On things Web 2.0
So I am back in the office. Ascilite was a good gig. There was a real buzz around Web 2.0 and what this is going to mean for elearning in the future. I think that that the linear platforms that we have like WebCT, BB, Moodle and Sakai could be at obsolete in there present form, sooner rather than later. Blackboard have announced that they will, shortly, be releasing a Blackboard 2.0. I think, philosophically, this is problematic. Sometimes I see the Learning Management System in the same way as I see Foucault’s (or Bentham’s) panopticon. The lecturer is in the middle and all the LMS cells surround the teacher. We peer into the cells and moderate the behaviour of the inmates. A little bit dramatic maybe, still what Web 2.0 technologies offer us is the opportunity to put the learner back to the centre of learning. LMS aren’t as successful as they could be because the system is locked down. Why don’t students chat in WebCT? Because it is inflexible. Why use Blackboard to communicate with your peers when I can have MSN messenger open all the time, and be contactable all the day, and choose to ignore someone, or ping someone. The beauty of Web2.0 apps, is that their distributed nature mirrors the distributed nature of knowledge. Knowledge isn’t just plonked in one place, it is in many places, and with many people.
At learning matters yesterday I show some great use of Web2.0 apps, people find it more like life I guess. And maybe that’s at the heart of how e-learning can we great learning – when we make it more like life. Designing learning platforms should perhaps be more life myspace, and less like online banking.
For those who would like a visual representation of Web 2.0 I found this on Scott Wilson’s blog (which is actually from Fred Cavazza’s visual mapping of identity)
4 Comments
There is a still a place for WebCT/Blackboard at VU – not because it is in tune with new ways of thinking about learning, but because it is not.
And because it is not, it provides an imperfect, but emotionally secure bridge which will eventually lead eLearning neophytes to the promised land of Web 2.0 and beyond.
The problem with any LCMS is not the limitations embodied in its tools, processes or one-dimensional communications – but in the power and influence that we have given it by making it a *central* part of the digital learning experience. However, by treating the LCMS as it deserves to be treated – a mere node in the social learning network – we can begin to create a true learning-centred paradigm.
Yeah – Scott Wilson’s take on all this is that any system is a reification of whatever the stakeholders wanted when the system was designed – and of course, as systems develop and are modified the same law holds… In a typical LCMS there is a shift towards “course management” – student population, recording of attendence and assessment for example, and a move away from an LCMS as an actual “learning environment”.
In fact one of the papers at ASCILITE states that the big players (Blackboard, WebCT) where always all about course management rather than teaching anyway and its a view I am gradually coming around to.
… and it was always a L C *Management* S
Maybe we need to graft a better *Learning” Management System onto the LCMS ??
The image on Scott Wilson Blog is from Fred Cavazza. The link you made is from the version that fred uses to make its own.
It’s the first source, so thanks for the link.
Leafar
Founder of U.[lik], helping people puzzling their cultural identity.
http://www.u-lik.com