Archive for the ‘Things that make you think’ Category

h1

Ny teknologi i velfærdsprofessioner

August 30, 2014

I begyndelsen af september udkommer Dansk Pædagogisk Tidsskrift nr. 3 2014 med et temanummer om Ny teknologi i velfærdsprofessioner. Temanummer redaktører: Marianne Brodersen, Bodil Øster og Mikala Hansbøl (gæsteredaktør)

Læs redaktionel indledning

Artikelbidrag:

Kasper Schiølin: Digitaliseringen af daginstitutionerne – hvorfor ikke bare lade være?

Søren Langager: Velfærdsteknologi og handicap – øget frihed til mindre samvær?

Lene Storgaard Brok og Vibeke Schrøder: Hvordan ændrer teknologier læreres praksis, og hvad skal lærere lære om teknologi i lærerarbejdet?

Mikala Hansbøl: Flere veje til at begribe og håndtere teknologi i professionsarbejdet.

I forlængelse af udgivelsen afholdes et åbent debatarrangement den 2. oktober kl. 16.30-19.00 i Festsalen på DPU, hvor temaet ‘levendegøres’ ved korte oplæg fra skribenter og fælles diskussion med hinanden og ‘publikum’.

Håber vi ses 🙂

 

h1

The question of representation: Have MOOCs adressed really central educational challenges?

March 10, 2014

Thomas Ryberg posted a link on Twitter which made me aware of this great interview “A free education online: too good to be true? – video debate” with (among other) Diana Laurillard who asks the central question: Have MOOCs adressed really central educational challenges?

During the interview – which I recommend seeing – the problem of representation is adressed: who and what is being represented when, how and where, when dealing with MOOCs? The interview also points at the importance of acknowledging local and distributed learning – both as ways to adress equality.

The interview goes straight to the core of educational challenges and how they may actually also become enlarged rather than decreased with current MOOC workings.

I have enrolled in the ongoing Scientific Humanities and Carpe Diem MOOC. Both are designed and run by key figures within their respective knowledge areas: Science and Technology Studies (Bruno Latour) and eLearning Design (Gilly Salmon). This is one of the reasons why I have enrolled.

I have wondered about the fundamental differences between these two MOOC courses and the university courses – I was familiar with – run by the Institute of Education and Pedagogy (DPU/Aarhus University) where I worked during 2002-2012 as a researcher and university teacher. These two MOOC courses have one prominent figure who’s ideas are widely disseminated and maybe (I am in the middst of these courses – so I do not know how they will end) their ideas are not disputed or really up for discussion?

The university courses I have been teaching previously, have all had this commen denominator: a fundamental acknowledgement of knowledge being produced through several scientific approaches to a matter, which of course deeply influences what becomes the matter. The courses I have taught, have all taken point of departure in a strong emphasis on the historical and cultural foundations of knowledge.

Of course it is possible also in university to take a special course relating to a particular methodology or subject area. However, the above mentioned interview made me think, that when we talk about localized and distributed learning, it is important also to keep in mind, what may become the new power relations of knowledge, as we are shifting out and adding to the platformations of our historical ways of distributing knowledge.

Thomas Ryberg (in his Twitter comment) and the interview mentioned above bring forward important concerns regarding the politics of knowledge: for instance, the issue of developing countries and their knowledge forms (currently) being underrepresented and perhaps even repressed. Also, if videobased instructions become the new acknowledged way of education, what kinds of societal concequences would that bring about? What if governments and/or citizens were to start believing that key figures from certain elite universities possess better knowledge than their own professors and university teachers?

There is a lot of really important relationships and a lot of politics to take into consideration when working with MOOCs.

We need NOT TO FORGET the allways important question of REPRESENTATION!

h1

Forskning i bevægelse?

March 25, 2011

Dette er en kopi af en kommentar, jeg har skrevet på bloggen Forskningsfrihed? Se evt. her.

“Tak til Claus Emmeche for et indlæg, der peger på de store og meget komplicerede processer, der er i gang i universitetsverdenen. Disse processer er fyldt med politiske dagsordener, og medfører stor risiko for, at vi mister universiteternes fokus på den såkaldte frie forskning.

Den frie forskning er ganske enkelt central for at man ikke altid driver risiko-mindskende, sikker, bundlinje-og anvendelsesorienteret forskning.

Til Centaine, som kommenterer, at reaktionerne på strukturændringerne ved AU ‘bare’ er et spørgsmål om brok og forskere, der ikke er forandringsparate. Det er slet og ret forkert!

Forskere, forskning (altså viden-skaben)skal være i bevægelse i en verden i bevægelse. Og det er netop pointen her. Jeg er meget enig med Centaine i, at det netop er væsentligt at have en decentral tilgang til universiteterne. Og det her handler faktisk om at man vil centralisere aktiviteterne.

Centaine har helt ret i, at der både er fantastiske lærere og foregår banebrydende forskning i Aarhus. Pointen er, at der bør være god forskning og fantastiske lærere i alle dele af Danmark. Det er netop med til at give os blik for variationerne.

Tiltagene med at flytte forskere fysisk fra campus-DPU til campus-Aarhus betyder, at man beder forskere og forskningsfelter om at rive deres rødder og praksisser op og ‘bare’ plante dem et andet (forestillet) bedre sted.

I virkeligheden er denne manøvre jo ligeså simpel, som at bede en familie om ‘bare lige’ at flytte fra København til Aarhus. Det betyder jo, at der er et hav af netværksrelationer og hverdagspraksisser, der må omdannes, udskiftes, droppes mm. Og derudover er manøvren baseret på en forestilling om, at vi skal flyttes hen til et bedre sted. Altså det vi kommer fra er ikke godt nok!

Og det er de faglige konsekvenser af at flytte to på mange måder unikke, velrenomerede (nationalt og internationalt) og velfungerende forskningsmiljøer, som vi forskere forsøger at pege på.

Der ER ikke nogen gode argumenter for at vi forskere (som i øvrigt mange af os har samarbejdet igennem mange år fx via Masteruddannelsen i IKT og Læring) skal bringes geografisk sammen. Vi (altså forskerne i Aarhus og København) ER vant til at samarbejde på tværs af tid og rum via mange forskellige medier og med hinanden.

Og fx underviser jeg efteråret 2011 i Aarhus v. Bachelor i Uddannelsesvidenskab. Jeg er også aktuelt i Serious Games on a Global Market Place projekt med forskere, som har bopæl fx i Jylland, og som er tilknyttet både SDU, DTU og Aarhus-campus delen af AU. Et projekt, der i øvrigt er støttet med mange millioner af Det Strategiske Forskningsråd.

Hvis man ønsker en nuancering af den modstand som mobiliseres aktuelt, og de mange forskellige væsentlige faglige argumenter der er, så kan man evt. læse mere her.”

h1

Connecting Design Thinking, Teaching and Learning

August 22, 2010

The workshop with Dan Gilbert “Connecting Design Thinking, Teaching and Learning” was quite interesting.

First I noted that he mentioned that Stanford University has had the goal to “make creative requirement a goal”.

I think that creative requirement should be a goal in all educational programmes. But how do you foster this?

One way is to be good at rapidly generating ideas, identifying needs, problems, and finding solutions.

At the workshop Dan Gilbert engaged us in a rapid exercise to identify a problem related to our students.

1. do an 1-1 interview, 5 minutes each, where you take turns answering these questions:

  1. “I wish my students…”
  2. Why can’t I accomplish that…?
  3. Why?… Why…?

2. round-table: Briefly state what are the participants problems. Select one of the problems. Spent 5 minutes brainstorming suggestions for solutions to this problem. Select one solution.

3. Spend 10 minutes on preparing a presentation (with whatever is at hand) where you show and tell about the solution (in 30 sec.).

It was a fun, boundary crossing, surprisingly effective, and learningful experience :-).

h1

Divergent and convergent thinking processes

August 22, 2010

From Renate Fruchter (founding director of Problem Based Learning Laboratory (PBL Lab), I have learned that brainstorming proceses may consist of two kinds of thinking processes: 

  1. Divergent thinking processes: where you explore and open up
  2. Convergent thinking processes: where you narrow down, focus, and make closure

Of course, I already knew this. But Renate just introduced this in a way that I found quite easy to relate to.

Renate Fruchter’s workshop at the “ICT and Innovative Learning Environments in Danish Universities” was another good reminder, that the value of brainstorming processes as a kick-off for idea generation and development of designs for teaching with ICTs should not be underestimated.

Renate made it appear quite unproblematic. She introduced two principles. The BBI principle involves thinking in terms of what is needed:

  • Bricks
  • Bits
  • Interaction

The D+C principle is about thinking in action (D= design and C= Collaboration).

With these principles and a focus on instructional/teaching design generation that emphasizes problem, process, product, people, project, Renate Fruchter presented these ingredients in the process:

  • experimental 
  • being mindful about the process
  • creating clarity from complexity
  • collaboration across boarders
  • showing and telling
  • focusing on human values
  • not having a bias towards action

Keeping this in mind, the next brainstorming process may not be that troublesome :-).

h1

What is this?

August 22, 2010

At the conference “ICT and Innovative Learning Environments in Danish Universities” I learned this cool and easy way to start thinking about innovation from Dan Gilbert (founder and creative principal of Learning Innovations Inc.):

  • Take two minutes. Brainstorm on a piece of paper “What is this?” (e.g. a pencil. Not what it really is, but what it could be)

Point of this exercise? To see that innovation is a matter of opening up, being inventive, imaginative. Furthermore, innovation can be a matter of rapid generation of ideas, identification of problems, and finding solutions.

Innovation can be about finding ways to make (better) things happen faster.

I think that ‘the world’ I come from could learn a lot from this little exercise :-). Try it. It is an eye-opener!

h1

Forskningens Døgn og Rock’N Researcher

May 26, 2010

Brænd igennem med dit budskab på få minutter!

Forskernes X Factor.

Forskning kan også gøres flot, kortfattet og lettilgængelig.

Forskning kan også formidles farverigt og gerne med musik og kulørte lamper.

Forskere skal både rock’e og formidle i øjenhøjde. 

Forskningens Døgn blev afholdt første gang i 2005 og senest i april 2010.

Som en del af Forskningens Døgn uddeles Forskningskommunikationsprisen til  en forsker som “gennem levende og vedkommende formidling har skabt bred opmærksomhed om sin forskning”.  

I år gik Videnskabsministeriets formidlingspris til personerne bag Danmarkhistorien.dk, som har hjemme på Institut for Historie og Områdestudier, Aarhus Universitet. Pressemeddelelser fra lanceringen af projektet i maj 2009 giver et udmærket kortfattet indblik i hvad denne ressource kan tilbyde.