Anna-Sofia ONL221

Final reflections

Journey. Ride. Rollercoaster. These are the words that keep being used when we discuss this course in my PBL group. There is no doubt about it. ONL221 provided me with a course experience like nothing I have ever experienced before. Learning by doing. For real.

One thing I have certainly learned is how much is out there. There are resources, ideas, research, collaborations, and communities that discuss the same issues that I think and wonder about. The only one that stops me from engaging and learning more is me. I think a great way to continue on this journey that this course has started, is to find and listen to some good education podcasts. I found “Teaching in Higher Ed” that had many interesting topics in an easily accessible format.  Because it is important to be realistic.

As inspiring and interesting things are, we all have limited time and resources to spend.  It takes time and effort to become a master blogger, plan champion open education, or research best learning practices online. Continuing with small but realistic steps is likely the best strategy. Because I really want to hold on to what this course has introduced me to. It has certainly proven that a functioning group is more than its separate members. We have a lot to learn by cooperating and getting inspiration and feedback from each other. Our different experience and personalities really push the quality of the group work to a higher level than could have been accomplished by one person spending the same amount of total time on our scenarios.

Another very valuable learning experience is the “learning by doing”. How can we teach in a problem based manner online if we have not experienced it ourselves? Or expect our students to work effectively in groups if we as teachers have not experienced the joy and challenges that well-planned group work entails?

I particularly found the “getting to know”-week very mind opening. Of course group work must have a solid foundation. And also the reflection time. In teaching, why do we miss out the introduction and reflection to such an extent? That is something that this course taught me in a totally new way.

What I wish I had spent more time on was interacting with other ONL participants. We were provided perfect opportunity to learn from and connect with a great mix of people from around the world. Unfortunately, I never felt I could spare the time/energy to do so.

It leaves an empty space. It was intense and constantly ongoing, unlike any other course I have taken before, but I enjoyed the ride. The name of this course is Opened Networked Learning. A suitable alternative name would have been And now, for something completely different.

Reflections on Topic 4: Learning design

Every topic in this course has provided me with “wow-moments”. I have realised many new things. But none as much as Topic 4. Much of what we have covered earlier in the course came together here, with new perspectives on how to plan, implement, and evaluate courses.

During this course, all webinars have had excellent quality. But I have to say, I found the webinar with Martin Weller the most inspirational! What made this so special? I think it was because it covered the whole process so nicely. From starting to plan a course to the final evaluation with the students. It gave me answers and clues to issues I have myself thought about a lot.

Learning design is an interesting concept. It can mean and include so much. Before the webinar with Martin Weller I cannot say it meant an awful lot to me. But the issues on how to improve student activity and student retention¹ are critical for most teachers/instructors. If we can make sure students are active and pass their courses we have done our job, right?

These issues are particularly challenging when teaching and learning takes place online in a distance format. For teachers that were trained for lecturing in classrooms, the challenges of teaching online can feel quite overwhelming. How do you make the sessions and assessment meaningful? How do you get the students involved? Martin Weller provided some really useful experience and conclusions from several years of work by him and his colleagues with courses provided by the Open University in the UK. They were able to boil it down to ten retention tips as presented by the ICEBERG model.¹

What made this model special to me is it’s usefulness. Particularly interesting how the collaborative process between the colleagues during the planning stages in order to fulfil the student needs associated with retention. The other thing that really stuck was the feedback to the learners. The experience suggested the feedback did not have to be advanced feedback on course work and learning progression only. Instead, just acknowledging the students and making sure they were all seen by the instructors meant they were more likely to continue the course. We have probably all felt that, but here the data shows it too. As always, there will always be questions and issues when using a simplified model in a specific context. But the way it is based on actual experience from a lot of open education online learners, it is bound to be helpful in any such context. I have a lot to learn here.

Learning design is such a nice topic to wrap up the course with, as it makes most things we have learned so far come together. Both with a learner and teacher/instructor perspective. For me it became clearer than ever that there is so much out there. Whatever questions I dwell upon, someone else has likely already gone through something similar. And chances are they published a paper on it. All I have to do is look for it!

¹Weller, M., van Ameijde, J. & Cross, S. (2018). Learning Design for Student Retention. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 6(2).

Reflections on Topic 3: Learning in communities – Networked collaborative learning

Have we not always been told the importance of networking? If we connect to people and start cooperating we can create networks that make us successful. A win-win situation for all involved, right? Little did I realise that when looking a little deeper, networks can easily be just loose connections of individuals with very different interests. This is not how a community works. And it can make a big difference for learning.

During this topic I started thinking a lot about two things. First the networks I have myself been involved in (learning networks and other), and second, collaborative learning within groups of learners. Both these issues relates to the difference between loose groups without common interests and groups with more common ground that develop real collaboration.

When looking back, it is now quite easy to see that the successful networks (meaning that the network and myself actually accomplished something) I have been involved in consisted of people with real engagement, commitment, and a genuine common ground. We had created small communities. It also strikes me how other people might have joined and left, but the core group of people remained to a large extent. We got things done, and we learned a lot along the way. In other networks, I was the one who joined, never fully committed enough to become part of the “core” and eventually I left. I did not learn or accomplish much then.

As a learner, I have been involved in all sorts of groups and group work. With hindsight, often such groups got the job done, but it has been very rare with genuine collaboration. I can also highly relate to all the types of frustration listed by Capdeferro & Romero¹. I believe most of us can. Still, this has been my view on what group work mainly is. The work done through genuine collaboration has felt like rare cases due to special circumstances and not “normal” group work. Of course, this is not an ideal mind frame for a teacher/instructor!

Building teams that can really collaborate needs investment in time and resources. I think it is important to think through carefully what is realistic to accomplish within different learning situations. During a short course with a lot of facts to learn it might not be ideal to try and create deep collaboration. However, for students in programs running over three-four years, we have the opportunity to let the students develop these skills. This will depend on the collaboration ability among the teachers/instructors on the programme. It is an interesting thought, that the better personal learning networks (PNLs) we as teachers can create for ourselves, the better we may become to allow the students to create effective collaborative learning in groups².

For me, these reflections make it clear that it is not possible to sustain participation in too many communities, nor networks. We must choose wisely what collaborations we dedicate ourselves to. Since networking without committing is less likely to result in any meaningful learning or other results.

¹Capdeferro, N. & Romero, M. (2012). Are online learners frustrated with collaborative learning experiences? The International review of research in open and distance learning, 13(2), 26-44.

²Brindley, J., Blaschke, L. M. & Walti, C. (2009). Creating effective collaborative learning groups in an online environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3).

Reflections on Topic 2: Open Learning – sharing & openness

Learning from materials that others share online is inspiring, fun, and time saving. Both for professional teaching and privately. I happily share my materials with colleagues and friends. However, open sharing of materials I produce to strangers online is not anything that I have really considered. I’m not even sure my institution would approve if I did? Where do we draw the line between Public, Private and Professional?

During this topic, I have widened my perspective on what “open” really means. And one major realisation regards the difference between openness of the materials we as teachers produce, and openness as to who we are. Before taking this course, I never did reflect on what open learning meant. I had heard about the Open University in the UK, about huge open courses arranged by e.g. EdX, and open access sources. In my mind, “open” was a mix of open resources, practices, education, teaching, learning, and licenses. I had failed to see how they were connected. Nor did I realise how there are creative communities discussing, developing, and sharing thoughts and materials out there.

Could I become a contributing part in this new found world of openness? That was nothing I would have considered earlier. The materials I produce for my students feel kind of personal. I spend a lot of time and effort on it. If I let it free, then who would use it and how!? Letting things open on the Internet means to let go. That is a bit of a scary thought! Even so, I am not even sure my institution would approve. If I produce a recorded lecture, it cannot be uploaded to YouTube or other general social media. I am obliged to share it through a password secured media platform where only course participants are allowed access. And to be fair, that is a rather safe and comfortable way to do it. However, not necessarily the best way. It depends on our perspective.

Looking from a different direction, how can knowledge be anything but open? The social justice perspective really is important to consider. As Maha Bali states in both her webinar and publication¹, in the right context, open education practices can support social justice with both economic, cultural, and political dimensions. It has made me think, if tax payers money pay our wages, should our work not benefit as many as possible if it can contribute towards a fairer world?

Another issue that made me think is why do we consider non-accessible university materials high quality whilst open online sources are often frowned upon? What if it could be the opposite? An open source that has been discussed and updated in a constructive community may be of much higher quality than something a university lecturer whipped up on his/her own. Also, there may be an increasing pressure for Universities to become more accessible. The Covid-19 pandemic made a huge difference. It proved that a lot of students can learn a lot online. However, it’s important to keep in mind that online learning is not the same as open learning!

Another perspective is private vs. professional. If we let the resources we produce free, will it not mean we make ourselves vulnerable? Teaching is after all rather personal, and our personality influence how we teach. However, if we manage to stay professional in a lecture hall, why couldn’t we on the Internet? As Robin DeRosa, a professor at the Plymouth state public university, puts it in the Teaching in Higher ed podcast: “Open is not the opposite of private”². Teachers/instructors should be able to share a lot of their work openly online without their privacy being at risk!

¹Bali, M., Cronin, C., & Jhangiani, R. S. (2020). Framing Open Educational Practices from a Social Justice Perspective. Journal of Interactive Media in Education

²Teaching in Higher Ed. Podcast Episode 183. Open education inspiration with Robin DeRosa https://teachinginhighered.com/podcast/open-education-inspiration/   

Hello, my name is Anna-Sofia Preece. I work at the Public Health department at Karlstad University, Sweden. My research field is environmental exposures and effects on children’s health and development. The research I have done sofar has been within the SELMA study. I teach epidemiology, sustainable development & health, and quantitative research methods.