|Snowed in? Reading about Research?|
Here's a badge for you!
With that in mind, our cohort had some great discussions both through official channels such as the Landing and Moodle, but also in our unofficial channel - the Cohort 7 Facebook page. I think most of our "real" discussion occurred in the Facebook page and our refined ideas and posting made their way to the various discussions on the Landing. Moodle didn't work out that well for me this semester. In 801 I got notifications of new posts in the Moodle forums, but this semester, no matter how much I tinkered with the setting to enable this, nothing was showing as a new post (either by email notification or on moodle itself). As a consequence I ended up missing posts. Luckily most of the discussion of the course was on the Landing and for that I was getting notifications.
The discussion that I found the most interesting, and thought provoking was the discussion on research ethics. Even though that discussion is over (well, as "over" as any discussion on the web is), there is still much to be said and explored about the ethics of doing research on the internet. This is a topic that we've discussed with colleagues, before I got into the AU EdD program, and it's something that we still discuss, especially with topics such as MOOC research.
While I find myself agreeing with Pat Fahy's stance of respecting the rights of the "willing majority," the group of individuals who do want to participate in research but who might not be able to because a small minority might want to, I don't know how to operationalize it yet. I think that when the rubber meet the road, i.e. when I get going with my own dissertation work, it will be interesting to see what barriers come up with individuals who do not want to participate in the research and how that might need creative ways of getting past those barriers.
It's hard to pick any one cohort member from cohort 7 that stood out more than others that was helpful to me. I think that the discussions that we had on the Landing, but also on our Facebook page, has made it feel like I am not just discussing academic matters with a random group of people, but I am also in this endeavor with a supportive group of people who are going through this as well, and some times our frustrations and triumphs intersect, and other times not. The point is that I got energy from the cohort, and I hope I gave some energy back to them.
There is one individual, however, that deserves a shout-out, and that's Lisa H. from Cohort 6. She is the designer of the Cabin Fever Epistemology badge (seen above). Lisa and I have been going back and forth over the semester. She has provided me with peer feedback on the 2 major assignments, and she (and @pinshe and from Cohort 6) have illuminated some areas of 802, while at the same time providing for some relief from the seriousness of doctoral studies. I don't know if this is a Cohort 6 "thing" but, when discussing assignments with them, there is always an assignment-drink pairing suggestion. Assignment 4 proof-reading and editing goes well with Tentura (my contribution to the EDDE pairing guide). This inter-cohort support network, just like the Cohort 7 support network on our Facebook page, is an example of a mechanism to maintain and augment motivation to continue (at least for me).
On a final note, I thought I would wrap-up by discussing technologies used in the course. Moodle I wrote a little about (not my favorite LMS, but it's fine-it works), but there were other tools like Adobe Connect, Elgg (the Landing), and VoiceThread.
I written before about Voicethread. In the past I was conflicted about this tool. I am still conflicted. At the end I think it's how one uses it. I've seen some bad uses, and I've seen some good uses. I think that the voicethread for 802 falls into one of the better uses. Even though I've been interacting with a couple of member from Cohort 6 on twitter, most Cohort 6 members are invisible. Seeing (or rather hearing) their reactions to the Koro-Ljungberg et al article on voicethread helped me make a connection with them through time. I still don't know most of these individuals, but it's makes the course more relateable, and suddenly being a doctoral student doesn't feel like such an individualistic venture. At the end of the day your make-or-break activity (dissertation) is your work, and you are the only author, but you've had a support network to get you through that, and you know that there are others before you that did it as well. I think that if voicethread were a tool just for our cohort I might have not liked this activity as much, but the fact that it tied one cohort with another made it worthwhile for me.
Elgg is also one of those love-dislike relationships. On the one hand I really want to love the Landing. Back in 2008 I started two networks for my own school, UMassID.com for our instructional design MEd community (current students and alumni), and UMassLinguistics.com for the program that I manage now. I want those to take off and be adopted by current students and alumni (but they haven't been wild successes as far as adoption goes). Since I am in the same role as Terry Anderson and Jon Dron are with my own "landings" I want to love it. At the same time Elgg seems unmanageable. The discussions tool is fine, the wire is fine, and the content collection is fine. But nothing really draws me in other than the sense of really wanting this thing to take off. Sometimes I feel like Elgg is tackling too much.
The Wiki in Elgg, for instance, seems a little half-baked. Not AU's fault, but Elgg's The wiki platform could be something else. Maybe wikimedia's platform could be used instead? For assignments like the paradigm wiki (part of assignment #5) I think that we also need a little more scaffolding. People like me, who have edited wikis in the past, are able to work naturally in this environment. Others who are not as familiar will create pages titled "My 3 articles" in the paradigm wiki. If the intent of the wiki is to become a resource for future (and past) cohorts, then wiki pages like this aren't that useful. I understand that this is part of a network literacy that we ought to cultivate, but I don't know if this should be explicitly taught, have small videos explaining how to add and edit the wiki for specific assignments, or if it should be left as is now (students figure it out on their own).
Finally, Adobe Connect session were good. On the one hand there are days where I feel like zombie at 8pm EST (6pm MTN), but even though I am tired I like the idea of spending an hour with the cohort and the instructor discussing aspects of the course. I think that there are things (resources) that come out spontaneously in a synchronous session that don't necessarily come out in discussion forums. Would I have liked more connect sessions? I don't know. My initial thoughts are "no" - I wouldn't want more. On the one hand, in 801, the weekly sessions did serve as a tool to regulate the course flow (something to expect each week), but on the other hand, with the amount of readings and cognitive processing requirements for 802 I think the little extra sleep gained from not having weekly sessions was good. My brain's fuse is a bit fried, so I am glad we have a few months break between courses. The one recommendation I would give is this: I think I would space presentations out a bit so that we don't end up with 6 presentations in one night, but other than that I enjoyed the Connect sessions. I know that some learners don't like going first, and that we need to cover research methods early so that we can tackle other parts of the curriculum, but better spacing is needed between the methods presentations in order to really make it a valuable jigsaw activity.
So, those are my concluding thoughts for EDDE 802 :-)
Stay tuned for more EdD thoughts over the summer as I participate in Rhizo15, hopefully read Deleuze & Guattari, and I catch up on published MOOC articles from the past year.