The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 2,600 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 4 years to get that many views.
“Western culture’s traditional system of knowledge is a stunning achievement,” says author and Harvard Internet scholar David Weinberger at the outset of this thought-provoking video. “It made us the dominant species on the planet.” But it was constructed as a series of stopping points: you asked a question, and you got an answer—on the page of a book or newspaper, say, or from an expert or a teacher. That system worked well when knowledge was put down on paper. Now knowledge lives on the hyperlinked Net, and links offer a never-ending invitation to go further, to know more. What are the implications of a future in which human knowledge is no longer a finite compendium of scholarly works but rather a limitless, intricately connected network of people, ideas, and works? What happens when knowledge consists of all those pieces, connected in discussion and disagreement? What happens, to quote Dr. Weinberger, when “the smartest person in the room is the room”? And what does all this mean for the storyteller? In venturing to answer that last question, Dr. Weinberger identifies the cardinal challenge of the storyteller in the age of networked knowledge: the duty to expose us to points of view other than our own, to free us from the “echo chamber” of narratives that merely reinforce what we already know or believe. The best stories should honor a simple yet stubbornly elusive truth: that different people start from different places, and that what happens to them matters just as much to them as what happens to us matters to us. True, stories that tell us about our own beginnings, our own history, and our own families have a place in our moral universe. But the future of storytelling lies in the hands of tellers who can, in the words of Dr. Weinberger, “show us how the world unfurls from a beginning other than our own.”
e-Assessment Scotland 2012: Feeding Forward – The Role of the Participatory Web in Formative AssessmentSeptember 11, 2012
From the back channel:
#eas12 Cristina Costa – the importance of feedback when trying to create content within a context #eas12 Cristina Costa -getting feedback when you didn’t ask for it – facilitated by Web technologies #eas12 Cristina Costa – real ‘digital literacy’ teaching students the skills to distinguish between good/bad feedback/comments/reviews
‘if you don’t provide a feedback platform, people will create it themselves’ #eAS12 So very true…
a. Assessment Reform, Innovative Technology, Improving Formative Assessment and Feedback: Are They at Odds with Each Other?
Dr. Sue Timmis, University of Bristol & Dr Steve Draper, University of Glasgow
Sue began by referring to Rowntree’s 17 principles of good assessment (1977) highlighting the lack of progress in this field. She outlined the myriad of roles involved in the reform of assessment and their contrasting goals. As an ‘e-learning optimist’ myself I was quite fired up over the ‘passing parade of technologies’ reference. Whilst that may be how it appears to mainstream practitioners if we don’t have those early adopters experimenting and researching then effective and appropriate change is not possible (IMO).
The ‘elephant in the room’ is the true purpose of assessment…certificates required for career progression.
b. Socialising Assessment
Cherry Hopton & Students, Angus College
This was the highlight of the day for me. Cherry enthusiastically shared her classroom experiences but it was when her two students began to talk that I was really blown away. So many of us are disconnected from classroom practice and was fantastic to hear the impact education (and Cherry?) had on their lives.
Getting back to the content: they talked about their use of facebook and how that fostered community in a wider context involving staff and previous students. Both were so positive and enthusiastic it really rubbed off!
From the back channel:
#eas12 students talking about Facebook for teaching and support – they understand boundaries and don’t expect answers at 4am #eas12 enjoying talk by Cherry Hopton and students. Also, fantastic shoes !
Russell Stannard was first up after lunch to talk about his use of screen capture software to provide feedback. He talked us through his learning journey sharing resources and experiences. He now uses Jing to capture ‘live’ feedback which is hosted online and shared via URL.
He referred to Richard Mayer’s research into multimedia learning which I’m keen to follow up.
From the back channel:
Voice is important for conveying feeling associated with feedback
Audio feedback automatically creates richer feedback – you don’t just say “good” – you naturally expand and explain
Audio feedback: students received more feedback (150wpm) and more PERSONAL feedbac
Students liked both oral & visual elements, thought they were getting more detail, were motivated, clearer, more personal
@russell1955 initially when started with video feedback gave feedback on surface errors but now elaborates much more
‘Students asked to estimate their mark after feedback – none overestimated their marks’
Well impressed by the fact that Russell shows his early practice and how it has developed – well done sir!
Step by step videos for using JING http://bit.ly/5efjS
‘Who’s feedback is it anyway’ concerns over students reposting personal feedback in the public domainhttp://mashe.hawksey.info/2011/04/whos-feedback-is-it-anyway/
a. What If Feedback Only Counted When it Changed the Learner?
Dr. Steve Draper, University of Glasgow
Dr. Draper challenges us to examine the impact of feedback and specifically “what is wrong with students relationship with feedback?”. He says “there is no point in giving feedback to a learner unless the learner acts on it: does something concrete and differently because of it”. He tried a variety of tactics and it was really encouraging to see this learning process being shared openly. He had measurable success using a prompt sheet to encourage students to think about what they might do with the feedback and to facilitate an extended discussion.
b. Feedback in eAssessment – What Can We Learn from Psychology Research?
John Kleeman, Questionmark
John Kleeman looked at some interesting research from the field of Psychology (e.g. Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping); specifically the findings that retrieval practice helps retention of learning (facts and concepts). The strongest effect is when retrieval is difficult and 5-7 repetitions show optimum results. He suggested mobile devices offer a real opportunity in this area, as do observational assessments for work based learning.
He also referred to Valerie Shute and Will Thalheimer but I didn’t catch the exact references.
Professor David Boud from the University of Technology Sydney is first up with his keynote focusing on “models of feedback that capture old and new ways of conceptualising the contribution of feedback to learning”. He challenged the way feedback is used and encouraged us to think carefully about what feedback really means. He presented three models:
He defined sustainable feedback:
He emphasised that feedback bridges the gap between teaching and learning and to be effective it requires engagement, it’s just not meaningful as an independent act. He urged us to make our feedback learner driven and to position it as part of learning.
‘We do not position feedback as if we expect students to act on it – we rely on hope!’
‘Worst case: we are undermining students’ ability to learn’
Judge feedback in terms of effect, on what learners do, on improvement!
Digital might mean doing bad feedback more efficiently.
Is there a more educationally destructive concept than anonymous assessment?