Podcasting for Learning

Gestern (22.09.2008) fand eine fast unbeschreiblich gute virtuelle Informationsveranstaltung zu einem aufkommenden Event statt, deren Botschaft / Inhalt ich gerne an interessierte Lehrerinnen und Lehrer in Schulen, wie jedoch auch Hochschulen weitergeben möchte. Aus dem letztjährigen Earthcastprojekt ist inzwischen Worldbridges entstanden. In diesem Rahmen hat Sheila Adams, Lehrerin in Rye Junior High School in New Hampshire und ihre Kollegin Robin Ellwood.

Seetauchen auf der Antarktis

Letzere wird in Bälde in eine Antarktis-Expedition aufbrechen und sie lädt die lernende Weltgemeinschaft ein sie zu begleiten und dort zu auch virtuell zu treffen. Weitere Informationen ergeben sich aus den Webseiten. Wir als teilnehmende Interessierte bekamen in diesem Testlauf Untersee-Roboter demonstriert, viele informationen zum Forschen auf der Antarktis, Einblicke in Flora und Fauna. Es wäre schön, wenn dieser Einladung zur Live-Partizipation auch aus Deutschland Schulen folgen würden. Wer gerne mit den wirklich netten Forschern – auch zu Planungszwecken- in Kontakt treten möchte, sollte sich nicht scheuen via „Ask the Team“ die Frage an das Team entsprechend loszuwerden.

Das Expeditionscamp

Bis denne

Andreas

Update: Neben den mir inzwischen gesendeten Bildern gibt es noch weitere Informationen zu dem Projekt und Hilfen für die Einbettung in den Unterricht. 

• Hier ist das Blog von Robin Ellwood zu finden: www.ryejrh​igh.org/el​lwood
• Hier das Wiki, über das die pädagogische, organisatorische und didaktische Begleitung koordiniert werden kann. Ein Hinweis noch zur Zeit. Im Hinterkopf dürfte man auch haben, dass sich die Forschungsstation in der neuseeländischen Zeitzone  befindet. Im Sommer ist man jedoch, was Zeiten angeht ziemlich flexibel. 

writing this post i have answers for several peoples in mind. But I think it could be worth to make it more general. „Why are you doing it (pause) teaching with the use of the internet, teaching by using social media – even aiming to generate public accessable content?“ That’s a question – in the moment you’ve been asked – and you have good luck, you have students at your hand you can handover this question and be sure it will go your way. If you have no students in your moment – you have your experiences – your own visions – and the glance of your students eyes you can tell about. (Maybe the glance if they got the first valuable feedback from elsewhere? Maybe something different.) But is there anything deeper? Is there an educational an pedagogical mission enabled to deliver an very good answer? This should be a challange for more than one mind. My small one will try a start with a little metaphor. It raised up in me, because as a young father of a 2 year old little and lovely and live-spreading girl – i remembered this question we had as parents very well and I am sure that those questions are deeply ancored maybe with different symbols all over the world. Here it is the picture of a hot plate (or burner Leo tells me) versus Hand or finger. What should you do in general with your kid. Will you be able to avoid your kid could get in touch? If it is so life-spreading like our daughter – you could be are a very busy busy person – I would like to predict. Let them mak the experience itself? (Then you must be the right person – very iron-harded, very strong. Compared to the above its very very much easier to avoid) But going back to the picture itself – A glance about theory gives a lot of pro’s and cont’s. There is no real and true answer – I would imagine. There is no true or false.

The only thing I think everybody would assign which is false is: To point to the lighter – tell not to use it. Locking the door and leaving the building.  Leaving the land and the mind of your child. That’s what would happen if we do not do what we do. And in response to Dave Truss – thats one reason I would not be able to go back.  

In the reverse this could clear a bit the part of the mission. You should be able to tell what fire could be good used before your kids could have burned themselves. They should have had the possibility to make their first experiences how creative it could be using the fire – handling the fire – steering it. They should have a glance about what could happen if it is out of control. And they should have enough learned what to be done to keep the fire burning. Chemists now know – there is a whole variety of fire (or oxidation) – so they could also be able to see the differences of fires – and techniques to get it running.  

This all comes out of one sentence which got deep deep entry of my educational soul: Emanzipation – in the word meaning: Ex Manus Cipere! in German: „Aus der Hand reichen!“)

Bis denne

Andreas

How can who benefit, if your are teaching and learning with web2.0. Thats the content. So he is getting the right bow from his personal experience to the benefits of his students. Thank you for creating and for sharing this work. And he expresses there very well, that you cannot teach traditionally about the technology – without using it in a sense bringing way. 

In the original Post from Dave Truss – there is a link for a you-tube video – but also for one on blip.tv in much more and better quality. So enjoy the next every-minute-worth video.

Last week I was permanently thinking about the conectivism and after the possibility taking part at the UStream conference part of the CCK08 it didn’t stop. Got an idea which could be make this for me more understandable. To resume my points I got from the connectivism apporach: Knowledge exists. Knowledge is existing in technology. Knowledge is existing in networked form – means in forms of nodes and edges connecting the nodes. 

Sounds very abstract, symbolic and clear – but this evening there is an clear open question which didn’t leave me. Where is the learner, if you would take this in educational approaches? 

It may be give an simple view – the learner are represented by the nodes. But this declares a static model of connected knowledge.

To bring in more dynamic: If it would take the point out in the net is the node a spoor of knowledge (as delivered asset of former knowledge) – as an expression – just as a concentrate or a substract of this, what somebody got learned – beside there was the point that content and context have to join together – but often enough only parts are „delivered“ or avaiable in knots. Assuming this and having this in mind a learner is maybe enabled to follow those nodes through edges to deconcentrate those nodes – finally delivering and embedding new contexts and content ->creating theyr own nodes. Those thoughts are offering: There is maybe a need to develop the learners perspective in a maybe more dynamic model than static-connectivism. So just the simple question of the quality of the node could be  valued by the quality in the moment of delivering by the person who delivers and by the quality of the moment of assuming and interpretation of those models. Anyhow the knowledge itself fixed in an asset as just a spoor offers another dynamic perspective. Those who fixed the spoor can, should and will adopt it if they got acces to new nodes. What would happen then? Will they create new nodes or change the others? Will all people had access to the node get the information of changed content or context?

My 2 cents for today!

Bis denne

Andreas