bits ‘n’ pieces
There’s loads to write about, as always, but I can’t seem to do it all justice in a post - so i’m simply posting some fairly random bits’n'pieces (as the title suggests) for now.
* I’m quite interested in presenting at a conference (about “Communication Technologies of Empowerment”), which will take place in Leeds next May. It is a very broad area - which is envisaged to lean towards the political context of communication technologies. I think there’s a very interesting story that Wikiversity can tell in this context; the only issue is that if I am to focus on the “how” of individual empowerment, there may be very little data to glean from Wikiversity’s collective experience for now. Or perhaps I’m wrong - maybe there’s just tonnes of experiential data there, and that I simply haven’t yet recognised it as such. In fact, I suspect the latter is the case.
* I’m also going to a conference in my own university about “knowledge transfer”, about making research accessible and useful to a wider audience than simply “the academy”. This could be a useful experience to reflect on what my research could become - ie. whether it could really start to help people who don’t wade through journals and PhD titles (something I can still improve on myself!). Wikiversity is a fascinating space to potentially connect people from academic and non-academic backgrounds - there remains much work to explore this and help make it a reality..
*Rob Lucas, of TeachForward, who I met at this year’s Wikimania, has set up a mailing list in “neutral space” (ie. not affiliated with any particular educational initiative), with the goal of bringing together people from various education/open content projects in order to discuss specific and common issues. As I’ve already confided to Rob, I’m envious of the discussion that the TeachForward mailing list has engendred, and I’m hopeful that this new list will be equally as thought-provoking. I’d like to start exploring what we can learn from eachother - which is, i think, largely what the list is for. There’s also a (fledgling) wiki to collate all these links.
* I’ve also set up a mailing list myself for my own university department (the School of Education) - hopefully to start sharing ideas from within our own pool of research ideas, problems, issues etc. I can’t believe it’s taken until now for someone to do this. Many of us live in our own little research bubbles, interacting with the people we already know, when there may be many others not too far away who have shared experiences, or who would benefit from sharing their experiences. (There’s also a lot more diversity than the website currently documents.) I still need to work on this list to get it functional and to advertise its existence - thankfully, tech-help is at hand.
* Still trying to figure out methodology/theoretical context - I think there’s so much to reflect on here that it warrants a post of its own (at some stage).
* And finally, of course, there are plenty of happenings within Wikiversity itself - getting to know Wikiversity educators (whose blogs I generally add in my blogroll on the right), discussions on Wikiversity-l (the Wikiversity mailing list) about using IRC in Wikiversity courses, as well as ongoing discussions on the (crucial) guidelines on the scope of research in Wikiversity (which we need to define in order to move out of our “beta” phase). In short, an ever-growing insight into what Wikiversity could become, and a continuing path of activity that will hopefully go on for quite some time to come..
November 25th, 2006 at 11:06 am
Hi Cormac - thanks for the post on my blog the other day. We seem to share an interest in new paradigms for education. I’d like to strike up a dialogue with you, this blog and fellow commentators here about barriers to Wikiversity-type initiatives amongst our fellow (less tech-savvy) educators. I was in the middle of a demonstration of Wikiversity to a friend & colleague at my university yesterday: I usually get really excited stringing together - admitedly, rather breathlessly - all the implications I see the ethos of Wikiversity, and wikis in general, have for traditional education. Just as I was introducing the topic of blogs as a means to blur the distinction between central versus peripheral participation (aka Lave & Wenger) in institutional educational discourse, he began to liken “all this” blogness and quick-fingered wiki webbing to a new language which he, for one, was not just unfamiliar but anxious about. Kind of stopped me short: maybe we’re all caught up our own fundaments? We’re a long way from these technologies becoming invisible, contrary to what our native scuttlings around the web connote. Anyway…
November 25th, 2006 at 3:05 pm
:-) Indeed, you’re absolutely right about the possibility of burying our heads in the sand with respect to the vastness of the field of technology and its speed of change. That’s something we need to lay right open in allowing people to access these technologies - and, being interested in this space (Wikiversity), we need to think about these accessibility issues. Or, am I right in interpreting your colleague’s nervousness as a usability question? There could well be many other dimensions to people’s nervousness - for example, the issue of anonymity (both desired and undesired), and, with respect to wiki-ness, the ‘problem’ of the author, or lack thereof..
In any case, I’m extremely motivated to instigate, open and sustain this dialogue with as many people as are interested in keeping it going. This blog, and the various other Wikiversity-related blogs (which I try to link from my blogroll as I find them) could act as a community, as well as trying to develop learning projects within Wikiversity itself. I mean, have you thought about starting a learning community around the issues of educational leadership (etc) on Wikiversity itself? I noticed your response to my comment on your blog - I feel it’s something that you’re burning to do..
Cormac
November 25th, 2006 at 4:41 pm
I’m not sure about the accessibility dimension of Wikiversity if by
accessibility you mean disability & discrimination act (DDA) and interface design issues. I think accessibility goes way beyond the politically correct of the personal
computer: the PC of the PC. I think Wikiversity is a double
subversion: from a technological wizardry sense for the non-tech
native, and from an ownership, intellectual property rights sense too
for those wedded to institutional learning. This double danger is
possibly what I saw on the face of my colleague: the ‘death of the author’, as Barthes calls it, is a serious concern for the academy. Bring it on, I say