Inside/Outside - the canon of concepts

September 4th, 2006

Just back from a course I taught at the Danube University Krems. It was the last input day for the students of the E-Teaching/E-Learning program. We had a very fruitful conversation about the meaning and usage of socalled Web 2.0 (t d f) / Social Software (t d f) concepts in formal learning contexts. The most important aspect from mpov was not so much the concerns about privacy and security for students but how can we - as instructors, consultants - transfer experiences and applications and models from the open Web into closed settings of formal education or organisational learning (t d f) aka knowledge-management (t d f).

A student told us about the integration of a Mediawiki (t d f) clone into their LMS, called Ilias (t d f), and similar stuff. The benefits are clear: control and integration. But what they lost was the openess of a participation that needs the network and its cumulative and emergent traits. If those 2 traits are of utmost relevance - and I do believe that - than we are heading into a big problem.

(Research and practical)Questions that arise?

- How can we transfer successful patterns of the open web into organisational settings without loosing their main building blocks?
- How do we need to conceive of an environment that supports the building of (learning) networks?
- How much of the original traits and affordances do we need to give up to import innovations into established practices?
- Is it necessary to wait ’til the traditional forms of - for instance - educational institutions erode and give way to open network-based-somethings?
- Who is the driver of such a development?
- Are applications in the driver’s seat?

I started that day in Krems with this notion from Sebastian:

Seblogging :: Weblogs, CMS, and personal Webpublishing for learning and education :: blogged by Sebastian Fiedler since July 2002 :: : “I yet have to hear a story about a young professional who felt the terrible need to install and run his own LMS platfrom to support his or her personal change project. But I know loads who use an array of small, simple and (increasingly networked) personal tools to their advantage. And guess what? It is usually a pretty messy sight… no integrated interfaces, no single-sign-on mechanisms, no careful workflow management.”

It becomes quite clear that a LMS (t d f) is nothing that belongs to the user. It’s quite the opposite to what we call learner or user-centered design. Well then, why do we need those LMS’s? Who benefits? And is it plausible to expect every individual to have those tools at hand like we use cellphones etc.

Since Blackboard (t d f) filed a patent the road is free to get rid of those tools anyway. Let’s put the learner in the driver’s seat. Tell them how to use those tools to benefit from networked, peripheral etc. learning.

On the other hand: it’s easy to claim that and by quoting Stephen Downes:

[...] It’s about enabling and encouraging participation through open applications and services. By open I mean technically open with appropriate APIs but also, more importantly, socially open, with rights granted to use the content in new and exciting contexts. (E-Learning 2.0)

The most - at least equally - important task is to take away the fear in the eyes of those in charge. Those that design curricula and grade students need to be able to see an new promising frontier. A new frontier that makes life more interesting and colorful by utilizing global networks of content creation, conversation and participation. This is - of course - an exhausting change process.

Translation and transfer of successful open web concepts and applications into organisations settings is the biggest challenge nowadays. It’s nothing less than incorporating innovation by changing it and changing the culture of the receiving organisation as well.