Browsed by
Tag: Bayne

Lifestream summary: week 9

Lifestream summary: week 9

Having taken the learning analytics course last year, at the start of this week I was back in familiar territory, reading Siemens on LA and EDM and watching Ben Williamson’s lecture on the digital university. In the second half of the week, we engaged in a two-day ‘tweetorial’ and I found myself communicating with Ben directly about LA.

The tweetorial was very much a tweetathon and I was fascinated to follow Anne’s link to some emergent analytics around our engagement and communications over the two days. Nigel’s cheesy diversion had an impact on the data which was generated via Twitter.

It will be fascinating to see what further analysis offers up, but this initial insight provided evidence of the conflicting interpretations as to what algorithms can offer us: order and chaos. The data generated by our discussion were, to an extent, captured and ordered by the algorithm, but the results are simultaneously ‘messy’ and require human agency to make sense of  the ‘cheese’ in the data.

For me, thinking summatively about what we’ve focused on over the last 9 weeks, I keep circling back to Bayne’s term, ‘entanglement’ (Bayne, 2015).

The sociomaterialist perspective of the  ‘the constitutive entanglement of the social and the material’ (Orlikowski, 2007) and, therefore, the technical, is a seam which has run throughout our blocks of study and was highlighted in both the Siemens and Williamson readings. As Siemens highlights, learning cannot be reduced to data:

The tension, the interplay, between the technical – the algorithm – and the human, informed much of our discussion during the tweetorial. Discussions circled back to the subjective agency which informs LA – both in terms of data extraction and interpretation – and to the impact of data on the subjects – both teachers and students. Kitchin and Dodge’s definition of algorithms – cited by Williamson – reminds us that data are not objective:

I’m looking forward to drawing more strands of thought together as we progress into week 10.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work. Organization Studies (28)9, pp. 1435-1448.

Microsoft Whiteboard

Microsoft Whiteboard

via IFTTT

This was one of my favourite new products demoed at BETT. Microsoft are releasing ‘Whiteboard’ for free. It can be used on any Windows 10 device,  so can be used by both teachers and pupils.

BUT…

…my reading of Bayne makes me question whether such ‘tools’ are simply reinforcing presumptions about ‘a pre-existing set of practices which are not in any need of radical shift or displacement…’ (Bayne, 2014, p.10). Why are we still using boards…?

 

Balance

Balance

It’s 23:14 as I start writing this. I’m still working. My Masters is being neglected. I am still communicating with colleagues via Slack. Emails are pinging in about other work which is log-jammed. Where is the ‘enhancement’?

On the other hand, social media brought this gem this week. Thank you Edinburgh.

Why is technology important in education? #2

Why is technology important in education? #2


via IFTTT
Technology use driven by need, by a gap.
‘Both TEL and transhumanist discourses are driven by the instrumental view of technology as being in service to the human and social…technology is viewed primarily as a ‘tool’ which has the capacity to make learning and/or the human ‘better’. (Bayne, 2014, p. 14)