need for a TV set anymore (if you are comfortable without one). But still, TV watching is a lot different - there are digital television boxes which allow you to watch different channels all over the world. There are usually two remotes on people's couches - one for the TV set, another for the digibox. When you push the buttons, you can choose between channels, read teletext and information about the programmes, and much much more.
I think TV history has changed throughout the years and will become even better. For example controlling the channels with your mind (a built-in chip that controls your emotions and thoughts) and projecting them onto your wall, no need of many gadgets at all. I believe that this is a very utopian perspective of things, but I think that watching TV will become even simpler than it is now.
Literature:
History of Estonian Television
Television, wikipedia article
Let's take watching television, an everyday activity.
Television in Estonia has been available since the year 1955, but it made its way to public already in 1928. The first television sets became available in the UK, US, and Soviet Union. In 1956 first television sets could be bought in Tallinn, the capital of Estonia.
TV transmission was first black and white, but now it is colourful, digital and can be easily viewed from any corner of the world. Estonia got its colourful picture inside the TV set already in 1975, but the world could view colourful images already in 1940.
I was born in the 1980's and as far as I can remember, we have always had a television set, a colourful one, and we fought over using rights of the TV with my two brothers. Television watching was possible only through one TV set and it was controlled manually, you had to stand up, go to the television set and push or turn the buttons.
The 1990's became the turning point in our family, where the remote control came and also virtual console games could be played through the television screen with the help of remote control joysticks and guns. Super Mario was my personal favourite.
When I first started to learn about the computers in 1996, it was not so thrilling with computers having only DOS systems and graphics were minimal, but in 1998 when our family got its first personal computer, my world changed - I got hooked with the "thing", later accompanied with Internet, and my interest in digital technology rose.
Nowadays these two gadgets can easily be mixed, since one can view computer images through a TV screen or vice versa, digital technology has helped us a lot. You do not necessarily have to have a TV set at home to view television.
I would describe my TV viewing habits then and now:
In the 1980s when I wanted to watch TV, I turned it on manually and sat on the couch watching children's programmes. If necessary, I stood up from the couch and turned up the volume or changed the channel manually. In the next decade it was possible to watch satellite TV in our family, and channels like MTV, VIVA and the like became popular for me. I also liked Cartoon Network. In the middle of the decade it was possible to change channels with a remote control without standing up. Occasionally there were mishaps in transmission.
The 2000s did not bring much change until the impossible happened - my TV set fell down and I lost the possibility of watching TV. I chose another alternative and downloaded illegaly all the serials that I was watching at that time and spent night hours watching them. When the hard disc broke, I did not care and am not a fan of TV anymore.
But there are some films and shows I enjoy watching via my computer, which has different TV archives and can be watched legally. Since television became digital on the 1st of July in 2010 in Estonia, the official Estonian channels can be viewed through your computer screen. If you cannot watch your favourite shows it is easier to record them and watch later straight from your computer. No need for a TV set anymore (if you are comfortable without one). But still, TV watching is a lot different - there are digital television boxes which allow you to watch different channels all over the world. There are usually two remotes on people's couches - one for the TV set, another for the digibox. When you push the buttons, you can choose between channels, read teletext and information about the programmes, and much much more.
I think TV history has changed throughout the years and will become even better. For example controlling the channels with your mind (a built-in chip that controls your emotions and thoughts) and projecting them onto your wall, no need of many gadgets at all. I believe that this is a very utopian perspective of things, but I think that watching TV will become even simpler than it is now.
Literature:
History of Estonian Television
Television, wikipedia article
11.12.10
Reflektsioon kursusele Õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud
Kursuse lõpureflektsioon hõlmab endas küsimustele ausalt vastamist ja enda sisse vaatamist kursuse lõpuks.
Kommenteeriks oma õpilepingut kursust läbides - kindlasti sain ma lisateadmisi õpikeskkondade osas, kuid ma arvan, et pärast kursust tuleks materjalid veelkord süvenenult läbi lugeda, et kogu info talletada ja seda edaspidi vajadusel kasutada. Kursuse jooksul sain palju uut informatsiooni, samuti kinnistusid kontseptuaalse disaini oskused, mida eelmisel aastal just õppisin.
Eesmärke ma ei saavutanud kahjuks täielikult, kuna töö- ja ajaplaneerimine ebaõnnestus. Tutvusin kursuse blogiga ning uute õppematerjalidega, kuid ei suutnud hakkama saada kõikide koduste ülesannete õigeaegse postitamisega. Tagasisidest olin huvitatud, kuid seda jagus napilt.
Kursusekaaslaste blogide kommenteerimise olen vaid "vajadusel" enda jaoks märkinud ja ilmselt ei teinud ma sellest vajadust, mistõttu jäid minu poolt blogid kommenteerimata.
Olen õpilepingus tsiteerinud: " Oma saavutusi hindan eelkõige enesetunde järgi - kui tunnen ennast hästi, siis on järelikult kõik õnnestunud. Kui südametunnistus piinab, on midagi tegemata jäänud. Ehk siis praktilisemalt olen rahul oma blogipostituste ja sellele eelnenud ning järgnenud tegevustega ning täitnud need õigeaegselt." - nimelt võin käe südamele pannes öelda, et hansu läbiviidud e-kursustest on see esimene, milles ma lõpuni vastu olen pidanud, kuid südametunnistus jäi mõne postituse puudumise pärast (samas lugesin üle, oli 7 postitust olemas, järelikult kriteeriumid täidetud) kripeldama.
Ma usun, et minu jaoks töötavad ühest küljest reeglid, kuna siis sunnin ennast tööle, kuid vahenädalad ja natuke kergem "režiim" minu enda jaoks ei toiminud hästi, kuna sellega unustasin antud aine tööd tegemata ning seadsin tööelu esiplaanile. Tugevad küljed on südametunnistus, mis sunnib mind tööle, kuid nõrgad küljed on kindlasti aja planeerimine ning töö jaotamine. Paraku ei ole ma endale kindlat graafikut suutnud teha, et oma asjadega võrdväärselt tegeleda.
Järgmisena peaksin läbima ajaplaneerimise kursuse.
Üldiselt kursusega jäin rahule, kuigi viimane osa jäi osadele gruppidele veidi arusaamatuks. Saan aru, et meie grupil oli eelis mõne teise grupi ees, kuna kaks grupi liiget olid eelmisel aastal läbinud kontseptuaalse disaini kursuse. Vaba ajaplaneerimine võimaldas ka "kummi venitada", et õpingud stressirohketeks ei kujuneks.
Kommenteeriks oma õpilepingut kursust läbides - kindlasti sain ma lisateadmisi õpikeskkondade osas, kuid ma arvan, et pärast kursust tuleks materjalid veelkord süvenenult läbi lugeda, et kogu info talletada ja seda edaspidi vajadusel kasutada. Kursuse jooksul sain palju uut informatsiooni, samuti kinnistusid kontseptuaalse disaini oskused, mida eelmisel aastal just õppisin.
Eesmärke ma ei saavutanud kahjuks täielikult, kuna töö- ja ajaplaneerimine ebaõnnestus. Tutvusin kursuse blogiga ning uute õppematerjalidega, kuid ei suutnud hakkama saada kõikide koduste ülesannete õigeaegse postitamisega. Tagasisidest olin huvitatud, kuid seda jagus napilt.
Kursusekaaslaste blogide kommenteerimise olen vaid "vajadusel" enda jaoks märkinud ja ilmselt ei teinud ma sellest vajadust, mistõttu jäid minu poolt blogid kommenteerimata.
Olen õpilepingus tsiteerinud: " Oma saavutusi hindan eelkõige enesetunde järgi - kui tunnen ennast hästi, siis on järelikult kõik õnnestunud. Kui südametunnistus piinab, on midagi tegemata jäänud. Ehk siis praktilisemalt olen rahul oma blogipostituste ja sellele eelnenud ning järgnenud tegevustega ning täitnud need õigeaegselt." - nimelt võin käe südamele pannes öelda, et hansu läbiviidud e-kursustest on see esimene, milles ma lõpuni vastu olen pidanud, kuid südametunnistus jäi mõne postituse puudumise pärast (samas lugesin üle, oli 7 postitust olemas, järelikult kriteeriumid täidetud) kripeldama.
Ma usun, et minu jaoks töötavad ühest küljest reeglid, kuna siis sunnin ennast tööle, kuid vahenädalad ja natuke kergem "režiim" minu enda jaoks ei toiminud hästi, kuna sellega unustasin antud aine tööd tegemata ning seadsin tööelu esiplaanile. Tugevad küljed on südametunnistus, mis sunnib mind tööle, kuid nõrgad küljed on kindlasti aja planeerimine ning töö jaotamine. Paraku ei ole ma endale kindlat graafikut suutnud teha, et oma asjadega võrdväärselt tegeleda.
Järgmisena peaksin läbima ajaplaneerimise kursuse.
Üldiselt kursusega jäin rahule, kuigi viimane osa jäi osadele gruppidele veidi arusaamatuks. Saan aru, et meie grupil oli eelis mõne teise grupi ees, kuna kaks grupi liiget olid eelmisel aastal läbinud kontseptuaalse disaini kursuse. Vaba ajaplaneerimine võimaldas ka "kummi venitada", et õpingud stressirohketeks ei kujuneks.
10.12.10
Task 12. New Interactive Environments. Tool or medium?
Today I will concentrate on the question whether digital world makes people different or not? Is computer technology a tool or medium?
While reading the text I had lots of other thoughts going through my mind concerning the people mentioned in the article, and the times when these texts were written by Leont'ev and Vygotski. The whole text seemed a little difficult to read, but it had a nice conclusion in the end so that one could finally gather his or her thoughts.
So - according to the article computer technology is both a tool and medium, more important is the person's view to the question. I think today some of us can actually live without computers and communicate the same way as in the olden days, but most of the people need computers in their work, leisure time, for communication, etc. - in this way to me it seems that digital world is a means for people to create an alternative means.
The author concentrates on digital world as a means for people to shape it according to their views and integrate every communication medium into it thus creating a "dominating medium".
I agree, digital media is a means to communicate and feel free to do almost anything with it, but does it make people different? While the author of the text seems to imply that it is not the computers or media that make people evil, but people themselves, then I have to disagree a little. I think that some of the "crazy" ideas still come from the media or social media. Perhaps the fact that people themselves are behind digital media and thus implicitly connected with creating the media, we might say it is true that people themselves have created the evil that comes from the medium, but it is the medium that brings quite a lot of emotions and thrill to people, and some of them take advantage of the great source like the Internet, and perform bad deeds.
In conclusion my answer to the question is that digital media is a medium with the help of which one can communicate and find out about things in a quicker way than one used to find before. It has definitely changed the behaviour of human kind, but if one wants to, he or she can live without digital technology and survive.
Source: Rückriem, G. Tool or Medium? The Meaning of Information and Telecommunication Technology to Human Practice. A Quest for Systemic Understanding of Activity Theory. Helsinki, 2. 12. 2003.
While reading the text I had lots of other thoughts going through my mind concerning the people mentioned in the article, and the times when these texts were written by Leont'ev and Vygotski. The whole text seemed a little difficult to read, but it had a nice conclusion in the end so that one could finally gather his or her thoughts.
So - according to the article computer technology is both a tool and medium, more important is the person's view to the question. I think today some of us can actually live without computers and communicate the same way as in the olden days, but most of the people need computers in their work, leisure time, for communication, etc. - in this way to me it seems that digital world is a means for people to create an alternative means.
The author concentrates on digital world as a means for people to shape it according to their views and integrate every communication medium into it thus creating a "dominating medium".
I agree, digital media is a means to communicate and feel free to do almost anything with it, but does it make people different? While the author of the text seems to imply that it is not the computers or media that make people evil, but people themselves, then I have to disagree a little. I think that some of the "crazy" ideas still come from the media or social media. Perhaps the fact that people themselves are behind digital media and thus implicitly connected with creating the media, we might say it is true that people themselves have created the evil that comes from the medium, but it is the medium that brings quite a lot of emotions and thrill to people, and some of them take advantage of the great source like the Internet, and perform bad deeds.
In conclusion my answer to the question is that digital media is a medium with the help of which one can communicate and find out about things in a quicker way than one used to find before. It has definitely changed the behaviour of human kind, but if one wants to, he or she can live without digital technology and survive.
Source: Rückriem, G. Tool or Medium? The Meaning of Information and Telecommunication Technology to Human Practice. A Quest for Systemic Understanding of Activity Theory. Helsinki, 2. 12. 2003.
5.12.10
Task 11. New Interactive Environments
This task focusses on analyzing the Piratepad list what our group created during the live session on the topic "activity management". No doubt this was a preliminary task to introduce Activity Theory when you take a retrospect on the previous activities.
The list concentrates on different activities and processes which where bundled together during a live session of NIE course. The group created a wide list of different components what constitutes the activity management.
Considering the questions given by the facilitator and looking at the list thoroughly, I think that according to my understanding quite an impressive list is made up by the whole team, and while thinking about it I came up with the fact that all the necessary (and some extra) components were listed.
It seems that some components of the list covered the others, for example relations - actors, roles, participants could be grouped together into a smaller chunk. I tried my best to see irrelevant components, but perhaps while being very thorough myself, I agree on the pieces that make up the list. One thing that could have been different would perhaps be giving names to different components - e.g. project manager / facilitator, etc.
As I mentioned before, the list could be shortened, thus I would take all similar chunks and group them under one summarizing term. For example start, end, timeframe could be grouped under the name "task time management", or participants, role, actor, etc. could be named solely "participants". Perhaps this is due to my profession, but I would definitely shorten the list into smaller chunks and then explain them thoroughly mentioning the wider range of components.
Considering the Activity Theory framework, I think that without even knowing amything about the Activity Theory, our group's list has an object (a course/tasks) and a subject (actors/participants). There are different artefacts, like schedule, process, methodology, software, and other things mentioned. Rules are also pointed out (restrictions, limitations, evaluation criteria, etc).
I think according to AT the list is lacking terms for division of effort and community. Some terms may hint the presence of the terms (timeframe, time management, interrelatedness, feedback), but there is no specific term for the previously mentioned chunks.
At the beginning I did not come up with any of the irrelevant or missing components, but by the end of the task, using Activity Theory, I managed to come up with a few missing components.
Literature used:
Activity Theory http://www.learning-theories.com/activity-theory.html
The list concentrates on different activities and processes which where bundled together during a live session of NIE course. The group created a wide list of different components what constitutes the activity management.
Considering the questions given by the facilitator and looking at the list thoroughly, I think that according to my understanding quite an impressive list is made up by the whole team, and while thinking about it I came up with the fact that all the necessary (and some extra) components were listed.
It seems that some components of the list covered the others, for example relations - actors, roles, participants could be grouped together into a smaller chunk. I tried my best to see irrelevant components, but perhaps while being very thorough myself, I agree on the pieces that make up the list. One thing that could have been different would perhaps be giving names to different components - e.g. project manager / facilitator, etc.
As I mentioned before, the list could be shortened, thus I would take all similar chunks and group them under one summarizing term. For example start, end, timeframe could be grouped under the name "task time management", or participants, role, actor, etc. could be named solely "participants". Perhaps this is due to my profession, but I would definitely shorten the list into smaller chunks and then explain them thoroughly mentioning the wider range of components.
Considering the Activity Theory framework, I think that without even knowing amything about the Activity Theory, our group's list has an object (a course/tasks) and a subject (actors/participants). There are different artefacts, like schedule, process, methodology, software, and other things mentioned. Rules are also pointed out (restrictions, limitations, evaluation criteria, etc).
I think according to AT the list is lacking terms for division of effort and community. Some terms may hint the presence of the terms (timeframe, time management, interrelatedness, feedback), but there is no specific term for the previously mentioned chunks.
At the beginning I did not come up with any of the irrelevant or missing components, but by the end of the task, using Activity Theory, I managed to come up with a few missing components.
Literature used:
Activity Theory http://www.learning-theories.com/activity-theory.html
29.11.10
Task 10. New Interactive Environments - Putting Activity Theory Into Practice
PLENK2010 and NIE compared with the help of activity theory.
PLENK2010 is a course which provides the learner a variety of tools to choose from in order to create their own content and define the content of the course rather than use materials provided by the facilitators. The course operates online and meetings between the students and facilitators take place via Elluminate live sessions. The course aims at creating a joined knowledge base on personal learning environments without forcing the students to take part in every single task that is not relevant to the learners - the latter have to select appropriate content for themselves.
Activity Theory in this case is applied the following way:
The subject of the course is the student or the student base, which is quite numerous. The subjects come from different countries and do not have to be necessarily university students.
The object of the course is the knowledge base that both the students and the facilitators provide.
The tools provided by the facilitators and the students are the following:
The rules are set up by the facilitators and do not bound the subjects to the course very strictly, although they are assumed to participate with their own knowledge base. There are also dates provided for online meetings and feedback.
The community is set up by 4 facilitators, the learner base (different countries/age groups/interests, etc), and the online environment with its various tools and help.
Division of labour is divided between different parties and can be understood clearly from the website.
NIE is a course which provides the learner a lesser variety of tools from the previous course, and gives certain tasks in order to get feedback from the students. The course operates online through the course blog and the facilitators' tasks, and also a few live sessions which take place via Flashmeeting. The course aims at providing knowledge to students who in turn raise questions and analyze/criticize the topics provided by the facilitators. This is also a fully online course, similarly to the previous course.
Activity Theory in this case is applied the following way:
The subject of the course is the student or the student base, which is less numerous than the previous course's. The subjects are the students from TLU, and can be also other interested people.
The object of the course is the knowledge base that both the students and the facilitators provide.
The tools provided by the facilitators and the students are the following:
The rules are set up by the facilitators and do bound the subjects to the course very strictly, a few mishaps are allowed. This is quite different from PLENK.
The community is set up by 2 facilitators, the learner base (different countries/age groups/interests, etc), and the online environment with its various tools and help.
Division of labour is divided between different parties and can be understood clearly.
Main differences between the two courses are:
Drawbacks concerning the activity theory applied to the two courses
First it was difficult to understand how to position the courses into activity systems, but digging into the article helped me since my previous task was left undone. I think the clear system was a great help for understanding how to classify the course information into the components of the theory. I used Figure 4: Activity System for e-commerce, which was provided in the article "An activity-theory-based model to analyse Web application requirements" by Uden, L., Valderas, P. & Pastor, O. (2008).
PLENK2010 is a course which provides the learner a variety of tools to choose from in order to create their own content and define the content of the course rather than use materials provided by the facilitators. The course operates online and meetings between the students and facilitators take place via Elluminate live sessions. The course aims at creating a joined knowledge base on personal learning environments without forcing the students to take part in every single task that is not relevant to the learners - the latter have to select appropriate content for themselves.
Activity Theory in this case is applied the following way:
The subject of the course is the student or the student base, which is quite numerous. The subjects come from different countries and do not have to be necessarily university students.
The object of the course is the knowledge base that both the students and the facilitators provide.
The tools provided by the facilitators and the students are the following:
- course forum on Moodle
- Daily Newsletter
- RSS-feed
- Elluminate Live Chat (for discussion and weekly review)
- course wiki
- course blog
- students' blogs
- students' twitter accounts
- delicious bookmarks
- video
- etc.
The rules are set up by the facilitators and do not bound the subjects to the course very strictly, although they are assumed to participate with their own knowledge base. There are also dates provided for online meetings and feedback.
The community is set up by 4 facilitators, the learner base (different countries/age groups/interests, etc), and the online environment with its various tools and help.
Division of labour is divided between different parties and can be understood clearly from the website.
NIE is a course which provides the learner a lesser variety of tools from the previous course, and gives certain tasks in order to get feedback from the students. The course operates online through the course blog and the facilitators' tasks, and also a few live sessions which take place via Flashmeeting. The course aims at providing knowledge to students who in turn raise questions and analyze/criticize the topics provided by the facilitators. This is also a fully online course, similarly to the previous course.
Activity Theory in this case is applied the following way:
The subject of the course is the student or the student base, which is less numerous than the previous course's. The subjects are the students from TLU, and can be also other interested people.
The object of the course is the knowledge base that both the students and the facilitators provide.
The tools provided by the facilitators and the students are the following:
- course blog
- student's blogs
- Wikiversity page
- Doodle for scheduling
- Flashmeeting online chat
- EduFeedr for monitoring
- etc.
The rules are set up by the facilitators and do bound the subjects to the course very strictly, a few mishaps are allowed. This is quite different from PLENK.
The community is set up by 2 facilitators, the learner base (different countries/age groups/interests, etc), and the online environment with its various tools and help.
Division of labour is divided between different parties and can be understood clearly.
Main differences between the two courses are:
- the number of subjects
- the number of facilitators
- the number of tools
- rules differ in the sense of strictness
Drawbacks concerning the activity theory applied to the two courses
First it was difficult to understand how to position the courses into activity systems, but digging into the article helped me since my previous task was left undone. I think the clear system was a great help for understanding how to classify the course information into the components of the theory. I used Figure 4: Activity System for e-commerce, which was provided in the article "An activity-theory-based model to analyse Web application requirements" by Uden, L., Valderas, P. & Pastor, O. (2008).
21.11.10
Õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud. Tehnoloogiad ja standardid.
Selge on see, et standardeid on vaja igasuguste seadmete ja rakenduste toimimiseks mitmetes keskkondades, mistõttu neid aretataksegi.
Meelde jäi tõetera, et tihtipeale kestab standardite arendamine kauem kui arvatakse, kuid neist on ka kasu. Mulle tuli SCORM tuttava sisupaketina ette, kuid lähemalt ma seda uurinud ei olnud.
Nii palju kui mina aru sain, sobivad mulle kõige lihtsamad standardid, mis on avatud õpiobjektide puhul kasutatavad (metaandmed, voogedastus jne).
Meelde jäi tõetera, et tihtipeale kestab standardite arendamine kauem kui arvatakse, kuid neist on ka kasu. Mulle tuli SCORM tuttava sisupaketina ette, kuid lähemalt ma seda uurinud ei olnud.
Nii palju kui mina aru sain, sobivad mulle kõige lihtsamad standardid, mis on avatud õpiobjektide puhul kasutatavad (metaandmed, voogedastus jne).
Õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud. Õpivõrgustik
- Koosta enda jaoks raamistik, mille põhjal erinevaid õpivõrgustikke saaks võrrelda (s.t. näitajad, mille alusel kahte võrgustikku võrrelda)
- Uuri natuke lähemalt seda “õpivõrgustikku” ja võrdle seda meie kursusega kui ühte võimalikku õpivõrgustikku.
Nagu paljud kaasõpilased on arutlenud, arvan ka mina, et õpivõrgustik on omamoodi sotsiaalne võrgustik, mis keskendub ühe eriala/aine/huvitava teema õppimisele.
Minu kriteeriumid õpivõrgustikule on järgnevad:
Juht (õppejõud, mentor, õpetaja) - võib olla, aga ei pea olema. Tema roll pigem sekundaarne, tegevuste suunamine.
Inimressurss, kes moodustab õpivõrgustiku. Minu nägemuse järgi on see õpilased või üliõpilased, kes õpivad samal kursusel või sama ainet, nemad moodustavad omaette võrgustiku. Sinna võrgustikku kuulub kindlasti ka mentor.
Keskkond, milles õppetöö toimub. Selleks võib olla ükskõik milline paik, ei pea tingimata klassiruumidesse surutud olema. Abiks interaktiivsed vahendid, mis hõlbustavad erinevates paikades elavate (üli)õpilaste õppimisvõimalusi.
Veebikeskkonnad - suletud/avatud. Õppetöö toimub veebikeskkonnas, mida on võimalik jälgida. Selleks võib olla suletud keskkond, nagu WebCT, Elgg, IVA vms, aga ka avatud, õpilase enda valitud keskkonnad (blogid, wikid, veebilehed). Avatud veebikeskkonna eeliseks on kasutatavus ka väljaspool (üli)kooli, mis toob uusi huvilisi ja uusi ideid. Keskkonnas alustab tööd kõigepealt mentor, kes annab õpilastele ülesandeid ning tagasisidet. Õpilased reflekteerivad või koostavad ise õppematerjale kursuse tulemusena.
Taoline veebipõhine keskkond peaks olema arenemisvõimeline ning sisaldama uuendatud informatsiooni.
PLENK 2010 ja Õpikeskkonnad ja Õpivõrgustikud võrdlus.
Teema - mõlemal kursusel sarnane temaatika.
Inimressurss - PLENK 2010 hõlmab suuremat seltskonda kui opikeskkonnad.
Kättesaadavus - mõlemad keskkonnad on veebipõhised, võimalik ligipääs erinevatest maailma paikadest. Eestikeelse kursuse osaks on ka ülikoolis kohal käimise.
Veebikeskkond - mõlemal juhul avatud keskkond, esimese kursuse puhul võimalik sisselogimine.
Ressursid - Esimesel juhul erineb kursus selle poolest, et osalejad suhtlevad iganädalaselt veebis ning üldjuhul kirjutatakse foorumisse. Teisel kursusel on oluline ka inimeste nägemine vähemalt kord kuus ning blogide pidamine.
15.11.10
Generative Content Creation. Critical Review - Geoffrey Rockwell and Andrew Mactavish "A Companion to Digital Humanities", paragraph 10 - "Multimedia"
The paragraphs go through the definition of multimedia from different points of view in order to reach some kind of a conclusion what multimedia really is. As the conclusion defines, there are two ways of considering multimedia:
The authors explain that the term new media stresses works that are different from the existing forms of entertainment, or works that are not necessarily digital, but are new to the 20th century.
Hypermedia refers to the labyrinth of information that is accessible through hypertext, which links and makes a connection between different texts (but is not used within some types of games). All of the names refer to a different cluster of multimedia, but seems that the authors agree that the most important term integrating all the above-mentioned names is still multimedia.
The authors have taken several definitions from different sources, which they divide into different categories in order to analyze the term "multimedia":
As it seems that the authors like classifying, the next one would be types of multimedia:
They also browse the development of the term through different categories like:
The last category researched by the authors is theoretical approaches considering multimedia, which involves best practices, game criticism and interactivity, and theories and histories of multimedia. The above-mentioned issues are necessary to study the base for multimedia including other sciences in order to think about different concepts forming multimedia.
Finally the authors suggest that scholars of multimedia should take seriously the challenge of creating multimedia as a way of thinking about multimedia and attempt to create exemplary works of multimedia in the traditions.
- to think about multimedia through definitions, histories, examples, and theoretical problems;
- to use multimedia to think and to communicate thought.
The authors explain that the term new media stresses works that are different from the existing forms of entertainment, or works that are not necessarily digital, but are new to the 20th century.
Hypermedia refers to the labyrinth of information that is accessible through hypertext, which links and makes a connection between different texts (but is not used within some types of games). All of the names refer to a different cluster of multimedia, but seems that the authors agree that the most important term integrating all the above-mentioned names is still multimedia.
The authors have taken several definitions from different sources, which they divide into different categories in order to analyze the term "multimedia":
- Computer-based - a multimedia work is a digital work that is accessed or created through a computer;
- Rhetorical artifact - multimedia work is a work of human expression, designed to convince, delight, or instruct the classical sense of rhetoric;
- Multiple media - combnes different media and different traditions of production and distribution;
- Integrated ... artistic whole - we treat multimedia as unified works that are intended by their creator to be experienced as a whole;
- Interactive - interactivity becomes a defining feature that helps weave multiplicity into a whole.
As it seems that the authors like classifying, the next one would be types of multimedia:
- Web hypermedia
- Computer games
- Digital art
- Multimedia encyclopedia
They also browse the development of the term through different categories like:
- Numbers and text - the first IBM's "word processor" was launched in 1964, and by the end of 1970s personal computers already had primitive word processing programs that allowed printing and editing;
- Images - Apple Macintosh (released in 1984) was designed to handle graphics, that is why it came with programs such as "MacPaint", a mouse for painting, and a graphical user interface. These images soon had capabilities to be pasted into other documents, etc;
- Desktop publishing - together with printing and page making low-end publishing was made possible. These features evolved and soon Adobe PhotoShop enabled designers to publish more detailed publications. The authors say that this category is the precursor to multimedia;
- Authoring environments - having practised with desktop publishing tools, designers were already familiar with implementing these environments into their work. 1987 HyperCard was released by Apple, people were able to create simple animations with simple interactivity. This program based on hypertext, but also had a more difficult programming language which enabled to control other devices (audio-, CD-, videodisk players);
- Sound - during 1980s - 1990s simple sound capabilities were developed;
- Digital video - as it put a great stress on computers, some great works were still made, like the Aspen Movie Map (1978), which combined pictures in order to make the user to wonder through Aspen. The release of different video standards made it possible to manage video in digital form;
- Virtual space and beyond - In 1990s cyberspace was mentioned, which seemed as a new frontier for multimedia computing. This involved a person and technology through which it would have been possible to enter digital reality.
The last category researched by the authors is theoretical approaches considering multimedia, which involves best practices, game criticism and interactivity, and theories and histories of multimedia. The above-mentioned issues are necessary to study the base for multimedia including other sciences in order to think about different concepts forming multimedia.
Finally the authors suggest that scholars of multimedia should take seriously the challenge of creating multimedia as a way of thinking about multimedia and attempt to create exemplary works of multimedia in the traditions.
7.11.10
Task seven. My Understanding of Interactivity.
Introduction
To begin with, my naïve assumption was that interactivity is something that moves around things - for example, when a person communicates with someone (or something), or when a computer program reacts to a person's touch or voice, it interacts. But as the previous articles clearly pointed out, there are more dimensions to the term than anyone could expect. What I gather from the papers, interactivity is a term that is in constant motion and improvement, so that it could be rephrased in every 5-10 years. As Kiousis quoted Jensen, it means that the two authors have already proved that it is possible to modify the term and as it is in constant alteration. The best blog I found about the question in mind is probably this one - "What is Interactivity anyway?" which perhaps unintentionally or intentionally is left blank - to everyone's own imagination (it could also be the name of the blog which seems like a post without words).
In Search of My Own Term for Interactivity
According to different sources mostly the definition of interactivity comes down to the notion of a person and computer interacting together. As communication between people has become less popular with new media's rise it is quite obvious why interactivity as a term cannot find its rest and is in constant self-search, because new media as a term is in continuous change since we do not know when.
The technology used back when the above-mentioned authors wrote their articles, was quite old and in the state of improvement, like CD-s, DVD-s, VHS cassettes, even tapes which are annoying to use nowadays. Media presentation has moved to web and there is almost no need to carry any artefacts (just in case when the Internet would not work there is a need for backup). The Internet was discovered and put into use, constantly being improved and updated. Html has changed to different programming languages, which now enables us to store our files anywhere in the "cloud" (also more available storage space and cheaper Internet connections have helped) and present them from there.
Interactivity has changed from animated gif-s to touch screens and hyperlinks to pop-up picture galleries and interactive text. People carry their interactive devices with them throughout the day and it is possible to interact with the help of machines all day long.
As I pondered on in my thoughts, I came up with the fact Google Image Search is full of static images which can turn interactive while looking at them because of people's eye traits, which means that even a non-interactive image can be transformed into an interactive one with the help of a person himself. Thus it is necessary to have at least one person and his/her imagination to be able to create interactivity, and Kiousis was correct to have added the psychological part into the discussion.
Conclusion
I do not mean to be trivial, but as far as new media is concerned, it is possible to say that interactivity is in search of its definition since peoples' imagination can come up with different solutions to improve the interactive experience of a person with the help of technology. The dimensions can grow in various directions since even Web 2.0 is changing into Web 3.0 - a semantic web. We do not exactly know what is happening in 10 or 30 years' time, so it is interesting to see what can happen to the term of interactivity in the sense of computer interaction with a person.
Sources
1. Wikipedia definitions on Interactivity
2. Whatis.com definition of Interactivity
3. Svanaes, D. (2000). Understanding interactivity - steps to a phenomenology of human-computer interaction.
4. Nathan Sheldroff's World - What is Interactivity anyway?
To begin with, my naïve assumption was that interactivity is something that moves around things - for example, when a person communicates with someone (or something), or when a computer program reacts to a person's touch or voice, it interacts. But as the previous articles clearly pointed out, there are more dimensions to the term than anyone could expect. What I gather from the papers, interactivity is a term that is in constant motion and improvement, so that it could be rephrased in every 5-10 years. As Kiousis quoted Jensen, it means that the two authors have already proved that it is possible to modify the term and as it is in constant alteration. The best blog I found about the question in mind is probably this one - "What is Interactivity anyway?" which perhaps unintentionally or intentionally is left blank - to everyone's own imagination (it could also be the name of the blog which seems like a post without words).
In Search of My Own Term for Interactivity
According to different sources mostly the definition of interactivity comes down to the notion of a person and computer interacting together. As communication between people has become less popular with new media's rise it is quite obvious why interactivity as a term cannot find its rest and is in constant self-search, because new media as a term is in continuous change since we do not know when.
The technology used back when the above-mentioned authors wrote their articles, was quite old and in the state of improvement, like CD-s, DVD-s, VHS cassettes, even tapes which are annoying to use nowadays. Media presentation has moved to web and there is almost no need to carry any artefacts (just in case when the Internet would not work there is a need for backup). The Internet was discovered and put into use, constantly being improved and updated. Html has changed to different programming languages, which now enables us to store our files anywhere in the "cloud" (also more available storage space and cheaper Internet connections have helped) and present them from there.
Interactivity has changed from animated gif-s to touch screens and hyperlinks to pop-up picture galleries and interactive text. People carry their interactive devices with them throughout the day and it is possible to interact with the help of machines all day long.
As I pondered on in my thoughts, I came up with the fact Google Image Search is full of static images which can turn interactive while looking at them because of people's eye traits, which means that even a non-interactive image can be transformed into an interactive one with the help of a person himself. Thus it is necessary to have at least one person and his/her imagination to be able to create interactivity, and Kiousis was correct to have added the psychological part into the discussion.
Conclusion
I do not mean to be trivial, but as far as new media is concerned, it is possible to say that interactivity is in search of its definition since peoples' imagination can come up with different solutions to improve the interactive experience of a person with the help of technology. The dimensions can grow in various directions since even Web 2.0 is changing into Web 3.0 - a semantic web. We do not exactly know what is happening in 10 or 30 years' time, so it is interesting to see what can happen to the term of interactivity in the sense of computer interaction with a person.
Sources
1. Wikipedia definitions on Interactivity
2. Whatis.com definition of Interactivity
3. Svanaes, D. (2000). Understanding interactivity - steps to a phenomenology of human-computer interaction.
4. Nathan Sheldroff's World - What is Interactivity anyway?
1.11.10
Õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud. Personaalne õpikeskkond.
Magistriõpingute alguses meeldis mulle väga, et enamus õppejõude opereerib avatud õpikeskkonnas. Tõele au andes ei ole ma vajanud väga sisselogimist, et oma õppematerjale presenteerida. Mulle tundub, et enamus sisselogimisi on siiski htk projektide raames valminud keskkondade testimisega seoses ning ka neid oleks saanud läbi viia avatud õpikeskkondades.
Sotsiaalse meedia roll minu õppetöös on märkimisväärne, kuid kogu kupatust ei ole ma kokku võtnud mitte sotsiaalsesse järjehoidjasse ega ka vooagregaatorisse, pigem eelistan seda oma läptopist brauseri tööriistaribalt jälgida. On olemas küll Google'i vooagregaator, kuid seda ma unustan jälgida.
Põhiosa õppetööst toimub minu õpiblogis blogspot.com-i abil. Blogidel on üldse suur roll IMKE magistriõpingus, kuna rühmatööd on samuti koondatud blogidesse (kas wordpress või blogger, eelistatakse kahte varianti). Samuti kasutavad õppejõud oma blogisid õppeülesannete edastamiseks või tagasiside andmiseks.
Teine variant õppejõudude poolt on olnud wikiversity beta versioon, mis on samuti avatud õpikeskkond ning kuhu saavad liituda ka väljaspoolt tulnud õpilased, kes on huvitatud teadmiste saamisest.
Otsingusüsteeminan kasutan Google Scholarit ja tavalist Googlet, samuti erinevaid veebiallikaid, sh. materjale (pdf, doc, html, jne). Samuti ei saa mööda vaadata Youtubest Vimeost ja muudest video vaatamise allikatest, mis sisaldavad erinevaid häid õpetusi. Neid vahendeid saab vistutada ühtlasi ka blogisse.
Vistutamisega seoses tuleb meelde ka esitluste "pilv" SlideShare ja dokumendi"pilv" Scribd, kuhu on nii mõnigi vajalik materjal salvestatud või mida on õppejõu poolt soovitatud. Ühisdokumentide tegemiseks oleme eelistanud grupitööna Google docs keskkonda, samuti erinevate vormide koostamiseks. Need kõik on sotsiaalsed vahendid, mis võimaldavad kasutajatevahelist kommunikatsiooni.
Kommunikatsioonile edasi minnes on kaks põhilist vahendit skype ja msn, mida kursuse raames kasutatakse kas koolikaaslastega suhtlemiseks või probleemide lahendamiseks. Samuti eelistan vajadusel kasutada veebipõhist meebo.com suhtluskeskkonda, kuhu saab integreerida nii msni, skype kui ka facebooki ja muude keskkondade suhtlusvidinad. Otse loomulikult on kasutusse läinud ka tavaline mobiiltelefon, kui arvutit ei ole läheduses.
IMKE kusustesiseseks keskkonnaks on oma loodud wiki pbworksis, mille haldamine lükkub ideaalis põlvest-põlve edasi. See sisaldab vajalikke lugemismaterjale ning erinevat kursuste infot, sh. keskkondi, viiteid ja muud olulist. Ei või unustada ka kursusekaaslaste andmeid (nimi, meiliaadress jm). Keskkond on kinnine, et andmed lihtsalt ei lekiks ning sissepääs ainult administraatori loaga. Kursuse suhtlus toimub skypes, wiki foorumi vidin Nabble'st ei toiminud nii hästi kui oleks lootnud.
Ainete planeerimise kalender on Google Calendari hallata, mis toob mugavalt kogu toimuva info arvutiekraanile.
Samuti on kasutuses Facebooki IMKE kommuun, kuhu saab erinevaid teateid postitada ja vestlusi pidada ning ei või ka unustada twitterit, milles erinevad kursusekaaslased olulisi uudiseid postitavad.
Kui lisada inimfaktor ja esemed personaalsele õpikeskkonnale juurde, siis Kehrwiederi kohvikus toimuvad koosolekud ja vestlused annavad õppetööle palju juurde nagu ka loengutes toimuv infovahetus, kuid sel aastal on antud faktorit veidi väheseks jäänud. Samuti käivad õppetöö juude raamatud, mida aeg-ajalt erinevalt e-materjalidest füüsiliselt raamatukokku kohale minnes laenutada tuleb.
Kokkuvõtteks peaks ütlema, et minu personaalne õpikeskkond on üsna interaktiivne, välja arvatud vooagregaator või ühisjärjehoidja. Õppetöös sees olles olen valmis katsetama erinevaid keskkondi, kuid päris mitmed on aja jooksul jäänud tähelepanuta. Põhiline toimiv õppevahend on minu peamine õpiblogi blogspotis, kuigi erinevate ainete raames oleme pidanud ka teistesse blogidesse kirjutama (grupiblogi, lepress jne).
Üldjoontes on see õpikeskkond avatud, kui välja arvata iCampus, mis nõudis sisselogimist ja oli kinnine välissilma jaoks. Ma olen enda loodud õpikeskkonnaga rahul, kuigi seda võiks koondada vooagregaatoriga, et oleks ülevaade asjadest olemas. Samas on mul võrreldes esimese aastaga vähem kursuseid, mis võimaldab kõigel silma peal hoida.
Sotsiaalse meedia roll minu õppetöös on märkimisväärne, kuid kogu kupatust ei ole ma kokku võtnud mitte sotsiaalsesse järjehoidjasse ega ka vooagregaatorisse, pigem eelistan seda oma läptopist brauseri tööriistaribalt jälgida. On olemas küll Google'i vooagregaator, kuid seda ma unustan jälgida.
Põhiosa õppetööst toimub minu õpiblogis blogspot.com-i abil. Blogidel on üldse suur roll IMKE magistriõpingus, kuna rühmatööd on samuti koondatud blogidesse (kas wordpress või blogger, eelistatakse kahte varianti). Samuti kasutavad õppejõud oma blogisid õppeülesannete edastamiseks või tagasiside andmiseks.
Teine variant õppejõudude poolt on olnud wikiversity beta versioon, mis on samuti avatud õpikeskkond ning kuhu saavad liituda ka väljaspoolt tulnud õpilased, kes on huvitatud teadmiste saamisest.
Otsingusüsteeminan kasutan Google Scholarit ja tavalist Googlet, samuti erinevaid veebiallikaid, sh. materjale (pdf, doc, html, jne). Samuti ei saa mööda vaadata Youtubest Vimeost ja muudest video vaatamise allikatest, mis sisaldavad erinevaid häid õpetusi. Neid vahendeid saab vistutada ühtlasi ka blogisse.
Vistutamisega seoses tuleb meelde ka esitluste "pilv" SlideShare ja dokumendi"pilv" Scribd, kuhu on nii mõnigi vajalik materjal salvestatud või mida on õppejõu poolt soovitatud. Ühisdokumentide tegemiseks oleme eelistanud grupitööna Google docs keskkonda, samuti erinevate vormide koostamiseks. Need kõik on sotsiaalsed vahendid, mis võimaldavad kasutajatevahelist kommunikatsiooni.
Kommunikatsioonile edasi minnes on kaks põhilist vahendit skype ja msn, mida kursuse raames kasutatakse kas koolikaaslastega suhtlemiseks või probleemide lahendamiseks. Samuti eelistan vajadusel kasutada veebipõhist meebo.com suhtluskeskkonda, kuhu saab integreerida nii msni, skype kui ka facebooki ja muude keskkondade suhtlusvidinad. Otse loomulikult on kasutusse läinud ka tavaline mobiiltelefon, kui arvutit ei ole läheduses.
IMKE kusustesiseseks keskkonnaks on oma loodud wiki pbworksis, mille haldamine lükkub ideaalis põlvest-põlve edasi. See sisaldab vajalikke lugemismaterjale ning erinevat kursuste infot, sh. keskkondi, viiteid ja muud olulist. Ei või unustada ka kursusekaaslaste andmeid (nimi, meiliaadress jm). Keskkond on kinnine, et andmed lihtsalt ei lekiks ning sissepääs ainult administraatori loaga. Kursuse suhtlus toimub skypes, wiki foorumi vidin Nabble'st ei toiminud nii hästi kui oleks lootnud.
Ainete planeerimise kalender on Google Calendari hallata, mis toob mugavalt kogu toimuva info arvutiekraanile.
Samuti on kasutuses Facebooki IMKE kommuun, kuhu saab erinevaid teateid postitada ja vestlusi pidada ning ei või ka unustada twitterit, milles erinevad kursusekaaslased olulisi uudiseid postitavad.
Kui lisada inimfaktor ja esemed personaalsele õpikeskkonnale juurde, siis Kehrwiederi kohvikus toimuvad koosolekud ja vestlused annavad õppetööle palju juurde nagu ka loengutes toimuv infovahetus, kuid sel aastal on antud faktorit veidi väheseks jäänud. Samuti käivad õppetöö juude raamatud, mida aeg-ajalt erinevalt e-materjalidest füüsiliselt raamatukokku kohale minnes laenutada tuleb.
Kokkuvõtteks peaks ütlema, et minu personaalne õpikeskkond on üsna interaktiivne, välja arvatud vooagregaator või ühisjärjehoidja. Õppetöös sees olles olen valmis katsetama erinevaid keskkondi, kuid päris mitmed on aja jooksul jäänud tähelepanuta. Põhiline toimiv õppevahend on minu peamine õpiblogi blogspotis, kuigi erinevate ainete raames oleme pidanud ka teistesse blogidesse kirjutama (grupiblogi, lepress jne).
Üldjoontes on see õpikeskkond avatud, kui välja arvata iCampus, mis nõudis sisselogimist ja oli kinnine välissilma jaoks. Ma olen enda loodud õpikeskkonnaga rahul, kuigi seda võiks koondada vooagregaatoriga, et oleks ülevaade asjadest olemas. Samas on mul võrreldes esimese aastaga vähem kursuseid, mis võimaldab kõigel silma peal hoida.
31.10.10
Task 6. New Interactive Environments.
This week's task was to analyze Kiousis' piece- Interactivity: a concept explication. He bulges through a lot of literature to make his point clear, and in the end he manages to give his own definition of the term.
First he begins with reviewing what others have written about the term itself. He notes that in order to get the concept, one needs to "dig through" a lot of points in order to get the main message. He begins with others' thoughts of what interactivity really meant to them. First it was associated with communication technologies, being an independent variable as a medium and a dependant variable as peoples' perceptions, but often the multi-dimensionality is disregarded while talking about interactivity.
He goes on with quite comprehensive literature review which he has chosen from the fields of psychology, sociology and computer science/design. The third field which wasn't used in the previous text is psychology. The author implies that mostly the literature handled the term as a technological and communication aspect, there are still studies that see it as perception, and adopt a psychological variable into it. He browses through various categories as communication definitions which primarily focus on computer-mediated communication, and non-communication definitions which take the psychological role in the term.
The fact is that even if the term is connected with technology, one cannot overlook medium structure and human characteristics. Schneiderman, for example, balances technological criteria (system functionality and reliability) with user criteria (time to learn, speed, rate of user error, etc.). (p. 365) The term is mostly described as perceiver-based more than technology-based, although it originally evolves from the latter. Interactivity originates from the machines which the user has to perceive later in order to understand what is going on in the technological base.
As the author goes through a list of definitions, he understands that the major problem is that the term is weakly explained. He then points out various mistakes, mainly concerned with peoples' perceptions with ever-growing technological opportunities. He also suggests that the term itself should be hybrid, because there is no single possibility of creating a term for the word interactivity, because it is perceived from different angles and the fact that technology is constantly changing, the term will change with the new concepts in the studied fields.
In the conclusion he gives a solid definition: "interactivity is the degree to which a communication technology can create a mediated environment in which participants can communicate (one-to-one, one-to-many, and many to-many) both synchronously and asynchronously and participate in reciprocal message exchanges (third-order dependency).", and goes on with the three factors that interactivity is established by: technological structure of the media used (e.g. speed, range, timing flexibility, and sensory complexity), characteristics of communication settings (e.g. third-orderdependency and social presence), and individuals’ perceptions (e.g. proximity, perceived speed, sensory activation, and telepresence) . (p. 379)
The author hopes that more literature will appear concerning the term, but he has done a lot of work in order to get a clear view to the reader about the current status of the term in the year of 2002, which by now has undoubtedly changed due to vast changes in technology and its users.
First he begins with reviewing what others have written about the term itself. He notes that in order to get the concept, one needs to "dig through" a lot of points in order to get the main message. He begins with others' thoughts of what interactivity really meant to them. First it was associated with communication technologies, being an independent variable as a medium and a dependant variable as peoples' perceptions, but often the multi-dimensionality is disregarded while talking about interactivity.
He goes on with quite comprehensive literature review which he has chosen from the fields of psychology, sociology and computer science/design. The third field which wasn't used in the previous text is psychology. The author implies that mostly the literature handled the term as a technological and communication aspect, there are still studies that see it as perception, and adopt a psychological variable into it. He browses through various categories as communication definitions which primarily focus on computer-mediated communication, and non-communication definitions which take the psychological role in the term.
The fact is that even if the term is connected with technology, one cannot overlook medium structure and human characteristics. Schneiderman, for example, balances technological criteria (system functionality and reliability) with user criteria (time to learn, speed, rate of user error, etc.). (p. 365) The term is mostly described as perceiver-based more than technology-based, although it originally evolves from the latter. Interactivity originates from the machines which the user has to perceive later in order to understand what is going on in the technological base.
As the author goes through a list of definitions, he understands that the major problem is that the term is weakly explained. He then points out various mistakes, mainly concerned with peoples' perceptions with ever-growing technological opportunities. He also suggests that the term itself should be hybrid, because there is no single possibility of creating a term for the word interactivity, because it is perceived from different angles and the fact that technology is constantly changing, the term will change with the new concepts in the studied fields.
In the conclusion he gives a solid definition: "interactivity is the degree to which a communication technology can create a mediated environment in which participants can communicate (one-to-one, one-to-many, and many to-many) both synchronously and asynchronously and participate in reciprocal message exchanges (third-order dependency).", and goes on with the three factors that interactivity is established by: technological structure of the media used (e.g. speed, range, timing flexibility, and sensory complexity), characteristics of communication settings (e.g. third-orderdependency and social presence), and individuals’ perceptions (e.g. proximity, perceived speed, sensory activation, and telepresence) . (p. 379)
The author hopes that more literature will appear concerning the term, but he has done a lot of work in order to get a clear view to the reader about the current status of the term in the year of 2002, which by now has undoubtedly changed due to vast changes in technology and its users.
27.10.10
New Interactive Environments. Task five.
Concept of Interactivity.
To me interactivity is the action which takes place in "communication" between various people/things, for example, as we are mostly connected with computers, interactivity in this sense would be the environments we go and things we do in the Internet that respond to us either by showing something, going to another place, answering (voice or text or pictures), etc., and the exchange of this "communication" varies in a rapid way.
The article I read about the concept of interactivity would show us how the term has been handled throughout the years, since it is by now a background to history of interactivity.
The author, Jensen, contemplates about the notion of interactivity, which in many cases may vary its definition depending on the context. Initially one can find the meaning of this notion in very many fields, thus there is no clear-cut meaning of the term. The author contemplates about the various fields throughout the text in order to get the meaning of interactivity, but in the very end he does not find a single explanation for it.
Goetz and Jäckel establish three fields in which the term ’interactivity’ should be understood in order to establish the concept, and gives explanation of the term considering the fields:
I think this was a good trail of thought to sum up the concept which even the author considered not the final and the very best discussion of the term, but I think he suggests that there should be more done to explain the concept of interactivity.
To me interactivity is the action which takes place in "communication" between various people/things, for example, as we are mostly connected with computers, interactivity in this sense would be the environments we go and things we do in the Internet that respond to us either by showing something, going to another place, answering (voice or text or pictures), etc., and the exchange of this "communication" varies in a rapid way.
The article I read about the concept of interactivity would show us how the term has been handled throughout the years, since it is by now a background to history of interactivity.
The author, Jensen, contemplates about the notion of interactivity, which in many cases may vary its definition depending on the context. Initially one can find the meaning of this notion in very many fields, thus there is no clear-cut meaning of the term. The author contemplates about the various fields throughout the text in order to get the meaning of interactivity, but in the very end he does not find a single explanation for it.
Goetz and Jäckel establish three fields in which the term ’interactivity’ should be understood in order to establish the concept, and gives explanation of the term considering the fields:
- sociology - two people need to be present and "exchange and negotiation regading meaning takes place between those people who find themselves in the same social context";
- communication studies - any action between a person and the media is called interaction;
- informatics - the author suggests that it is the "relationship between people and machines".
I think this was a good trail of thought to sum up the concept which even the author considered not the final and the very best discussion of the term, but I think he suggests that there should be more done to explain the concept of interactivity.
24.10.10
E- portfoolio. Viies nädal.
Lähtudes viiendas nädala kodutööst hakkasin mõtlema, milline võiks minu e-portfoolio olla ja mis eesmärgil ma seda koostaks.
Tiigrihüppe poolt korraldatud Digitiigri koolitusel koostasin esimest korda e-portfooliot, kuid kahjuks ei suuda ma meenutada tarkvara nimetust. See oli spetsiaalselt õpetajatele (kui ma õigesti nüüd mäletan) koostatud tarkvara CV koostamiseks.
Ma keskendun oma portfoolio loomisele, kuna hetkel mul teadlikult koostatud e-portfooliot ei eksisteeri. Õpiportfoolioks võiks tinglikult nimetada seda blogi, kuna siia on koondatud postitused erinevatest ainetest ning mõni üksik aine on jäänud väljapoole antud blogi.
Kuna ma töötan õpetajana ning õpetaja ametis on tähtis osa enesearendamisel, mis on omakorda kasulik kategooria tõstmisel, siis kavandan ma oma e-portfoolio just selle mõttega, et kokku koguda materjal, mis oleks vajalik minu karjääriredelil edasi liikumiseks ning oleks ka CV-le täiendavaks materjaliks.
Materjalid, mis on vajalikud e-portfooliosse sisestamiseks.
Riigi teatajas on kehtestatud õpetajate atesteerimiseks vajalikud nõuded, millest ma oma järgnevas analüüsis ka lähtun:
Keskkond, kuhu ma oma portfoolio loon peab olema lihtsalt kasutatav ning visuaalselt nauditav. Kindlasti saab seda lihtsalt muuta ja see võib seetõttu olla ka lihtne veebilehekülg, mis on kergesti navigeeritav.
Mulle endale meeldib Weebly kodulehe süsteem, kus on mul olemas ka nii-öelda CV-laadne leht (lähemal meeldetuletamisel üsna mahukas), kuid ma olen selle olemasolu veidi unarusse jätnud. Samuti sobib selleks ka näiteks lihtne kodulehe formaat nagu Wix.com (vt. Ingrid Maadvere portfooliot).
Weebly lehele lisasin oma cv, SlideShare ettekanded, mille olin teinud kooli mitteametliku haridustehnoloogina töötamisega seoses, ning samuti väikese ülevaate sellest, mida pean enda elus oluliseks.
Tiigrihüppe poolt korraldatud Digitiigri koolitusel koostasin esimest korda e-portfooliot, kuid kahjuks ei suuda ma meenutada tarkvara nimetust. See oli spetsiaalselt õpetajatele (kui ma õigesti nüüd mäletan) koostatud tarkvara CV koostamiseks.
Ma keskendun oma portfoolio loomisele, kuna hetkel mul teadlikult koostatud e-portfooliot ei eksisteeri. Õpiportfoolioks võiks tinglikult nimetada seda blogi, kuna siia on koondatud postitused erinevatest ainetest ning mõni üksik aine on jäänud väljapoole antud blogi.
Kuna ma töötan õpetajana ning õpetaja ametis on tähtis osa enesearendamisel, mis on omakorda kasulik kategooria tõstmisel, siis kavandan ma oma e-portfoolio just selle mõttega, et kokku koguda materjal, mis oleks vajalik minu karjääriredelil edasi liikumiseks ning oleks ka CV-le täiendavaks materjaliks.
Materjalid, mis on vajalikud e-portfooliosse sisestamiseks.
Riigi teatajas on kehtestatud õpetajate atesteerimiseks vajalikud nõuded, millest ma oma järgnevas analüüsis ka lähtun:
- tõendid koolituste kohta, mille ma läbinud olen (koolitusel ülestähendatud märkmed, mõtted, ideed ja muud materjalid); koolitusi tuleb läbida 160 tunni ulatuses 5a jooksul,
- tõendid/kogemused koolis/vabariigis toimunud olümpiaadide korraldamisest või neis osalemisest; õpilaste juhendamisega seotud kogemus,
- pedagoogilise praktika juhendamisel saadud kogemuste ülestähendamine; võimalusel ka praktikandi kogemus,
- uurimistöö retsenseerimise/juhendamise kogemus,
- konverentsidel ja muudel taolistel üritustel esinemised (teema, sihtgrupp, rahulolu jne)
- loodud publitseeritud õppevara avaldamine,
Keskkond, kuhu ma oma portfoolio loon peab olema lihtsalt kasutatav ning visuaalselt nauditav. Kindlasti saab seda lihtsalt muuta ja see võib seetõttu olla ka lihtne veebilehekülg, mis on kergesti navigeeritav.
Mulle endale meeldib Weebly kodulehe süsteem, kus on mul olemas ka nii-öelda CV-laadne leht (lähemal meeldetuletamisel üsna mahukas), kuid ma olen selle olemasolu veidi unarusse jätnud. Samuti sobib selleks ka näiteks lihtne kodulehe formaat nagu Wix.com (vt. Ingrid Maadvere portfooliot).
Weebly lehele lisasin oma cv, SlideShare ettekanded, mille olin teinud kooli mitteametliku haridustehnoloogina töötamisega seoses, ning samuti väikese ülevaate sellest, mida pean enda elus oluliseks.
Õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud. Kolmas nädal.
Jäin küll rongist maha, aga järjepidevuse mõttes teen siiski oma selle nädala ülesande ka ära.
1. Baseerudes oma eelmisel nädalal defineeritud õpikeskkonna definitsioonile mõtiskle sotsiaalse meedia vahendi(te) üle kui potentsiaalse õpikeskkonna võimalik(ud) koostisosa(d). Millised on sotsiaalse meedia eelised õpihaldussüsteemide ees ning millised on sinu arvates peamised probleemid nii õppija kui ka õpetaja/õppejõu vaatenurgast?
Sotsiaalse meedia vahendite eelised:
Kindlasti avatus ja tihti väike või üldse puuduv haldustasu. Õpilastel on võimalik keskkondadele hõlpsalt ligi pääseda ning oma õpikeskkonda mugavalt täiendada vastavalt nõutud töödele. Väga hõlpsalt leiab keskkondi, mis ei nõua mingit haldustasu ning kuhu saab lihtsalt uusi postitusi lisada.
Sotsiaalne meedia lubab piire laiendada, mis lahti seletatuna minu mõistes tähendab seda, et lisaks õpilastele/üliõpilastele saavad loodud kursuse materjale kasutada ka väljaspoolt kooli huvitatud inimesed õppematerjale kasutada ja huvilised loodud ideid kommenteerida. Blogipõhine õppegrupp moodustab homogeense blogosfääri, mis hakkabki postituste ja kommentaaride harmoonial põhinevalt toimima.
Andmed asuvad veebis, st. mujal kui enda arvutis. Neid ei pea salvestama lisakettale, vaid keegi teeb salvestamise töö Sinu eest juba ära. Inimesel on võimalus salvestada oma digitaalset materjali erinevatele "pilvedele", mis säilitatakse tema eest.
Sotsiaalse meedia vahendite puudused:
Privaatsuse puudumine. Sellistest keskkondadest on hõlbus leida inimeste personaalset infot (enesetutvustus, e-post jne) ning seda kurjasti ära kasutada.
Kindlasti on neid inimesi, kellele ei meeldi avalikkusele oma mõtteid kajastada, mistõttu neid võib segada avatud õpikeskkonna loomus ning nad võivad keelduda oma loodud sisu publitseerimast. On kogemus ühe üliõpilasega, kes avalikkuse ees postitamise vastu võitlemiseks saatis oma kodutööd õppejõule meili kaudu. Siit tuleneb ka autoriõiguse probleem. Näitest tulenevalt võime oletada, et üliõpilane kartis oma ideede vargust, mida on üsna lihtne avatud õpisüsteemide kaudu teostada.
Kõige maalähedasem probleem on vast internetiühendusega tekkinud probleemid, mis takistavad koolitööd tegemast, kuid need takistavad ka kinnistes keskkondades tegevuse toimumist.
Minu jaoks on sotsiaalmeedia vahendites siiski rohkem positiivseid külgi, sest kui tihti ja kui kauaks see internet ikka ära kaob. Pigem on sotsiaalmeedia abil ikkagi võimalus uurida vajalikku infot (seda eelnevalt sõelast läbi lastes, mis on adekvaatne või mitte) ning teada saada erinevate inimeste käekäigust, kuid leidub ka neid inimesi, kes teevad teiste üle nalja, et nad omavad näiteks Facebooki kontot või peavad blogi.
1. Baseerudes oma eelmisel nädalal defineeritud õpikeskkonna definitsioonile mõtiskle sotsiaalse meedia vahendi(te) üle kui potentsiaalse õpikeskkonna võimalik(ud) koostisosa(d). Millised on sotsiaalse meedia eelised õpihaldussüsteemide ees ning millised on sinu arvates peamised probleemid nii õppija kui ka õpetaja/õppejõu vaatenurgast?
Sotsiaalse meedia vahendite eelised:
Kindlasti avatus ja tihti väike või üldse puuduv haldustasu. Õpilastel on võimalik keskkondadele hõlpsalt ligi pääseda ning oma õpikeskkonda mugavalt täiendada vastavalt nõutud töödele. Väga hõlpsalt leiab keskkondi, mis ei nõua mingit haldustasu ning kuhu saab lihtsalt uusi postitusi lisada.
Sotsiaalne meedia lubab piire laiendada, mis lahti seletatuna minu mõistes tähendab seda, et lisaks õpilastele/üliõpilastele saavad loodud kursuse materjale kasutada ka väljaspoolt kooli huvitatud inimesed õppematerjale kasutada ja huvilised loodud ideid kommenteerida. Blogipõhine õppegrupp moodustab homogeense blogosfääri, mis hakkabki postituste ja kommentaaride harmoonial põhinevalt toimima.
Andmed asuvad veebis, st. mujal kui enda arvutis. Neid ei pea salvestama lisakettale, vaid keegi teeb salvestamise töö Sinu eest juba ära. Inimesel on võimalus salvestada oma digitaalset materjali erinevatele "pilvedele", mis säilitatakse tema eest.
Sotsiaalse meedia vahendite puudused:
Privaatsuse puudumine. Sellistest keskkondadest on hõlbus leida inimeste personaalset infot (enesetutvustus, e-post jne) ning seda kurjasti ära kasutada.
Kindlasti on neid inimesi, kellele ei meeldi avalikkusele oma mõtteid kajastada, mistõttu neid võib segada avatud õpikeskkonna loomus ning nad võivad keelduda oma loodud sisu publitseerimast. On kogemus ühe üliõpilasega, kes avalikkuse ees postitamise vastu võitlemiseks saatis oma kodutööd õppejõule meili kaudu. Siit tuleneb ka autoriõiguse probleem. Näitest tulenevalt võime oletada, et üliõpilane kartis oma ideede vargust, mida on üsna lihtne avatud õpisüsteemide kaudu teostada.
Kõige maalähedasem probleem on vast internetiühendusega tekkinud probleemid, mis takistavad koolitööd tegemast, kuid need takistavad ka kinnistes keskkondades tegevuse toimumist.
Minu jaoks on sotsiaalmeedia vahendites siiski rohkem positiivseid külgi, sest kui tihti ja kui kauaks see internet ikka ära kaob. Pigem on sotsiaalmeedia abil ikkagi võimalus uurida vajalikku infot (seda eelnevalt sõelast läbi lastes, mis on adekvaatne või mitte) ning teada saada erinevate inimeste käekäigust, kuid leidub ka neid inimesi, kes teevad teiste üle nalja, et nad omavad näiteks Facebooki kontot või peavad blogi.
14.10.10
New Interactive Environments. Task Three
Today I am concentrating on different students' study plans as task 3.
I studied Maarja, Jakob, Katri, Mehrnoosh, and Valeria.
1. What elements, components, etc. have been used by others to describe their activity?
All the students named above used a kind of graph to describe their activities during the process. Most of them added written information to graphical illustrations, but Jakob was the only one to get away with only graphic devices. I also noticed that he had added some extra information in the comments section, so it was useful to read.
2. What level of detail?
The most detailed descripition was Maarja's, and the precision caught my eye at once. Jakob, Mehrnoosh, and Valeria seemed the only ones to present their tasks in a graphic form with some explanation of the graph (the latter was a bit longer than the first one).
3. What structural aspects are showing up in their descriptions/visualisations?
Most of the students had used a graph and a short explanation of the graph. Everyone began from deciding on the courses based on the available curriculum and moved on towards different decisions like timing, will to learn, etc. Every single plan had a different approach, but one could find similar clusters. Maarja's and Valeria's graphs were similar in the sense that they involved questions and paths to the final decision, but at the same time I found Mehrnoosh's and Valeria's graphs similar from the meaning of thoughts and decisions.
4. What is missing?
Most of the graphs were missing a thorough explanation.
5. What are pros and cons of the different approaches?
I think a graph is a great tool for visual learners, as it can be presented in various ways (more boring or less boring). Jakob's graph was a great example for an interesting, youthfully grasping graph, and the others were quite classical. In another blog I also found a hand-drawn graph, I assume, which caught my eye at once, but I did not choose the blog for analysis. I would have liked to see a longer description of the choices, because for me it is more interesting to read than to search the words for the author's connotations. Connotations come from our own minds, thus the real explanations from the authors remain hidden.
Pros are definitely the amount of time for creating a graph versus adding an explanation to it as well, the first variant takes up less time for sure.
I also peeked in other blogs and found out that quite a lot of people had chosen the graph approach, this is why I liked Maarja's approach the most, because it was deeply thorough. Jakob gets extra points for his creativeness, and I must say he does have an explanation in the comments.
I studied Maarja, Jakob, Katri, Mehrnoosh, and Valeria.
1. What elements, components, etc. have been used by others to describe their activity?
All the students named above used a kind of graph to describe their activities during the process. Most of them added written information to graphical illustrations, but Jakob was the only one to get away with only graphic devices. I also noticed that he had added some extra information in the comments section, so it was useful to read.
2. What level of detail?
The most detailed descripition was Maarja's, and the precision caught my eye at once. Jakob, Mehrnoosh, and Valeria seemed the only ones to present their tasks in a graphic form with some explanation of the graph (the latter was a bit longer than the first one).
3. What structural aspects are showing up in their descriptions/visualisations?
Most of the students had used a graph and a short explanation of the graph. Everyone began from deciding on the courses based on the available curriculum and moved on towards different decisions like timing, will to learn, etc. Every single plan had a different approach, but one could find similar clusters. Maarja's and Valeria's graphs were similar in the sense that they involved questions and paths to the final decision, but at the same time I found Mehrnoosh's and Valeria's graphs similar from the meaning of thoughts and decisions.
4. What is missing?
Most of the graphs were missing a thorough explanation.
5. What are pros and cons of the different approaches?
I think a graph is a great tool for visual learners, as it can be presented in various ways (more boring or less boring). Jakob's graph was a great example for an interesting, youthfully grasping graph, and the others were quite classical. In another blog I also found a hand-drawn graph, I assume, which caught my eye at once, but I did not choose the blog for analysis. I would have liked to see a longer description of the choices, because for me it is more interesting to read than to search the words for the author's connotations. Connotations come from our own minds, thus the real explanations from the authors remain hidden.
Pros are definitely the amount of time for creating a graph versus adding an explanation to it as well, the first variant takes up less time for sure.
I also peeked in other blogs and found out that quite a lot of people had chosen the graph approach, this is why I liked Maarja's approach the most, because it was deeply thorough. Jakob gets extra points for his creativeness, and I must say he does have an explanation in the comments.
10.10.10
New Interactive Environments. Task Two.
I started thinking about my semester's choices, and first ended up with a short mind map to sum my thoughts up:
In case you cannot see the object properly, I will provide you with a simpler HTML page.
I will start analyzing the background information.
Work
This year I considered work more important than last year, because I missed so many days because of the learning cycles that IMKE curriculum has. Since there were very many interesting courses, I decided to participate in most of them to concentrate more on the Master's Thesis on the second year.
During school there is no replacement for me at work, so my tasks are not completed. This year my chosen lecture decisions based on the following:
Family
As the last year was crowded with homework there was almost no time for my family. All my child heard was "Mom's learning now, be a good kid and play with your Legos." Or something the like. Quite a lot of my evenings were filled with homework and work tasks. I also spent a few nights studying in order not to miss deadlines. I was not there for my family at all.
I also spent a lot of time in Tallinn during learning cycles, thus my child missed me a lot. This influenced deeply my this year's decisions not to spend too little time with my son and leave a little mind rest for myself.
This means I have weekday evenings free for my family and my own relaxation, and I can go to sleep early in the evening. I wake up more alert and willing to work. My child is happier, and I do schoolwork more eagerly.
Courses
Previous year's choices showed that during study cycles it was possible to interact with coursemates and it was much more fun to study in that way, you had help and teams available at all times. Collaboration was great!
Since there were many new courses I got quite a lot of new ideas and bright thoughts, but as I mentioned previously, my work and family life suffered greatly from studying.
This year there are a few courses left on my compulsory courses list, thus it is easier to choose between the courses that do not disturb my private life and work.
Since I have more time, I also have more options, and thus I chose some optional courses from another curriculum, because I think these courses might come in handy for my future career. This way I ended up choosing some lectures from Educational Technology curriculum.
First I read through the information in order to see if the course fitted my needs and registered online.
The study system allows you to register online without attending the Tallinn University building. This year my choice was between e-courses and weekend lectures. With e-courses it was also necessary to observe the lecturers' weblogs and wikiversity entries in order not to miss the beginning of the courses.
Last year I ended up with passing 72.5% of the curriculum, this year I will try to do the rest.
I am seriously wondering how I could manage this much last year.
This year it seems that noone is bothered at work that I am missing very often, and my family is also happy. I have weekends for studying, because then I am fresh and fully able to concentrate on schoolwork.
In case you cannot see the object properly, I will provide you with a simpler HTML page.
I will start analyzing the background information.
Work
This year I considered work more important than last year, because I missed so many days because of the learning cycles that IMKE curriculum has. Since there were very many interesting courses, I decided to participate in most of them to concentrate more on the Master's Thesis on the second year.
During school there is no replacement for me at work, so my tasks are not completed. This year my chosen lecture decisions based on the following:
- More time for work
- More time for Master's Thesis
- More time for rest and my family
Family
As the last year was crowded with homework there was almost no time for my family. All my child heard was "Mom's learning now, be a good kid and play with your Legos." Or something the like. Quite a lot of my evenings were filled with homework and work tasks. I also spent a few nights studying in order not to miss deadlines. I was not there for my family at all.
I also spent a lot of time in Tallinn during learning cycles, thus my child missed me a lot. This influenced deeply my this year's decisions not to spend too little time with my son and leave a little mind rest for myself.
This means I have weekday evenings free for my family and my own relaxation, and I can go to sleep early in the evening. I wake up more alert and willing to work. My child is happier, and I do schoolwork more eagerly.
Courses
Previous year's choices showed that during study cycles it was possible to interact with coursemates and it was much more fun to study in that way, you had help and teams available at all times. Collaboration was great!
Since there were many new courses I got quite a lot of new ideas and bright thoughts, but as I mentioned previously, my work and family life suffered greatly from studying.
This year there are a few courses left on my compulsory courses list, thus it is easier to choose between the courses that do not disturb my private life and work.
Since I have more time, I also have more options, and thus I chose some optional courses from another curriculum, because I think these courses might come in handy for my future career. This way I ended up choosing some lectures from Educational Technology curriculum.
First I read through the information in order to see if the course fitted my needs and registered online.
The study system allows you to register online without attending the Tallinn University building. This year my choice was between e-courses and weekend lectures. With e-courses it was also necessary to observe the lecturers' weblogs and wikiversity entries in order not to miss the beginning of the courses.
Last year I ended up with passing 72.5% of the curriculum, this year I will try to do the rest.
I am seriously wondering how I could manage this much last year.
This year it seems that noone is bothered at work that I am missing very often, and my family is also happy. I have weekends for studying, because then I am fresh and fully able to concentrate on schoolwork.
3.10.10
Õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud. Õpikeskkonna definitsioon.
1) Õpikeskkond on koht, kus tegeletakse õppetegevusega. See võib olla ükskõik, milline koht või internetikeskkond, milles olles omandatakse uusi teadmisi. Õpikeskkonad võmaludavad õpilastel end mugavalt tundes (aga ka vahest teadmatult õppides) õppida.
Selles aines käsitleme kindlasti veebikeskkondi, mis on mugavalt struktureeritud ning võimaldavad nii õppida, õpitut peegeldada kui ka tagasisidet saada.
2) Õpihaldussüsteemidest olen põgusalt kokku puutunud Moodle'iga, IVA-ga, VIKO-ga ja iCampusega või eestikeelse eCampusega (ega neil kahel peale keelelise erinevuse muud vahet ei olegi).
Ma analüüsiks neid viimaseid, kuna need on uusimad.
Positiivne taoliste õpihaldussüsteemide puhul on sotsiaalvõrgustiku mudel, mis võimaldab inimestel saada automaatset tagasisidet nii antud keskkonnas kui ka meili teel. Lisaks on seal võimalus faile lisada ja õppejõuga otse vestelda, samuti muude lisavidinate (kommuunid, grupid jms) lisamise võimalused. Kuna tegemist on ELGG-iga, siis olen enne selle süsteemi "maigu" suhu saanud just Koolielu portaalist, milles on võimalusi vaat et rohkemgi kui antud õpihaldussüsteemides.
Negatiivse poole pealt jäävad taolise keskkonna võimalused siiski kasinaks, ning sinna ei ole integreeritud automaatse tulemuse genereerimise võimalust, samuti paigutuvad sinna asetatud failid väga ebamugavalt järjestusse. Tundub, et antud keskkonda on vaja põhjalikult tuunida, et sellest asjalik õpihaldussüsteem saada.
Mulle meeldib kõige rohkem ehk IVA, mida sai Tiigrihüppe koolituse ajal proovida, see tundus väga loogiline ja mõnus hallata, kui Moodle jäi tiba keeruliseks, aga see võib tuleneda asjaolust, et mul oli seda väga vähe aega õppida. VIKO on väga suurte puudujääkidega algeline õpihaldussüsteem ning vajab massiivset täiendamist nagu iCampuski. WebCT-ga ei ole mul isiklikke kokkupuuteid olnud.
Selles aines käsitleme kindlasti veebikeskkondi, mis on mugavalt struktureeritud ning võimaldavad nii õppida, õpitut peegeldada kui ka tagasisidet saada.
2) Õpihaldussüsteemidest olen põgusalt kokku puutunud Moodle'iga, IVA-ga, VIKO-ga ja iCampusega või eestikeelse eCampusega (ega neil kahel peale keelelise erinevuse muud vahet ei olegi).
Ma analüüsiks neid viimaseid, kuna need on uusimad.
Positiivne taoliste õpihaldussüsteemide puhul on sotsiaalvõrgustiku mudel, mis võimaldab inimestel saada automaatset tagasisidet nii antud keskkonnas kui ka meili teel. Lisaks on seal võimalus faile lisada ja õppejõuga otse vestelda, samuti muude lisavidinate (kommuunid, grupid jms) lisamise võimalused. Kuna tegemist on ELGG-iga, siis olen enne selle süsteemi "maigu" suhu saanud just Koolielu portaalist, milles on võimalusi vaat et rohkemgi kui antud õpihaldussüsteemides.
Negatiivse poole pealt jäävad taolise keskkonna võimalused siiski kasinaks, ning sinna ei ole integreeritud automaatse tulemuse genereerimise võimalust, samuti paigutuvad sinna asetatud failid väga ebamugavalt järjestusse. Tundub, et antud keskkonda on vaja põhjalikult tuunida, et sellest asjalik õpihaldussüsteem saada.
Mulle meeldib kõige rohkem ehk IVA, mida sai Tiigrihüppe koolituse ajal proovida, see tundus väga loogiline ja mõnus hallata, kui Moodle jäi tiba keeruliseks, aga see võib tuleneda asjaolust, et mul oli seda väga vähe aega õppida. VIKO on väga suurte puudujääkidega algeline õpihaldussüsteem ning vajab massiivset täiendamist nagu iCampuski. WebCT-ga ei ole mul isiklikke kokkupuuteid olnud.
26.9.10
Õpikeskkonnad ja Õpivõrgustikud. Õpileping.
Minu personaalne õpileping:
Ma soovin lisateadmisi õpikeskkondade osas, et oma teadmisi eelkõige töös rakendada ning teistega jagada. Õpivõrgustikud kaasnevad õpikeskkondade loomisega ning nende tööle rakendamisega, seega on osa õpikeskkondadest ja samuti minu huviorbiidist.
Õpiprojekti eesmärkideks on antud teemavaldkonnas pädevamaks muutuda, et teisi juhendada antud temaatikas just haridustehnoloogilises valdkonnas. Usun, et saan antud kursusest juurde nii mõndagi uut ja kasulikku.
Eesmärgid saavutan õppematerjali tutvumisega ning selle läbitöötamisega. Tegevused järjestaksin nii:
1) Kursuse blogiga tutvumine
2) Uue õppematerjaliga tutvumine, selle läbitöötamine
3) Koduse ülesande õigeaegne postitamine ajaveebi
4) Tagasiside lugemine, teiste kursusekaaslaste blogipostitustega tutvumine, et saada uusi ideid.
5) Vajadusel kursusekaaslaste blogide kommenteerimine
Vahenditeks on õppejõudude poolt pakutud materjal, lisamaterjal veebist (raamatutest), samuti kursusekaaslaste blogid. Kindlasti leidub ka päriselust näiteid, mis illustreerivad pakutud materjali.
Oma saavutusi hindan eelkõige enesetunde järgi - kui tunnen ennast hästi, siis on järelikult kõik õnnestunud. Kui südametunnistus piinab, on midagi tegemata jäänud. Ehk siis praktilisemalt olen rahul oma blogipostituste ja sellele eelnenud ning järgnenud tegevustega ning täitnud need õigeaegselt.
Tulevikuks märgin ära:
Reflektsioon (kursuse lõpus) – Mis minu jaoks töötas ja mis mitte? Miks? Mis on need aspektid, mille kallal pean veel vaeva nägema? Mis on minu tugevad ja nõrgad küljed? Mis ma peaksin järgmisena tegema?
Ma soovin lisateadmisi õpikeskkondade osas, et oma teadmisi eelkõige töös rakendada ning teistega jagada. Õpivõrgustikud kaasnevad õpikeskkondade loomisega ning nende tööle rakendamisega, seega on osa õpikeskkondadest ja samuti minu huviorbiidist.
Õpiprojekti eesmärkideks on antud teemavaldkonnas pädevamaks muutuda, et teisi juhendada antud temaatikas just haridustehnoloogilises valdkonnas. Usun, et saan antud kursusest juurde nii mõndagi uut ja kasulikku.
Eesmärgid saavutan õppematerjali tutvumisega ning selle läbitöötamisega. Tegevused järjestaksin nii:
1) Kursuse blogiga tutvumine
2) Uue õppematerjaliga tutvumine, selle läbitöötamine
3) Koduse ülesande õigeaegne postitamine ajaveebi
4) Tagasiside lugemine, teiste kursusekaaslaste blogipostitustega tutvumine, et saada uusi ideid.
5) Vajadusel kursusekaaslaste blogide kommenteerimine
Vahenditeks on õppejõudude poolt pakutud materjal, lisamaterjal veebist (raamatutest), samuti kursusekaaslaste blogid. Kindlasti leidub ka päriselust näiteid, mis illustreerivad pakutud materjali.
Oma saavutusi hindan eelkõige enesetunde järgi - kui tunnen ennast hästi, siis on järelikult kõik õnnestunud. Kui südametunnistus piinab, on midagi tegemata jäänud. Ehk siis praktilisemalt olen rahul oma blogipostituste ja sellele eelnenud ning järgnenud tegevustega ning täitnud need õigeaegselt.
Tulevikuks märgin ära:
Reflektsioon (kursuse lõpus) – Mis minu jaoks töötas ja mis mitte? Miks? Mis on need aspektid, mille kallal pean veel vaeva nägema? Mis on minu tugevad ja nõrgad küljed? Mis ma peaksin järgmisena tegema?
Õpikeskkonnad ja Õpivõrgustikud. Enesetutvustus.
Tutvustan ennast õpingukaaslastele.
Eestikeelse tutvustuse lisan siia teist korda, sest esimese modifitseerisin inglisekeelseks ja duubeldasin seda kevadise kursuse jaoks. See tutvustus on kursuse nimega õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud tarbeks.
Niisiis, minu nimi on Maibritt ja õpin Tallinna Ülikoolis teise aasta magistrandina interaktiivset meediat ja teadmuskeskkondi. Töötan Pärnu Ühisgümnaasiumis võõrkeeleõpetajana alates 2001. aastast ning hobi korras aitan kolleege haridustehnoloogilistes küsimustes.
Minu koolitee on enamasti kulgenud koolis, kus ma töötan. Vahepeal põikasin Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikooli inglise ja prantsuse keelt õppima ning sekka ka tilgakese informaatikat, kuna vaba aega oli jalaga segada. Sellest tekkis ka hilisem magistriõpingute huvi just arvutitega seotud valdkonnas.
Eraelus kasvatan peaaegu 6-aastast poega ja naudin elu!
Eestikeelse tutvustuse lisan siia teist korda, sest esimese modifitseerisin inglisekeelseks ja duubeldasin seda kevadise kursuse jaoks. See tutvustus on kursuse nimega õpikeskkonnad ja õpivõrgustikud tarbeks.Niisiis, minu nimi on Maibritt ja õpin Tallinna Ülikoolis teise aasta magistrandina interaktiivset meediat ja teadmuskeskkondi. Töötan Pärnu Ühisgümnaasiumis võõrkeeleõpetajana alates 2001. aastast ning hobi korras aitan kolleege haridustehnoloogilistes küsimustes.
Minu koolitee on enamasti kulgenud koolis, kus ma töötan. Vahepeal põikasin Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikooli inglise ja prantsuse keelt õppima ning sekka ka tilgakese informaatikat, kuna vaba aega oli jalaga segada. Sellest tekkis ka hilisem magistriõpingute huvi just arvutitega seotud valdkonnas.
Eraelus kasvatan peaaegu 6-aastast poega ja naudin elu!
New Interactive Environments. Task one
23.5.10
Review on Steve Krug's "Don't Make Me Think"
I honestly read Steve Krug's book through, because it was more attractive with less text and more images to make things clear to the core point for a user, or in this case, a book reader. The approach of designing the book is similar to the described content - in order to make it readable, it has been made concise, packed with illustrative pictures, and "scannable", as people nowadays mind reading books full of dull text. It can be compared with a usable web page described in the book. The author adds that the reader should not know everything to get the picture, this is why he has kept the content as concise as it is.
The other good thing about the book is that Krug also suggests better solutions for the existing flaws on web pages as well as possible scenarios and outcomes for different problems, making the book a true handbook for all kinds of web page makers.
Many parts of the book came to me as familiar from Hypertext and Interface and Interaction Design lectures. I think the lecturer has used parts of it in his talks. I think that this book is very interensting and easy to read and the author gives precise instructions on how to create a web page efficiently so that the user would navigate better and with less effort on it.
The book starts with guiding principles and moves on to navigation principles. Then the author talks about usability and user testing, finalizing the book with most common problems that might come up and how to fix them. He provides sample dialogues, images, and tables in order to summarize the topics. The author also brings up some of the accessibility problems that might come up. I am not going to retell the contents of the book, but I will point out a few notes that I took:
I would recommend the book to all starting web page creators since it is interesting to read, packed with lots of examples and really catches the reader's attention, just like a really functional home page should do!
The other good thing about the book is that Krug also suggests better solutions for the existing flaws on web pages as well as possible scenarios and outcomes for different problems, making the book a true handbook for all kinds of web page makers.
Many parts of the book came to me as familiar from Hypertext and Interface and Interaction Design lectures. I think the lecturer has used parts of it in his talks. I think that this book is very interensting and easy to read and the author gives precise instructions on how to create a web page efficiently so that the user would navigate better and with less effort on it.
The book starts with guiding principles and moves on to navigation principles. Then the author talks about usability and user testing, finalizing the book with most common problems that might come up and how to fix them. He provides sample dialogues, images, and tables in order to summarize the topics. The author also brings up some of the accessibility problems that might come up. I am not going to retell the contents of the book, but I will point out a few notes that I took:
- the user should not think while he or she browses the web in order to grasp the site quickly
- the less the user thinks, the more efficient the page is, it is necessary to remove "noise"
- users scan only certain words that they think is necessary for them, they do not read the whole content
- help is not necessary, because users do not use it, they try to get through the page themselves, the same goes for introductions, not much "happy talk" needed there
- organize parts in a clear way
- keep pace with known web page conventions, make obvious what is clickable
- remove unnecessary words, make choices clear to the user
- a good road map will be necessary in the form of "breadcrumbs" or a good menu so that the user could not get lost
- bookmarks are necessary because they show you a large chunk of the menu and they should be visible
- page logo is important, as well as the navigation marker "you are here"
- site home page should note its identity, the hierarchy, and has to have a "search" button as well as the good things that draw people's attention to it.
- the users need to know that they findon the page
- show your own identity on the web page, but make it concise
- testing should be done in the beginning and the more people involved, the better it is. After testing the mistake should be fixed and then tested again
I would recommend the book to all starting web page creators since it is interesting to read, packed with lots of examples and really catches the reader's attention, just like a really functional home page should do!
17.5.10
Week 11. Individual reflection and assessment
I took out my learning contract and started revising it. According to my contract I managed to fulfill most of the parts:
- I learned a lot from the theoretical part of creating an e-learning course as well as got a good experience of managing a group - although there were minor setbacks, everything turned out pretty well in the end. As far as committing yourself to the role is concerned, I sometimes did too much, and should have loaded more responsibility to the other members.
- Secondary school practice went as predicted, and I managed to post more information about the tasks in order to make them clear for the lessons I was absent.
- I think I even got a good load of experience of time planning, since I managed to do most of the weeks in time, but since I joined later, I had to do some of the tasks later as well. I did not have to create a to-do-list, but managed to remember how to do the tasks needed.
- What changed was the collaboration tool from pbwiki to google docs, and also our prototype environment appeared into weebly. Other sources were used as predicted.
9.5.10
Week 10. Prototype Evaluation, and other stuff.
You can find our group's thoughts from the prototype's blog post.
New things about groupwork were the ones that there were no new things, we did our job, and those who were busy managed to add their opinions as well. Thus we created a common understanding of our course and posted it to our prototype's blog, since it was the most suitable place to put it in.
As for my personal contract, I understood that it is not utterly possible to make people to do their job unless they are available. And this way groupwork had to be re-organized. Those who care put more effort in working and those who have other priorities put less of an effort, but all in all we worked together well as a group. I think it is really about priorities and likes of the tasks.
I think I am still motivated to doing such things in later future, because I love learning by reflecting to yourself and the facilitator.
I think my learning contract has worked within the course, but I would reflect it more deeply the next week.
New things about groupwork were the ones that there were no new things, we did our job, and those who were busy managed to add their opinions as well. Thus we created a common understanding of our course and posted it to our prototype's blog, since it was the most suitable place to put it in.
As for my personal contract, I understood that it is not utterly possible to make people to do their job unless they are available. And this way groupwork had to be re-organized. Those who care put more effort in working and those who have other priorities put less of an effort, but all in all we worked together well as a group. I think it is really about priorities and likes of the tasks.
I think I am still motivated to doing such things in later future, because I love learning by reflecting to yourself and the facilitator.
I think my learning contract has worked within the course, but I would reflect it more deeply the next week.
3.5.10
Week 9. Reflection
Since we have done pretty much until now, this week's tasks were quite simple. This week we tried to smooth the consistency of our e-learning course, and added some extras to the course (e.g. team members, and timeline). I felt that my course companions were very supportive this week and made me realize that it is not always necessary to take the lead and that group members are capable of working on their own as well. It felt relaxing.
I found out that in our group there is a very nice division: some are active and some inactive, but still we managed to do the necessary work. I think that without having all members present, it is still possible to finish the work in order to get a good e-course result.
What I have noticed is that I get a great leading experience, how to act as a leader, how to make people work, etc. Also a good skill :)
PS. The timeline can be found in our weebly course environment from team page.
Oh, and it's so good to acknowledge that creating an e-course is much more than learning about e-courses. Alice is a great example of a good learner - she has learned about social networks and different collaboration- and web platforms as well. I feel thrilled!
The same about Chiara and me - I think we both are learning from international group work. This is the first time I am working with such a varied group of people, and I am grateful for new experiences. To tell you the truth, I am waiting for comments on my posts and reflection, because this course is unique for its reflection "bonus". And, well, who doesn't like positive feedback (and constructive critical feedback as well).
I found out that in our group there is a very nice division: some are active and some inactive, but still we managed to do the necessary work. I think that without having all members present, it is still possible to finish the work in order to get a good e-course result.
What I have noticed is that I get a great leading experience, how to act as a leader, how to make people work, etc. Also a good skill :)
PS. The timeline can be found in our weebly course environment from team page.
Oh, and it's so good to acknowledge that creating an e-course is much more than learning about e-courses. Alice is a great example of a good learner - she has learned about social networks and different collaboration- and web platforms as well. I feel thrilled!
The same about Chiara and me - I think we both are learning from international group work. This is the first time I am working with such a varied group of people, and I am grateful for new experiences. To tell you the truth, I am waiting for comments on my posts and reflection, because this course is unique for its reflection "bonus". And, well, who doesn't like positive feedback (and constructive critical feedback as well).
23.4.10
Töö allikatega, viitamine ja viidete haldamine e-õppes. Teine nädal.
Kõigepealt videokonverentsist.
Kuna mul on õnnestunud osaleda päris mitmel videokonverentsil, ei oleks see olnud minule uus kogemus, kuid tutvumise mõttes oleks see päris lahe olnud. Kuna ma ei saanud osaleda, olin loengul samal ajal, siis vaatasin konverentsi ajalugu.Meelids ka Hansu üles pandud vooagregaator NetVibes, kuskohast saab enda blogisse pandud uusi kommentaare lugeda :)
Nüüd aga asja juurde:
http://viitamiskursus.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/teine-nadal-folksonoomia-ja-uhisjarjehoidjad/
Põhimõtteliselt on blogi ka omaette folksonoomia-allikas. Oma blogile olen lisanud päise allamärksõnapilve, et õppejõududel ja lugejatel oleks mugav mu blogis orienteeruda, sest endalegi üllatuseks on minu nn. õpiportfoolio arenenud väga laiahaardeliseks peegeldamise ja tööde esitamise keskkonnaks. Kuna mulle meeldib kirjutada, siis kasutan meelsasti oma blogi mõtete kajastamiseks ja seetõttu vajan kursusetööde märksõnadega eristamist.Visuaalse naudingu lisamiseks olen erineva sagedusega esinevad märksõnad pannud suuruse järjekorda.
Delicious vs. StumbleUpon.
Delicious on mulle tuttav keskkond, alustasin deliciousiga mitu aastat tagasi, kui selle veebiaadress oli veel lahedal kujul www.del.icio.us.Põhimõtteliselt delicious on lihtne vahend veebiaadresside salvestamiseks, nende märksõnastamiseks, teiste huvitavate veebiaadresside otsimiseks jne. Sotsiaalmeediat on sinna ka lisatud, nagu ka loengumaterjalidest lugeda võis.
Kui ma StumbleUponi avasin, siis ei saanud hästi aru kuidas see veebilehti salvestab, aga see oli natuke mõnusama keskkonnaga (samas keerulisem) kui delicious. Olles visuaalselt atraktiivsem, toimis see Firefoxi aplikatsiooni abil, mida ma ei tahtnud alla laadida. Ma avastasin ühe keerulise mooduse, kuidas brauserisiseselt seda kasutada, kuid kas ma tahan nii palju aega raisata? Võin öelda, et tallatud rada on kergem käia, ehk siis delicious on lihtsamalt üles ehitatud ja seda on mugavam kasutada. Selleks ei pea ma alati toolbari installeerima, et lehekülgi salvestada (kuigi mul on see olemas).
Hiljemal kasutamisel märkasin parema hiireklahvi menüü küljes ühte stumble ikooni pärast tööriistariba allalaadimist. Ilmselt tuli mulle päris palju "pahna" sellega süsteemi kaasa, aga õilsa eesmärgi nimel ju võib. Igatahes StumbleUponile lisandus üks hea võimalus hiirega lehekülgi lemmikuks salvestada.
Suurim pluss Deliciousil on kasutusmugavus ja lihtsus, StumbleUponil sotsiaalne mõõde paremini välja toodud.
Suurim miinus Deliciousil on ehk mitte nii atraktiivne väljanägemine (lihtsuses peitubki võlu, tegelikult) aga StumbleUponil tundus see miinus kalduvat tööriistariba installeerimise poole. Samas ma ei uurinud ka päris põhjalikult, ehk oleks mõne lihtsama stumble'imise variandi ka leidnud. Foorumist ma ei leidnud oma küsimusele, kas ilma tööriistaribata antud keskkonda on võimalik kasutada.
Sellised mõtted põgusast "maitsvast komistamisest" (otsetõlge).
Minu delicious on delicious.com/maibrittkuuskmae, see on hiljuti avatud ühe konkursi tarbeks. Isiklikku, algset, on piinlik näidata, kuna ei ole seal koristamas käinud. Kõik mis arvutist tuli läks sinna üles, mistõttu peaks osa sisust privaatseks tegema.
Komistuskivide lehele panin sellise kasutajanime http://www.stumbleupon.com/stumbler/britake/, aga sealne konto on üsna tühi eelmainitud põhjusel.
Kuna mul on õnnestunud osaleda päris mitmel videokonverentsil, ei oleks see olnud minule uus kogemus, kuid tutvumise mõttes oleks see päris lahe olnud. Kuna ma ei saanud osaleda, olin loengul samal ajal, siis vaatasin konverentsi ajalugu.Meelids ka Hansu üles pandud vooagregaator NetVibes, kuskohast saab enda blogisse pandud uusi kommentaare lugeda :)
Nüüd aga asja juurde:
http://viitamiskursus.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/teine-nadal-folksonoomia-ja-uhisjarjehoidjad/
Põhimõtteliselt on blogi ka omaette folksonoomia-allikas. Oma blogile olen lisanud päise allamärksõnapilve, et õppejõududel ja lugejatel oleks mugav mu blogis orienteeruda, sest endalegi üllatuseks on minu nn. õpiportfoolio arenenud väga laiahaardeliseks peegeldamise ja tööde esitamise keskkonnaks. Kuna mulle meeldib kirjutada, siis kasutan meelsasti oma blogi mõtete kajastamiseks ja seetõttu vajan kursusetööde märksõnadega eristamist.Visuaalse naudingu lisamiseks olen erineva sagedusega esinevad märksõnad pannud suuruse järjekorda.
Delicious vs. StumbleUpon.
Delicious on mulle tuttav keskkond, alustasin deliciousiga mitu aastat tagasi, kui selle veebiaadress oli veel lahedal kujul www.del.icio.us.Põhimõtteliselt delicious on lihtne vahend veebiaadresside salvestamiseks, nende märksõnastamiseks, teiste huvitavate veebiaadresside otsimiseks jne. Sotsiaalmeediat on sinna ka lisatud, nagu ka loengumaterjalidest lugeda võis.
Kui ma StumbleUponi avasin, siis ei saanud hästi aru kuidas see veebilehti salvestab, aga see oli natuke mõnusama keskkonnaga (samas keerulisem) kui delicious. Olles visuaalselt atraktiivsem, toimis see Firefoxi aplikatsiooni abil, mida ma ei tahtnud alla laadida. Ma avastasin ühe keerulise mooduse, kuidas brauserisiseselt seda kasutada, kuid kas ma tahan nii palju aega raisata? Võin öelda, et tallatud rada on kergem käia, ehk siis delicious on lihtsamalt üles ehitatud ja seda on mugavam kasutada. Selleks ei pea ma alati toolbari installeerima, et lehekülgi salvestada (kuigi mul on see olemas).
Hiljemal kasutamisel märkasin parema hiireklahvi menüü küljes ühte stumble ikooni pärast tööriistariba allalaadimist. Ilmselt tuli mulle päris palju "pahna" sellega süsteemi kaasa, aga õilsa eesmärgi nimel ju võib. Igatahes StumbleUponile lisandus üks hea võimalus hiirega lehekülgi lemmikuks salvestada.
Suurim pluss Deliciousil on kasutusmugavus ja lihtsus, StumbleUponil sotsiaalne mõõde paremini välja toodud.
Suurim miinus Deliciousil on ehk mitte nii atraktiivne väljanägemine (lihtsuses peitubki võlu, tegelikult) aga StumbleUponil tundus see miinus kalduvat tööriistariba installeerimise poole. Samas ma ei uurinud ka päris põhjalikult, ehk oleks mõne lihtsama stumble'imise variandi ka leidnud. Foorumist ma ei leidnud oma küsimusele, kas ilma tööriistaribata antud keskkonda on võimalik kasutada.
Sellised mõtted põgusast "maitsvast komistamisest" (otsetõlge).
Minu delicious on delicious.com/maibrittkuuskmae, see on hiljuti avatud ühe konkursi tarbeks. Isiklikku, algset, on piinlik näidata, kuna ei ole seal koristamas käinud. Kõik mis arvutist tuli läks sinna üles, mistõttu peaks osa sisust privaatseks tegema.
Komistuskivide lehele panin sellise kasutajanime http://www.stumbleupon.com/stumbler/britake/, aga sealne konto on üsna tühi eelmainitud põhjusel.
22.4.10
E-Learning Week 8 - Reflection
I had some thoughts concerning Ketlin's post of week 7.
She said she did not have a clear image of a decent e-course in mind before she started this subject, but she has learned a lot now. I must admit, that I have learned something as well, but it is fairly simple for me to surf around in the e-learning environment. I am feeling pretty good now that I have passed one bad e-course example, I even decided to give the lecturer course feedback so that she could improve her courses. After learning some basics and browsing through materials I feel pretty secure in open learning environments. I am also proud that I have participated on an e-course of the lecturer who got a quality mark from EITSA (Estonian Information Technology Foundation), so I have a few courses to compare.
I just hope that all of our group's materials of our course will be posted before evaluation, because group work matters 25%, not your own effort in the group, as far as I understand.
Explain, which type of learning environment is best suitable for your e-learning course prototype?
Our group has decided to adapt an open personal learning environment, because it is easier to follow and there are no extra passwords to remember. The other point would be that social media applications require a lot of mobility and time to get acquainted with the whole concept, thus a weekly space is left for the student to learn the things and reflect on them. We have put our materials in the web, namely a weebly-based page, which gives the objectives, main information, tasks, and the facilitator's blog (the name is made up thus there is no need to contact the person who is the "facilitator" there). Tools for learners would be a few social networking tools and also a blog for reflection. Since there is no groupwork, only minor skype chats may occur, but it is not clear yet, whether the learners would be keen on it. Some tasks are made in twitter, thus there will be an agregator for twitter feeds as well.
Why did we choose Weebly?
I still learned that it is possible to do group work so that not everyone is present, but through collaboration with some and then the others it is possible to manage with group tasks very easily. There has to be a keen person who "fuels" the conversation, and participants who do work in time. I had quite a lot of fun setting up the weebly course and inventing facilitator's blog posts and comments. I love creative work!
What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What did go well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
According to my observations this week has been productive, we have been online and decided things together, and there was no need to schedule time, we were all online and had a spontaneous meeting. This made our task division even more effective. Well, since everybody agreed that PBworks is not the best environment for course presentation, we decided that we would change it. As we had at least 2 weebly users, we decided to use this environment. We have had several talk sessions with the group and that is assuring, everyone took part nicely.
Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
I love my organization :) but group environment changed in the sense that there appeared a new web page for the course prototype.
She said she did not have a clear image of a decent e-course in mind before she started this subject, but she has learned a lot now. I must admit, that I have learned something as well, but it is fairly simple for me to surf around in the e-learning environment. I am feeling pretty good now that I have passed one bad e-course example, I even decided to give the lecturer course feedback so that she could improve her courses. After learning some basics and browsing through materials I feel pretty secure in open learning environments. I am also proud that I have participated on an e-course of the lecturer who got a quality mark from EITSA (Estonian Information Technology Foundation), so I have a few courses to compare.
I just hope that all of our group's materials of our course will be posted before evaluation, because group work matters 25%, not your own effort in the group, as far as I understand.
Explain, which type of learning environment is best suitable for your e-learning course prototype?
Our group has decided to adapt an open personal learning environment, because it is easier to follow and there are no extra passwords to remember. The other point would be that social media applications require a lot of mobility and time to get acquainted with the whole concept, thus a weekly space is left for the student to learn the things and reflect on them. We have put our materials in the web, namely a weebly-based page, which gives the objectives, main information, tasks, and the facilitator's blog (the name is made up thus there is no need to contact the person who is the "facilitator" there). Tools for learners would be a few social networking tools and also a blog for reflection. Since there is no groupwork, only minor skype chats may occur, but it is not clear yet, whether the learners would be keen on it. Some tasks are made in twitter, thus there will be an agregator for twitter feeds as well.
Why did we choose Weebly?
- easy to navigate, just a few clicks
- simple to create, and manage, just a few drag-and-drop items + text, embeddable code, etc.
- forum/feedback/blog option
- simple interface
I still learned that it is possible to do group work so that not everyone is present, but through collaboration with some and then the others it is possible to manage with group tasks very easily. There has to be a keen person who "fuels" the conversation, and participants who do work in time. I had quite a lot of fun setting up the weebly course and inventing facilitator's blog posts and comments. I love creative work!
What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What did go well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
According to my observations this week has been productive, we have been online and decided things together, and there was no need to schedule time, we were all online and had a spontaneous meeting. This made our task division even more effective. Well, since everybody agreed that PBworks is not the best environment for course presentation, we decided that we would change it. As we had at least 2 weebly users, we decided to use this environment. We have had several talk sessions with the group and that is assuring, everyone took part nicely.
Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
I love my organization :) but group environment changed in the sense that there appeared a new web page for the course prototype.
21.4.10
Prediction of Possible Business Models in Social Media in the Future.
Introduction
Social media is very clever in implementing business models in such a way that the user does not even notice while being hooked up in engaging content or an interesting application of a social media site that they find themselves paying for a service. Having tried to avoid spending money for social media-based applications has not succeeded since I have been tempted to try out the possibilities of upgraded services just to feel how it is to benefit from something. This experience has led to the conclusion that one should think about all the pros and cons of the service and come to a conclusion if buying upgraded services is necessary. I understood that there is a possibility to avoid paying when you leave the passion for an application aside or think rationally about the application benefits whether they are really necessary or not.
Having read through all possible variants of revenue models in social media, a warm feeling of recognition appeared. Nowadays social media and media economy mostly demands novelty and unique solutions in order to please the customer. When I find a social media-based web page, I have constantly found myself thinking about the websites’ conception how a certain site gains money from its customers while being totally free in the first glance. In further investigation certainly a kind of revenue model becomes apparent since the people behind the website mostly need an income.
Social media is very clever in implementing business models in such a way that the user does not even notice while being hooked up in engaging content or an interesting application of a social media site that they find themselves paying for a service. Having tried to avoid spending money for social media-based applications has not succeeded since I have been tempted to try out the possibilities of upgraded services just to feel how it is to benefit from something. This experience has led to the conclusion that one should think about all the pros and cons of the service and come to a conclusion if buying upgraded services is necessary. I understood that there is a possibility to avoid paying when you leave the passion for an application aside or think rationally about the application benefits whether they are really necessary or not.
Having read through all possible variants of revenue models in social media, a warm feeling of recognition appeared. Nowadays social media and media economy mostly demands novelty and unique solutions in order to please the customer. When I find a social media-based web page, I have constantly found myself thinking about the websites’ conception how a certain site gains money from its customers while being totally free in the first glance. In further investigation certainly a kind of revenue model becomes apparent since the people behind the website mostly need an income.
18.4.10
E-Learning Week 7 - Reflection
What was the most important thing you learned this week? What kind of questions/ideas/experiences this week’s activities raised for you?
I will take Chiara's example and talk about the conference I attended, E-learning conference 2010. I got a lot of inspiration through that and when the materials are put up, I hope there is a possibility to look at them. In the conference I had this e-learning course in mind several times. But I will not talk about the conference, since there are more important issues to be discussed. I learned that there is a possibility that without the group leader things get done as well. Chiara was so kind this time as to lead the forces, thus I was happy that other people take the lead as well!
What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What did go well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
Concerning group work I will reflect on Chiara's post, that the communication was not all that terrible, since she got hold of the groupwork to her hands and pushed us into working. I think we would have done it anyway, but work and school and other down-to-earth activities kept the team busy on the given times (one-two people were present, still). As far as the tasks are divided, I think people do not have to be online at the same time, everyone can improve/add something to the discussion later. I remember that everyone had their excuses, thus there should be other communication options/means to collaborate. The contract did not fulfill its purposes from the leadership point of view, but I think that everything is still on track.
We have not changed our environment yet, but I think that we should place the final product somewhere else than Pbworks (but I am growing to like the environment for this course a bit).
My personal learning environment is the same, I think. I still use a blog, which is a kind of portfolio for my learning experience. I use Skype for chats and task division, and E-Learning course for task monitoring.
I will take Chiara's example and talk about the conference I attended, E-learning conference 2010. I got a lot of inspiration through that and when the materials are put up, I hope there is a possibility to look at them. In the conference I had this e-learning course in mind several times. But I will not talk about the conference, since there are more important issues to be discussed. I learned that there is a possibility that without the group leader things get done as well. Chiara was so kind this time as to lead the forces, thus I was happy that other people take the lead as well!
What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What did go well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
Concerning group work I will reflect on Chiara's post, that the communication was not all that terrible, since she got hold of the groupwork to her hands and pushed us into working. I think we would have done it anyway, but work and school and other down-to-earth activities kept the team busy on the given times (one-two people were present, still). As far as the tasks are divided, I think people do not have to be online at the same time, everyone can improve/add something to the discussion later. I remember that everyone had their excuses, thus there should be other communication options/means to collaborate. The contract did not fulfill its purposes from the leadership point of view, but I think that everything is still on track.
We have not changed our environment yet, but I think that we should place the final product somewhere else than Pbworks (but I am growing to like the environment for this course a bit).
My personal learning environment is the same, I think. I still use a blog, which is a kind of portfolio for my learning experience. I use Skype for chats and task division, and E-Learning course for task monitoring.
14.4.10
Töö allikatega, viitamine ja viidete haldamine e-õppes. Esimene nädal.
Kirjutan vastuseks sellisele postitusele: http://viitamiskursus.wordpress.com/2010/04/12/esimene-nadal-sissejuhatus/
Mulle meeldisid väga viitamise 10 käsku - viitamine on minu jaoks eriti armas teema, kuna hetkel on meil koolis aktuaalsed aastatööd ning ülikoolis on loomulik, et ma pean üliõpilasena (omades oma osa viitamisest) oskama korrektselt viidata.
Mulle meeldib kõige rohkem blogis viitamine, seal ei ole vaja hakata nuputama, millist stiili kasutada - APA, MLA või Chicago. Lisaks veel küsimused, kas Vikipeediat arvestatakse või mitte (jah, pigem arvestatakse allikaid, millest artiklid kokku kirjutatud on, aga miks siis üks õppejõud jonnakalt vaid Vikipeediale viitas? - võib esitada retoorilisi küsimusi), kas ma peaksin lisama numbri ja joonealuse viite või sulgudes oleva kirjanduse loetelu katke... väga keeruline.
Õnneks on tänapäeva tehnoloogia väga uuenduslik ja teeb üliõpilase elu kergeks (ma ei soovitaks keeleõpetajana kunagi Google Translate'i, aga kui muidu ei saa, siis soovitan saadud tõlke alati üle kontrollida; nii on ilmselt ka kõikide veebimaterjalidega), seega olen avastanud väikese üliõpilase abimootori nimega Citation Machine, mis paneb sinu sissetrükitud andmed kenasti korrektsesse vormi. Kui ISBN numbrit tead, siis on veel parem, ei pea midagi sisse toksima (aga alati kontrolli, enne kui seda teadustöös kasutad).
Uudiste kirjutajana tean, et alati tuleb algallikale viidata ja jälgida, ega lool liiga karme piiranguid ei ole. Mul on omapärane kogemus enda läbiviidud intervjuuga, kus ajakirjanik võttis minu loo, kirjutas sellest sobivas mahus materjali oma nime all ümber ja esitas lehes. Kahjuks ei suuda ma originaalartiklit leida, aga otsingust on näha pealkiri "Pärnu kooli teeb USA kolledžiga koostööd". Loo ümberkirjutanu ei viidanud ei originaalartiklile ega selle autorile, aga kuna ta oli mu sõbranna, siis andsin talle andeks.
Kommenteeriks rusikareegleid ja 10 käsku järgnevalt:
Kui ma ülikooli sisseastumisesseed kirjutasin, olin küll omadega veidi puntras, aga viitamist ei unustanud. Ilmselt tegin seda erinevates stiilides, aga tundub, et tahtsin võimalikult palju viiteid ära näidata, ei tea kas selle pärast, et uhkem oleks või selle pärast kui palju vaeva ma nägin.
Praegu võingi öelda, et eksin selle reegli vastu, et viitamisel tuleb kasutada läbivat stiili, aga samas kõik on harjutatav, ma olen ka arenenud.
Kuskohast on pärit 10 käsu adaptatsioon viitamise kohta? Ma ilmselt olen viitamiskuulekas, korralikult kasutan (enamasti) viiteid. Kui tõesti aega ei ole, siis jätan viitamata, aga selle võib minu uneaja arvele panna.
Viitekogu ei taha hästi kolleegidega jagada, sest seal on mul üks segapudru.
Ahjaa, allikate kohta tahtsin kirjutada, et neid tuleb pidevalt uuendada, kuna informatsioon vananeb nii kiirelt, et kõigega ei jõua end kursiski hoida.
13.4.10
Töö allikatega, viitamine ja viidete haldamine e-õppes. Sissejuhatus. Esimene nädal.
Tere.
Kirjutan vastuseks sellisele postitusele: http://viitamiskursus.wordpress.com/2010/04/12/esimene-nadal-sissejuhatus/
Selline ma olengi. Pildistamise hetkel asusin tööl ja üritasin asjalikku nägu teha.
Olen ennast juba päris palju tutvustanud, küll eesti küll inglise keeles. Paraku on sellest blogist, mis oli algselt mõeldudki taolise Vikiülikooli kursuse jaoks, saanud minu Tallinna Ülikooli IMKE (Interactive Media and Knowledge Environments) inglisekeelne õpiblogi.Taustast nii palju, et olen eluaegne Pärnakas ja eluaegne Ühisgümnaasiumis käija, kes oma õpetajahariduse hankis Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikoolist ning uut haridust juba uuemast, Tallinna Ülikoolist taga ajab ülalmainitud magistriõppe läbijana.
Töötan Pärnu Ühisgümnaasiumis inglise ja prantsuse keele õpetajana ja tiigrihüppe haridusportaali aineeksperdina.
Kõige selle kõrvalt kasvatan ka tubli koolieelikut Ukut, ja kui natuke rohkem aega on, laulan naiskoor "Lindas". Põhitähelepanu on hetkel õppimisele ja töötamisele suunatud.
Kursuselt ootan ma uusi põnevaid ressursse ja tegelikult panen ka ennast proovile, kas sel korral olen võimeline sellise kursuse lõpuni käima (kus ei ole reaalset käsku midagi lõpuni teha). Tuttavaid on ka tore kursusel kohata :)
11.4.10
E-Learning Week 6 - Tasks and Reflection
What do you consider as important elements in an e-learning course?
1) A well-educated course facilitator - the facilitator's role is the most crucial as he or she has to build up a course for people who might not even meet the facilitator and coursemates. The facilitator has to know the basics of building an e-learning course as well as have a good grasp of the material.
2) A nice introduction - to define the outcome and goals of the course.
3) Good materials - by materials I mean videos, texts, notes, etc., which draw the learners' attention in such a way that they memorize things very easily. The materials to my mind should be concise and very striking, especially for younger people.
4) Evaluation - understandable criteria for passing the course. Those should be not too harsh and not too simple, because with too tight schedule a learner could never do well in a course with harsh requirements, and with too broad criteria the result might not come out as well, too, because then they just forget about the requirements and think there is time enough to pass.
5) Feedback - this is an important part, since every person needs reflection for how he or she has advanced. It can be a mark or a comment.
What was the most important thing you learned this week?
I think I realised that groupwork is tricky work since there is no ideal time when you can meet, there is no ideal pattern that the group co-operates on, because the people in the group are so different. Yet you manage to do all things well and on time, which is a relief.
What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What did go well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
Groupwork went well, because we met online and discussed which parts should be done and which tasks should be divided. I think that according to personal learning contract I can regard myself as successful, because the group managed to do well. I was a bit puzzled, though, that there is a kind of dependence on the group leader. Puzzled, because I think that grown-up people are able to think on their own as well. But all in all we managed well and all parties did their job on time.
Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
Nothing has really changed in these learning environments. I have taken my blog as a learning blog or portfolio and for group work we are still using Pbworks. Maybe we will switch to another one, but currently all of it is as it was before.
1) A well-educated course facilitator - the facilitator's role is the most crucial as he or she has to build up a course for people who might not even meet the facilitator and coursemates. The facilitator has to know the basics of building an e-learning course as well as have a good grasp of the material.
2) A nice introduction - to define the outcome and goals of the course.
3) Good materials - by materials I mean videos, texts, notes, etc., which draw the learners' attention in such a way that they memorize things very easily. The materials to my mind should be concise and very striking, especially for younger people.
4) Evaluation - understandable criteria for passing the course. Those should be not too harsh and not too simple, because with too tight schedule a learner could never do well in a course with harsh requirements, and with too broad criteria the result might not come out as well, too, because then they just forget about the requirements and think there is time enough to pass.
5) Feedback - this is an important part, since every person needs reflection for how he or she has advanced. It can be a mark or a comment.
What was the most important thing you learned this week?
I think I realised that groupwork is tricky work since there is no ideal time when you can meet, there is no ideal pattern that the group co-operates on, because the people in the group are so different. Yet you manage to do all things well and on time, which is a relief.
What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What did go well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
Groupwork went well, because we met online and discussed which parts should be done and which tasks should be divided. I think that according to personal learning contract I can regard myself as successful, because the group managed to do well. I was a bit puzzled, though, that there is a kind of dependence on the group leader. Puzzled, because I think that grown-up people are able to think on their own as well. But all in all we managed well and all parties did their job on time.
Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
Nothing has really changed in these learning environments. I have taken my blog as a learning blog or portfolio and for group work we are still using Pbworks. Maybe we will switch to another one, but currently all of it is as it was before.
6.4.10
Reply to the Facilitator's Questions of Week 3
Should every group member be responsible for all the points you have made? For instance, who should make sure that everyone has the information that is necessary for the next tasks. Is it a task for every group member to check or is it a group leader's task to take care of?Actually every group member took part in the creation of the points, I just formulated the final "product". The following steps will be agreed upon with the whole group, and I think we will collectively distribute tasks needed for future. I believe each group member will get familiar with the necessary information, this is not definitely my task, but as a group we support each other. I also allowed access to write into our space, so you can comment there now, I believe.
I had a look at your group environment in pbwiki about the criteria for a good online course. As I don't have access to that environment and I am not allowed to leave comments I present them here:
1. "Practical = sufficient length of the course" - a strange combination :). I found the following claim also very subjective: "The course should take up time as much as it would not disturb one's private life". I would argue that our private lives are very different and how one can quarantee that it doesn't disturb participants' private lives?
Another claim: "There is a need for the course and the need persists because of its good quality." A course can be good, but the need for that course might change due to different reasons, one of them can be out-to-date knowledge and skills it provides and encourages...
2. I so much agree with you that a course should be free, but somebody should pay for the costs at some point. Currently we have a list of courses in our wikiversity, which are for free, but certificate is given only to those who have either paid for this or enrolled to a formal program. Of course it is not the best solution, but at least it is a step further to open up the education for everybody.
3. Your claim: "The course has to be inspiring, and provide with lots of interesting ideas and new thoughts." It used to be that way that a course should be already designed in a way that it provides lots of interesting ideas and new thoughts. Now we encourage participants to say their opinions, share their experiences, discuss and argue. And I believe that all the participants can contribute to this. Of course another problem is the level of engagement from the participants... So a good course should provide opportunities for participants to provide their ideas and thoughts...
But in general, these are really good and relevant points a course designer should consider.Thanks for the time spent on looking through our work I totally agree that there were some personal subjective thoughts, but this was the reflection of our group on the ideal course design. Since there are 5 people, everyone contributed their preferences and we had this great mash-up of thoughts. I know that there is no one clear solution for a course, and the facilitator has to make amendments on some points, but every course designer gives his/her best to create the best course.
I think that if a course wants to be up-to-date, the facilitator has to renew the course components and constantly keep the information and different applications updated - it takes up a lot of time and ideas, but I think it is possible for some time at least.
As for free courses Wikiversity is a really great environment to continue life-long learning without getting the certificate (for those who do not care about certificates).
4.4.10
E-Learning Week 5 - Reflection
Tasks:
Revise your personal learning contract if needed, considering what you have learned so far, what is going differently from your initial plans, how the environment has changed. Please start a new blog post for revision and keep the first version of the contract. Refer to the first version.
Since I created my learning contract based on some knowledge already, I think it would be unfair to change anything there. After week 6 I can add if my experience with the e-learning tasks of my pupils went well or if I did anything wrong (not to encourage my pupils' motivation).
Revise your personal learning contract if needed, considering what you have learned so far, what is going differently from your initial plans, how the environment has changed. Please start a new blog post for revision and keep the first version of the contract. Refer to the first version.
Since I created my learning contract based on some knowledge already, I think it would be unfair to change anything there. After week 6 I can add if my experience with the e-learning tasks of my pupils went well or if I did anything wrong (not to encourage my pupils' motivation).
29.3.10
E-Learning Week 4 - Tasks and Reflection
Tasks:
Find at least one good and one bad example case of course design and reflect your opinions of these courses in your personal Weblog. Visit the blogs of your groupmates, read their reflections of course designs and add your opinions as comments about these courses.
I can easily draw a comparison between four e-courses, which I have participated in or am currently participating in:
The first course is very orderly. First it gives the backbone of the course and in the backbone there is a possibility to move on to the course topics. In each topic you have the hometask as well as extra materials. In addition the lecturer provided us with a forum and a weekly skype discussion opportunity (to gain points and to get feedback on different topics). He also invited guests to our skype sessions. These weekly sessions were good for communication between different people, and also groupwork was pretty good among our participants. Each group member had to contribute to the paper we made and thus noone could miss their part. We created the course work environment in a wiki as well. What was missing from the course was the introduction to the topic (as in "today we are going to learn... etc.), but that was really a minor error. Individually we read papers and filled in our blogs.
The second course are very well designed with tasks given in correct order, topics and extra materials under the introduction, leading to separate pages. As I got used to the backbone of the previous course, the index before the topics seems a good solution, but after the index there is scrollable content (too much scrollable content is not good). This course seems not too "scrollable", satisfactory in that sense. The facilitator introduces the topics and provides with good reading materials which give additional academic knowledge to the initial knowledge base, which is great. Students have to reflect on different tasks (given on Wikiversity page) in their blogs and groupwork has to be done on a separate page. A good thing is that the facilitator gives feedback on the course in each participant's blog, and also provides us with a web conferencing option. The facilitator also keeps the students updated through her blog.
The third course is divided into two environments, having the backbone with a similar index as the second course has, and the Wikiversity page is more used as the introduction to weekly topics and tasks. Tasks are given in a separate blog, which may be a bit confusing to the first-time users, but this is well-adaptable to a technology-prone person. The facilitator uses an extra pageflakes page to collect all students' blog links into one blogroll visible to all participants at once, which is a good idea to have a look at the others' blogs as well. The blog option is used for weekly materials.
I found this kind of learning more amusing, but also more confusing. The learners in that course were intrinsically motivated and quite communicative, thus making the course more enjoyable. Sadly I had to leave because of lack of time (enormous workload).
The three previous examples were examples of good e-learning course designs, but the last one should be a bit worse example.
The fourth Wikiversity-based course's layout is quite stretched, so you have to scroll it down, and the table of contents (what I previously called "index") appeared only recently. This is a very inconvenient way to navigate on the page. The facilitator provides with the introduction of each page, but when you start looking closer at the topics, the content seems pretty much copy-paste from the original sources (which does not seem very academic). There is a separate closed environment (iCampus) for participation and you have to upload your documents there. She provides the students with sources and topics on iCampus, but she has not defined the marking scale, nor the criteria for passing the course. This course seems a bit disturbing, because I feel more like blogging instead of scribbling documents and uploading them. Also I do not like scrolling and would prefer clicking on the topic and moving on to a separate page.
As a group define what are the criteria for a good online course and reflect it in your group space (whatever you choose this to be), but make this group space visible to other groups by posting a link on E-learning/Participants page under your group.
The page created is tallinnuniversityprojects.pbworks.com, and our group task is here.
Reading and reflection
1. Structure - in which order and how to place content. What kind of information to provide, what kind of links, etc.
2. Material - presented in a structured format, so that the learner can understand the topics. Chosen material does not differ from classroom material.
3. Motivation and feedback - Due to effective feedback provided by the facilitator, the learner feels motivated.
4. Interaction - a) programs that enable activity, b)open questions, games, tools and calculators stimulate good activity, c) engage the mind!
5. Involvement - Learner-controlled involvement through several activities.
2. What was the most important thing you learned this week? What kind of questions/ideas/experiences this week’s activities raised for you?
The most important thing that I learned this week was that group collaboration needs strong peer support and encouragement, as well as changes in chosen web-based applications. It may turn out that in fact the chosen solution may not be the best for this particular group.
3. What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What went well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
I was very pleased with this week's groupwork in terms of collaboration and input. After reminding ourselves that PbWorks does not allow multiple changes for one page, we agreed on using a Google Document in order to collaborate on a draft version of our task 1, and this also went quite well, everybody started participating right away. Alice had to make an account in Google and she managed to fix her thoughts in the document as well.
I think I had good feedback on my questions and I hope I could support my team members as well as I could as well. I hope to get feedback on our groupwork from the facilitator as well, since this was the first task ever done by our group in such way. I felt we could have done more there, but maybe I am just overthinking.
Overall, my management skills proved to be excellent in getting the group together as well as allowing them all to collaborate in their own pace. I am satisfied with myself, thus I should make a green tick somewhere in order to mark my coping with the task in the contract.
4. Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
What changed in our group learning environment was that a separate document for online and simultaneous collaboration was needed. Creating a Google Document was not a difficult job. I think our group is going to use this kind of collaboration more, and maybe new means of collaboration will arise as well. Final results that our group got, were still put in PbWiki space.
Find at least one good and one bad example case of course design and reflect your opinions of these courses in your personal Weblog. Visit the blogs of your groupmates, read their reflections of course designs and add your opinions as comments about these courses.
I can easily draw a comparison between four e-courses, which I have participated in or am currently participating in:
- Ethics and Law in New Media
- E-Learning
- Avatud õppematerjalide koostamine ja kasutamine
- Value Chains and New Media
The first course is very orderly. First it gives the backbone of the course and in the backbone there is a possibility to move on to the course topics. In each topic you have the hometask as well as extra materials. In addition the lecturer provided us with a forum and a weekly skype discussion opportunity (to gain points and to get feedback on different topics). He also invited guests to our skype sessions. These weekly sessions were good for communication between different people, and also groupwork was pretty good among our participants. Each group member had to contribute to the paper we made and thus noone could miss their part. We created the course work environment in a wiki as well. What was missing from the course was the introduction to the topic (as in "today we are going to learn... etc.), but that was really a minor error. Individually we read papers and filled in our blogs.
The second course are very well designed with tasks given in correct order, topics and extra materials under the introduction, leading to separate pages. As I got used to the backbone of the previous course, the index before the topics seems a good solution, but after the index there is scrollable content (too much scrollable content is not good). This course seems not too "scrollable", satisfactory in that sense. The facilitator introduces the topics and provides with good reading materials which give additional academic knowledge to the initial knowledge base, which is great. Students have to reflect on different tasks (given on Wikiversity page) in their blogs and groupwork has to be done on a separate page. A good thing is that the facilitator gives feedback on the course in each participant's blog, and also provides us with a web conferencing option. The facilitator also keeps the students updated through her blog.
The third course is divided into two environments, having the backbone with a similar index as the second course has, and the Wikiversity page is more used as the introduction to weekly topics and tasks. Tasks are given in a separate blog, which may be a bit confusing to the first-time users, but this is well-adaptable to a technology-prone person. The facilitator uses an extra pageflakes page to collect all students' blog links into one blogroll visible to all participants at once, which is a good idea to have a look at the others' blogs as well. The blog option is used for weekly materials.
I found this kind of learning more amusing, but also more confusing. The learners in that course were intrinsically motivated and quite communicative, thus making the course more enjoyable. Sadly I had to leave because of lack of time (enormous workload).
The three previous examples were examples of good e-learning course designs, but the last one should be a bit worse example.
The fourth Wikiversity-based course's layout is quite stretched, so you have to scroll it down, and the table of contents (what I previously called "index") appeared only recently. This is a very inconvenient way to navigate on the page. The facilitator provides with the introduction of each page, but when you start looking closer at the topics, the content seems pretty much copy-paste from the original sources (which does not seem very academic). There is a separate closed environment (iCampus) for participation and you have to upload your documents there. She provides the students with sources and topics on iCampus, but she has not defined the marking scale, nor the criteria for passing the course. This course seems a bit disturbing, because I feel more like blogging instead of scribbling documents and uploading them. Also I do not like scrolling and would prefer clicking on the topic and moving on to a separate page.
As a group define what are the criteria for a good online course and reflect it in your group space (whatever you choose this to be), but make this group space visible to other groups by posting a link on E-learning/Participants page under your group.
The page created is tallinnuniversityprojects.pbworks.com, and our group task is here.
Reading and reflection
- Make a selection of reading material for the fourth week
- Reflect on your learning experiences in your personal Weblog following the reflection template:
1. Structure - in which order and how to place content. What kind of information to provide, what kind of links, etc.
2. Material - presented in a structured format, so that the learner can understand the topics. Chosen material does not differ from classroom material.
3. Motivation and feedback - Due to effective feedback provided by the facilitator, the learner feels motivated.
4. Interaction - a) programs that enable activity, b)open questions, games, tools and calculators stimulate good activity, c) engage the mind!
5. Involvement - Learner-controlled involvement through several activities.
2. What was the most important thing you learned this week? What kind of questions/ideas/experiences this week’s activities raised for you?
The most important thing that I learned this week was that group collaboration needs strong peer support and encouragement, as well as changes in chosen web-based applications. It may turn out that in fact the chosen solution may not be the best for this particular group.
3. What is your evaluation of this week's groupwork? (What went well and what did not? How did groupwork influence fulfilling your personal learning contract?)
I was very pleased with this week's groupwork in terms of collaboration and input. After reminding ourselves that PbWorks does not allow multiple changes for one page, we agreed on using a Google Document in order to collaborate on a draft version of our task 1, and this also went quite well, everybody started participating right away. Alice had to make an account in Google and she managed to fix her thoughts in the document as well.
I expected our wiki-collaboration to make more progress. I certainly expect the group members to add or change my posts in our wiki as well.
Overall, my management skills proved to be excellent in getting the group together as well as allowing them all to collaborate in their own pace. I am satisfied with myself, thus I should make a green tick somewhere in order to mark my coping with the task in the contract.
4. Describe what has changed in your personal learning environment and in group environment?
What changed in our group learning environment was that a separate document for online and simultaneous collaboration was needed. Creating a Google Document was not a difficult job. I think our group is going to use this kind of collaboration more, and maybe new means of collaboration will arise as well. Final results that our group got, were still put in PbWiki space.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)