Footprint of Emergence

boom3Jenny Mackness and Roy Williams and and Simone Gumtau try to make a visual way of analyzing learning and teaching in courses. They call it Footprints of Emergence.

Jenny Mackness en Roy Williams en en Simone Gumtau proberen een visuele manier van analyseren van leren en lesgeven te maken: Footprints of Emergence.
Ze hanteren vier groepen factoren :

Openheid – structuur .
interactieve omgeving.
agency (autonomie, zelfbepaling).
Aanwezigheid / schrijven ( het leerproces en product , of de manier waarop het leren wordt gerealiseerd ).

They use four groups of factors:

  • Openness – structure.
  • Interactive environment.
  • Agency.
  • Presence / Writing ( the learning process and product, or the way the learning is realized).

In those 4 groups we find 20-25 factors describing different aspects of learning.

Some aspects:

  • Trust: The student engages competitive self-interest or in the course is a feeling of mutual respect and support.
  • Ambiguity: how tightly defined is the meaning and application of the learning?
  • Open Affordances: the student has space for exploration, the action is predeterminated or space for creative engagement.

In die 4 groepen vinden we 20-25 factoren van leren .

Enkele aspecten :

Vertrouwen : De student houdt zich bezig concurrerende eigenbelang of in de loop is een gevoel van wederzijds respect en steun .
Ambiguiteit : hoe strak gedefinieerd is de betekenis en toepassing van het leren ?
Open affordances : de student heeft ruimte voor exploratie, is het handelen voorgeschreven of is er ruimte voor creatieve inzet .

A course could be prescribed, emergent, or chaotic.
One student could judge a course chaotic, another student will judge it an emergent course. And the designer or teacher could judge it another way. Some subjectivity is build in this scoring.
On Lisa’s blog  is an example of this instrument. An article in IRRODL about emergent learning and footprints.

Een cursus kan zijn voorgestructureerd, emergent , of chaotisch .

Een student kan een cursus als chaotisch beoordelen , een ander ziet er meer een voorgestructureerde cursus in . En de ontwerper of docent kan  nog anders oordelen . Er zit subjectiviteit in deze manier van scoren .
Op Lisa’s blog is een voorbeeld van dit instrument . Een artikel in IRRODL over emergent leren en Footprints .

 If a teacher or designer wants an open course with a lot of possibilities for emergent learning, these factors could be a guide to develop an open course.  One has to find a balance between a very prescribed and a chaotic course to foster emergent learning. Of course student characteristics are important when we are designing a course.

Als een leraar of ontwerper  een open cursus met veel mogelijkheden voor emergent leren wil ontwerpen, kunnen deze factoren als gids dienen . Men moet een evenwicht vinden tussen een  voorgestructureerde en een chaotische cursus om emergent leren te bevorderen . Natuurlijk zijn kenmerken van  de student belangrijk bij het ontwerp van een cursus.

De inhoud van een cursus komt niet voor in de analysevragen. Voor cursusontwerp en  voor leren is inhoud niet zo belangrijk als het proces.

Content of a course is not mentioned in the analyzing questions. For course design and learning characteristics content is not as important as process and arrangement of teaching and learning procedures.

Discussie op http://scope.bccampus.ca/mod/forum/view.php?id=9408 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Footprint of Emergence

  1. Jaap, great post – thanks so much for the translations. With your permission, we would love to include them in a ‘translations’ page – both on the public wiki, and also in the SCoPE forums. Working with Jutta and her group in Austria, we have learnt so much about our terms from the difficulties (any joys, too) of translation.

    Only one comment. We try to separate out ‘judgement’ (oordelen) and description (beskryven?) – not because we do not want to engage with judgement and evalution (and Lisa’s recent blog has some interesting, new, ideas (for us) on evaluation, but because we think it’s difficult enough to ask people to ‘describe’ how the factors affect ‘me and my learning’ (those are two different aspects).

    Evaluation and judgement can come later. (I realise that a ‘weak’ sense of ‘oordeel’ might be very close to ‘describe’, so I might have this a bit wrong – please advise – ‘back translation is both interesting and hazardous).

  2. And … subjectivity – yes and no.

    Describing your own experience, and the effect of learning on both ‘you’ and ‘your learning’ is necessarily something that you have to do from ‘yourself’ – where you are, who you are, even who you want to become. So yes, subjective is necessarily part of the process in that sense.

    On the other hand, it’s not ‘subjective’ in the sense that it could well be quite different – certainly when we create footprints of our own design, or learning, or research analysis, we are describing both what happens – and – what happens to us: which means we are also describing ourselves. As Lisa commented in the chat yesterday, ‘it’s complex enough to be useful’ – and its ‘objective’ in the sense that it’s a difficult and empirical description of our own experience, or of what we (as designers) would like others to experience.

    The language (in English, or any other) does not help us to describe ’empirical reflection’ – which doesn’t fit easily into the ‘subjective’ or ‘objective’ box.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s