Wisconsin Union Blend

One of the early challenges of the project we now call LessonShare was finding a name. Among the most prevalent of the working names we used in the early stages of development was the “lesson plan repository.” We weren’t really fond of calling it a repository, but we were having trouble coming up with anything better.

I was reminded of this search for a name, and the vague discomfort I had about the word “repository” in the “Hot Topics Discussion” Institutional Repositories. Much of the debate in this session was around the tension between our emerging ideas of collaborative, social space and the need for persistent and organized document preservation and archiving. Everyone, it seemed, agreed that both these areas were essential, and that clear paths must be made for content creators to move their work from collaborative areas to areas for storage, preservation, and distribution. The disagreement came, however, as to how connected or integrated these spaces should be. More than a few attendees made the case for a dynamic repository - an area for collaboration, improvement, and discussion as well as preservation - that sounded similar to our efforts with LessonShare.

A couple of the participants in the discussion brought up the question - is there really such a thing as a finished product? Since many documents evolve over time, should we dismiss the idea of a repository as a storage mechanism for “finished documents frozen forever in their final state.” Another participant conceded that there are certainly things that do reach a “finished state” (an image of a Matisse painting, for example, would need to be preserved without modification) but that “a finished project doesn’t mean that the conversation is finished” (the archival Matisse image could be connected to remixes, responses, and reinterpretations).

While LessonShare does perform some of the functions of a repository, the very nature of teaching and learning objects is that they will change and evolve over time. I’ve always hoped that LessonShare would encourage creativity and innovation, rather than facilitate the recycling of the same materials and approaches year after year. In that respect, the hope is that LessonShare is more about collaboration than storage. And in that sense it is both a database and a social space.

Josh Baron at Marist College talked about how they manage the onslaught that is Web 2.0 technology. Through a programmatic approach Marist is putting pedagogy and faculty innovation right out front with these technologies. They manage a grant program wherein faculty come to Josh’s group with a technology and/or idea in mind. Through a consultation process, assistance with proposal development, and (as Josh put it) a bunch of us “freaks” sitting around a table and talking about it, the technology gets piloted for a semester.

The pilot/experimental nature of the program means that promises are not made to the faculty about the commitment to supporting the technology beyond the life of the pilot. If that technology is successful in meeting the goals of the instructor, and if excitement builds, then the technology might get folded into something more permanent or longer lasting.

Just in case you are wondering, Josh’s group does take all the security, FERPA and other support issues very seriously. They don’t accept technologies that don’t fit the mold of what they are trying to accomplish with the grant program. I have Josh’s card and some handouts from the session if anyone on the Madison campus is interested.

This is an excerpt from an interview I did with a teaching assistant on our campus. Rick Hunter is in the Dept. of English and he teaches a writing intensive course on technology. In it, he uses blogs as a way to not only give students exposure to the technology, but also as a way to give them more time for writing. In this bit, Rick talks about a creative way in which one of his students, a veteran of the war in Iraq, used the blog technology to write a research paper.

A Soldier’s Use of Blogs

With apologies to Letterman…

Top 10 Challenges of the Academic Community as identified by Veronica Diaz, John Campbell, and Dennis Trinkle. John and company wrote an article for the Educause Quarterly in which they provide more detail on these challenges.

The session was a packed house. Standing room only. Glenda Morgan from George Mason University introduces.

By the way, Glenda has the type of personality that can steal the show. Bright. Funny. She smiles, you smile.

Anyway, here’s the list:

1. Establishing and supporting a culture of evidence
2. Demonstrating improvement of learning
3. Translating learning research into practice
4. Selecting appropriate models and strategies for e-learning
5. Providing tools to meet growing student expectations
6. Providing professional development and support to new audiences
7. Sharing content, applications, and application development
8. Protecting institutional data
9. Addressing emerging ethical challenges
10. Understanding the evolving role of academic technologists

There were lots of good comments from the audience especially over concerns about accountability. I thought that the last point on understanding the role of academic technologists was most poignant. I can’t believe how much our group and other instructional technologists are woven into the day-t0-day practices and institutional missions of our campus. We’re constantly having conversations with people in the libraries, facilities, and administration about the role of technology on campus. One thing is for sure…we’re not bored.

The Horizon Report “charts the landscape of emerging technologies for teaching, learning and creative expression and produces the NMC’s annual Horizon Report.” If you’d like to get involved in the process, add your exciting new instructional technology links to your del.icio.us account with the tag hz08.

Want to see what the Horizon Report community has been bookmarking lately? Just visit - http://del.icio.us/tag/hz08

Thanks to Cyprien P. Lomas for sharing this tag in the Social Software in Higher Education session.

Every session I’ve attended today has included the clicks, bings, boings, and ringtones of our mobile technology. We’re gonna be identifying devices in the same manner we identify birds from their calls.

Ahh…I believe I hear the melodious tones of a Samsung SGH-X497 now.

Oh wait. That’s me.

Joanna Robinson from the Great Northern Way Campus talked about the challenges of teaching in and constructing a new, physical complex for instruction in digital media while simultaneously building a virtual space for it in Second Life.

She did an admirable job especially for someone who is only 26 (I wish I had her confidence when I was that young) but I also wish she would have talked more about the pedagogy behind the participatory culture. I think people see the SL avatars, the slick marketing videos, and hear the funny stories about the “crazy” things that happen in virtual worlds and lose sight of the pedagogical value of these spaces and how that same value applies to our physical spaces.

My takeaway quote from her session: Build around your learning objectives.

Wendy Woodward, Director of Technology Support Services at NU, talked about their decision to use Google for student email and other collaborative tools. The ballroom was crowded and lots of people had questions about security, privacy, backup and other issues surrounding this partnership. What I liked most about her presentation was her remark that by putting student email with Google (something 90% of NU students were already doing), they were able to focus more of the NU IT staff’s attention on faculty and staff needs.

In my world, the more time and attention you can give those folks, the better!

I thought the keynote from Doris Kearns Goodwin was really nice. She had some slightly awkward tie-ins to technology, but I appreciated the effort. I liked the fact that she referred to us as “characters.” She’s a great storyteller of history and that’s all this character needed.

I was hoping some of you could fill in the gaps to my listening. Here’s my list of I heard her say are the characteristics of good leaders:

• They have the capacity for listening to and accepting differing points of view.
• They learn from their mistakes.
• They share credit for successes.
• The bear the blame.
• They keep control of their emotions
• They have resolve to see things through particularly in the face of frustration.
• They make time to relax and replenish energies.
• The manage by “walking around.” That is they interact with subordinates to get the day-t0-day perspectives of those that they lead.

What did I miss? Anybody wanna fill in the gaps?

This is a test of PodcastingThis is a description