Disqus - Latest Comments for jkmcdonald

Re: Screenplay Review – United States of Fuckin’ Awesome

Jason McDonald — Thu, 07 Jul 2016 12:22:28 -0000

Send it my way please? jkmcdonald @ gmail.com

Re: Screenplay Review – United States of Fuckin’ Awesome

Jason McDonald — Wed, 06 Jul 2016 14:30:09 -0000

Send it my way please? jkmcdonald @ gmail.com

Re: The CMS and the PLN

Jason McDonald — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:53:19 -0000

Hey, Jon. Interesting thoughts. A few things came to mind as I read. Would you please take this in the spirit of further inquiry?

As I read, I wondered whether you might be falling into your own "tyranny of or" trap. As in, "the CMS has this goodness we want, so we either have to get it from an CMS or we can't have it at all." What if the CMS advantages you discuss could be provided in ways other than through an CMS? In other words, instead of trying to combine the CMS and PLN to get the advantages of both (where I actually think you have a higher chance of getting the disadvantages of both), what if you pursued the advantages of the CMS in other (perhaps even non-technological) ways? A few ideas came to mind:

1) Integration with the SIS: When I worked with the IMC, one of the students exploited a weakness in the LDAP system to allow his little multimedia project to use student information outside of Blackboard or AIM. I mention this only to underscore the fact that the technical challenges of SIS integration are not difficult - a student making $8.00/hr figured it out. What is difficult is navigating the layers of policies on top of the SIS. Some of these, no doubt are necessary. But others are in place to make engineers' lives easier, and still others are there to make administrators' lives easier. We naturally accept those as constraints when they are only constraints because we want them to be. Taking a hard look at data access policies may provide innovative ways for using SIS data without the traditional structure of the CMS - even if it makes the data stewards hot to even think about it.

2: Institutional control over data (you actually mentioned this as a PLN weaknesses). A wise man once said, "Available information wisely used is far more valuable than multiplied information allowed to lie fallow." It seems like institutions treat data like junkies treat crack - they always want more even when it hurts them. I doubt most modern institutions actually need more data or more control over data. Most of the problems I observe probably are correlated with too much data rather than too little. So is a way to mitigate this PLN weakness (or CMS strength) to redefine what data we want to control? I bet an honest asking of the question, "if I was starting again completely from scratch, would I recreate the system I currently have?" would reveal many places in our system where the data we thought we had to control simply becomes irrelevant.

3: FERPA compliant. Not to say that privacy isn't important. But there is a difference between privacy and FERPA. And there is a difference between FERPA and how institutions choose to interpret FERPA. If there is an educational opportunity that appears to violate FERPA, what if institutional leaders used their collective influence to modify the FERPA landscape, instead of squashing the idea in the name of compliance? At least sometimes I believe "compliance" is a code word for "easier than the alternatives." What if we refused to let people play that game? What if we really explored innovations in the spirit of trying to make them work, instead of abandoning them as soon as they conflict with the status quo? Does this approach open ways for the PLN to be used to meet the needs we really have, instead of relying on the CMS?

Just some random thoughts . . . interested in your response!

Re: Learning Technology Customers

Jason McDonald — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:41:07 -0000

My original response questioned the idea that students would respond
positively to authority figures (like professors) showing up in their social
spaces. I guess I don't see the number of students using social networks as
counter-evidence to that claim. 100% of students could be using Facebook,
but they still might revolt in mass if a university tried to make Facebook
the new LMS.

As I've reflected further over the last couple of days I think I've decided
my thoughts go even one step further. 10+ years in instructional technology,
plus a PhD in the subject, has led me to a very functionalist perspective on
the topic. I can't count the number of times I've heard (or even asked)
questions like, "How can we get more professors to adopt Technology X?"
These questions are asked with an evangelical zeal, quietly assuming that if
professors only saw the light, true conversion would come and we would reach
educational Nirvana!

But educators use tons of technology. Most use word processing, because it
solves real and significant problems for them and their students. Most use
some form of research-support software, because it solves real and
significant problems for them and their students. If they aren't using our
favorite technology (whether it be Facebook or Blackboard), maybe it's
because that technology doesn't solve real and significant problems for them
and their students.

The history of education shows that the significant issues aren't technology
problems. They're people problems. And you can't solve people problems with
technology, no matter how hard you try. So if students aren't learning all
we think they should learn (and assuming we know what they should learn is
also a questionable assumption, but let's go with it for now) using a
technology we don't have to train them on is, at best, rearranging the deck
chairs on the Titanic.

Maybe we need to own up to the conclusion that if professors (or students)
resist a technology, then the technology just isn't useful to them. Maybe it
will be useful someday. And if it is, the technology will still be there to
support them. We don't need to be better marketers of instructional
technology. We need to be better listeners to what issues professors and
students are really struggling with, and help there first . I think we might
be surprised how little the Internet or computers would come up as a
solution if we really approached problems this way.

Re: Learning Technology Customers

Jason McDonald — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:31:07 -0000

Tech support done by someone else? Awesome.

Students already know these tools proficiently? Let's not over-generalize.
This morning I was sent some research conducted with incoming college
freshmen in 2006 (2/3 of which were between the ages of 17 and 20). Only 1/3
of these students used social networking websites once a month or more or
more frequently. Only 1/3 read blogs once a month or more frequently. Less
than 20% wrote in their own blog once a month or more frequently.

For the full article please see:
http://www.ascilite.org.au/...

And yes, I'll be careful to not over-generalize myself. The research was
conducted in Australia, and so we have to question how similar U.S. students
are. But I think a safe conclusion is we can't assume we know our students,
based on demographic information alone. We can't assume our students are
like everyone else. We have to get to know our students, as individuals,
before we can safely recommend tools that will enhance their learning
experience.

Re: Learning Technology Customers

Jason McDonald — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:36:14 -0000

In response to the idea that educators should use the same tools the students are already using (Facebook, e.g.):

At first glance this doesn't seem like a bad idea. When many of these initiatives are implemented, however, they often run into problems. Among other things is the phenomenon known as the "creepy treehouse."

Yes, communication, community, relationships, and more are very important to students' use of social media tools and websites. So it seems so natural to use them for education! But another important draw for many students is those sites are also places where the normal authorities aren't around. In other words, at least part of the draw of Facebook is kids can be themselves, and don't have to act the way their parents, teachers, or employers want them to act. Did your parent ever chaperone a high school dance, just so they could spend more time with you? This is the same idea. When professors use Facebook (or many other social media sites) for educational purposes, students feel more than only it's out of place. They feel it's . . . creepy.

For more on the "creepy treehouse" see:
http://flexknowlogy.learnin...

http://acrlog.org/2008/05/1...