Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study 'Minerva'

Mediencommunity 2.0
Expansive Learning & Web 2.0:
Shifts in learning culture?
Case Study 'Minerva'

Dr. Ilona Buchem
Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin
Research project „Mediencommunity 2.0“

Online Educa Berlin 2011, 02.12.2011
Theme: NPA – New Pedagogical Approaches to Learning

Overview

1. Mediencommunity 2.0
2. Expansive Learning
3. Case Study „Minerva“
4. Community Size
5. Open Questions

Buchem/OEB2011/Case study: Minerva 2

Mediencommunity 2.0


Shift in learning culture …

1. Industry-wide cooperation
2. Modernised vocational training
3. Educational permeability


Media designers : Vocational School

Final exams twice a year all over Germany

Participation?

Alarm!

Exam!


Expansive Learning

Learning by expanding

Learning is an „action which Klaus Holzkamp

differentiates itself from other actions
by its goal to extend ones own control
possibilities.”
Holzkamp, K. (1993). Lernen. Subjektwissenschaftliche Grundlegung. Frankfurt/M. Campus


Expansive vs. defensive Learning

Averting negative effects such as
Expansive Learning poor grades,
punishment,
Extending one‘s power to act as
sanctions
intentional
subject

Foto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/letcombe/1586241141/

Defensive Learning



Web 2.0: Expansive Learning

Learning 2.0
Learner-centered design
“(…) is more than just adapting for Stephen Downes

different learning styles or allowing the user
to change the font size and background color;
it is the placing of the control of learning
itself into the hands of the learner.”
Downes, S. (2005) E-learning 2.0. eLearn Magazine, Association for Computing Machinery.


Case Study „Minerva“

Exam tasks Moderate

Minerva

Wiki Collaborate


Over 400

Minerva

members!


Who is Minerva?

• 29 year old media designer
• First PC with Internet at age of 12
• Fan of strategy/adventure games
•
Minerva
Learned web design in online forums
• Former archeology student
• Made her hobby to her career


What motivates Minerva?
***
What are her subjective reasons to moderate a
group of peers preparing for the final exam?


… a virtual substitute

? “ I was missing my own peer group
as I was already out of school and
Minerva
working full time. I had no peers
around that I could learn with.”


… a missing benchmark

? “ I was unsure about what I have to
learn. I did not know what the
others already knew and how I
Minerva
compared to them.”


… a favorable environment

“There was simply no other
? possibility to set up an own group.
I had the tools and the peers, who
Minerva
were in the same situation like
me.”


… role identity
“I had the responsibility for leading
the group. Sometimes it was
? difficult , for example when I had a
stressful day at work. But I knew if I
Minerva
did nothing, people would drop out.
So I tried to contribute on regular
basis.”


expansive learning …
… starts with a subjective perception of a
discrepancy between current abilities and
the task requirements.

The learner aims to Foto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/waltstoneburner/3372746317/

master the task.


… prosumers?

Rarely
Often

Consume Produce


Why are they only consuming?
• MISTAKE: Cautious to publish in public, because
it could be a mistake and others from school
would laugh at you, mock you.
• QUALITY: Cautious to produce own content,
because it may be incorrect and mislead others.
• NORMS: Cautious to learn with/from the
Internet, because books have been
recommended by teachers for years.
• EXPECTED UTILITY: Unwilling to invest time,
energy, because unsure what this will bring, if
this will be of use at all.

Defensive learning …
… takes place in order to avert negative
effects such as bad grades or other sanctions.

The learner tries to
cope with challenges
With a minimum effort.

Foto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcandrelariviere/3251428624/


Other reasons?


… almost 800 members!

Allysia Allysia


Ringelmann effect …
• Individual members of a group become less
productive as the size of the group increases.

http://ht.ly/7Kto9

• Reason 1: Loss of motivation
• Reason 2: Coordination problems

Social loathing …
• Individuals put less effort to achieve a goal when
they work in a group than when they work alone.

http://ht.ly/7KuJs

• Deficit 1: Personal accountability
• Deficit 2: Uniqueness of contribution


… subjective reasons?

• “Too many cooks spoil the broth, so I
better help somewhere else.”
• “I seldom got any responses to my
Allysia
contributions or they came late”.
• “ I contribute only when I am sure I
can bring in my special knowledge”


Community size???

• Critical Mass Theory: Active users produce
enough content to motivate others to join.
• Information Overload Theory:
Contribution rates drop as user population
and their contributions grow.
• Social Loathing Theory: The larger the
group, the less personal effort.


Lessons learned …
Promote expansive learning
• Create opportunities for taking responsibility
• Foster self-organised forms of learning
• Promote positive error culture

Prevent social loathing
• Foster sub-groups for strong membership
• Assign individual members specific goals
• Recognise personal, unique knowledge


Open questions
• How many members are
needed to trigger a
community?

• Is effective group size
dependant on the type of
technology used?


Thank you for your attention!
Mediencommunity: http://www.mediencommunity.de
Dr. Ilona Buchem: http://www.ibuchem.com/


Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study 'Minerva'

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Similar a Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study 'Minerva'

Similar a Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study 'Minerva' (20)

Más de Mediencommunity 2.0

Más de Mediencommunity 2.0 (17)

Último

Último (20)

Expansive Learning & Web 2.0: Shifts in learning culture? Case Study 'Minerva'