etc@bmc
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Click and Double-Click: David Karen talks Tablets
This episode of Click and Double-Click, David Karen discusses how he used the Tablet PC in his courses to comment on writing and we talk about cell phone technology.
Independence, Balkanization, or Going Along with the Crowd
Terry Calhoun writes an interesting opinion piece about the problem of monoculture in higher education, especially in IT. He points specifically to Blackboard. In a discussion he followed on the issue of Blackboard, he cites Skip Knox as saying:
I have always advocated using whatever technology fits your particular pedagogical approach and so, many people create their own web sites or use blogs or wikis or use the chalkboard. We are a small enough place where I think we can still advocate this approach. However, as more and more people want to use technology outside of Blackboard, our resources become strained. There is one of me and I can't possibly train everyone in html. I've put up a blog site, but someone still has to maintain it and develop it. It takes time and energy to research what to use, to set it up and figure out how it works and then to teach others how to use it. We're considering alternative systems to Blackboard, but that, too, can cause a pull on resources. Who's going to install and maintain it? Will it be so different from Blackboard that we'll need to develop separate documentation? How will we get students enrolled into courses? We depend on faculty's self-sufficiency in these situations, that they are smart, enterprising people who can figure this stuff out and who know best how to use the technology in their classes.
But . . . when I feel pulled in too many different directions and when the persons wanting to use the technology are not willing to learn anything on their own, I have to suggest going along with the crowd. There's a support system in place for those who use Blackboard. There are 5 or 6 people on campus who know the system well. Swarthmore handles the server administration. It's backed up and it's fairly reliable.
And still, I'm supportive of those who show independence and venture beyond the "approved" system because I don't believe in forcing one way of approaching technology on people. Education to me is individual and not cookie cutter. Though it may be more difficult to support, working together I think it's possible to allow different systems to live in parallel. If we advocate diversity in other areas, why not technology?
It's not just that Blackboard (to give name to the devil) is a corporate vendor; it's that any LMS represents a particular pedagogical approach. No one seems to have questioned the wisdom of imposing one pedagogy across the entire curriculum.Of course, we here at Bryn Mawr are a Blackboard campus. In fact, we share our Blackboard installation with Haverford and Swarthmore. Are we risking monoculture in doing so? Actually, I don't think so. While Blackboard is our only course management system option, we make no requirements for using it. In fact, plenty of people don't. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'd guess that only about half of the faculty on campus are using Blackboard. Of those that are using Blackboard, I'd say only half are using it as a Learning Management System. The other half are using it to store documents and no more.
I have always advocated using whatever technology fits your particular pedagogical approach and so, many people create their own web sites or use blogs or wikis or use the chalkboard. We are a small enough place where I think we can still advocate this approach. However, as more and more people want to use technology outside of Blackboard, our resources become strained. There is one of me and I can't possibly train everyone in html. I've put up a blog site, but someone still has to maintain it and develop it. It takes time and energy to research what to use, to set it up and figure out how it works and then to teach others how to use it. We're considering alternative systems to Blackboard, but that, too, can cause a pull on resources. Who's going to install and maintain it? Will it be so different from Blackboard that we'll need to develop separate documentation? How will we get students enrolled into courses? We depend on faculty's self-sufficiency in these situations, that they are smart, enterprising people who can figure this stuff out and who know best how to use the technology in their classes.
But . . . when I feel pulled in too many different directions and when the persons wanting to use the technology are not willing to learn anything on their own, I have to suggest going along with the crowd. There's a support system in place for those who use Blackboard. There are 5 or 6 people on campus who know the system well. Swarthmore handles the server administration. It's backed up and it's fairly reliable.
And still, I'm supportive of those who show independence and venture beyond the "approved" system because I don't believe in forcing one way of approaching technology on people. Education to me is individual and not cookie cutter. Though it may be more difficult to support, working together I think it's possible to allow different systems to live in parallel. If we advocate diversity in other areas, why not technology?
Friday, June 09, 2006
Academic "blogging"?
Inside Higher Ed reports today about UPenn's student blogging initiative. The idea is to have incoming students write in a blog that is shared only with their academic advisor and other administrators. They write about their academic interests, their strengths and weaknesses, and other issues related to their intellectual life at the University. The idea is that these "blog posts" will be shared with their academic advisors who will then have a better overall picture of their advisees and can provide better advice for them for their academic career.
This definitely sounds like an interesting idea and as the article states, has evolved out of the popularity of sites like Facebook and MySpace. The biggest difference is that the UPenn initiative is not public. Further, none of these sites are really blogs. Facebook and MySpace are really social networking sites though MySpace does have a blog component (often not used). And the UPenn initiative, by not being public, drops it out of the blog category as well. Though I certainly understand not wanting to make such sites public, one of the benefits of public blogging is the feedback one gets. I wondered (and commented to this effect) if it might not be beneficial to allow the students to make certain parts public, perhaps sharing it only with other students in their class. It would seem that would be a good way to build a community and to provide support for each other as they pursue their academic careers. Yes, having an electronic journal that the academic advisor can see anytime anywhere is a nice idea, but it doesn't take full advantage of the medium.
This definitely sounds like an interesting idea and as the article states, has evolved out of the popularity of sites like Facebook and MySpace. The biggest difference is that the UPenn initiative is not public. Further, none of these sites are really blogs. Facebook and MySpace are really social networking sites though MySpace does have a blog component (often not used). And the UPenn initiative, by not being public, drops it out of the blog category as well. Though I certainly understand not wanting to make such sites public, one of the benefits of public blogging is the feedback one gets. I wondered (and commented to this effect) if it might not be beneficial to allow the students to make certain parts public, perhaps sharing it only with other students in their class. It would seem that would be a good way to build a community and to provide support for each other as they pursue their academic careers. Yes, having an electronic journal that the academic advisor can see anytime anywhere is a nice idea, but it doesn't take full advantage of the medium.
