Mapping e-Learning: Visualising the negotiated social shaping of educational technology
-
Upload
sydnee-case -
Category
Documents
-
view
17 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Mapping e-Learning: Visualising the negotiated social shaping of educational technology
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Mapping e-Learning: Visualising the negotiated social shaping of
educational technology
Andrew Whitworth &Angela Benson
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Introduction
• Theme: “Next generation of providers”• Paper describes research project• Funders: WUN, British Academy• Area of interest: e-learning as organised
human activity in a workplace context• How will the next generation of
providers absorb and develop these technologies?
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Are technologies like this?
• Emerging from nowhere
• Always looking the same?
• (though it’s fair enough to say they are bigger on the inside than the outside!)
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
The social shaping of technology• Technologies are shaped… built from the available
resources and in particular (organisational) contexts• They also shape organisations and practices: acting as
affordances for everyday working lives
• This relationship is co-evolutionary (Andrews & Haythornthwaite 2007)
TECH:
ORG:
and so on…
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
The context
• What is an organisation?– people? infrastructure? working
practices? knowledge? external constraints? customer demands?
• E-learning researchers must appreciate organisation studies and theory
• Any organisation fragmented… HE especially so?
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Technology at the planning table
• Different stakeholders… different practices, assumptions, values, knowledge bases…
• multiple forces shaping products (technologies, programs…)
• Who shapes the sociotechnical configuration of online programs? & does it make a difference?
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Research design
• via Cervero & Wilson • and Benson (2002)• Both projects looked at negotiations
in educational planning…• Attend to role of e-learning tech
itself in constituting a framing factor• Qualitative case studies
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Case studies
• Not establishing if one is “better” but whether and how these different design methodologies are
compatible with existing organisational structures
CMS types:
• commercial• open source• home-grown• “Lone Ranger”
Different develop- ment communities in each case…
Locations:
1 US and 1 UKcase study foreach CMS type
Time:
Data for 4 col-lected summer2005
3 more summer2006
1 to complete
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Validity of data
• Why important? (especially in this project)• Multiple stakeholders, perspectives –
contradiction in the data set is inevitable?• Validity becomes a matter of
trustworthiness of data?• Two case studies used to illustrate this…• …and how establishing validity itself
brought insight
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Identifying interactions
• Should not take “formal” structure as read – do perceptions of this structure match?
• “Named” v. “unnamed” interactions• First visualisation – a crude count (full
table is in the proceedings)• Reduce then to a second visualisation:
cognitive social structure – reciprocal recognition of ties between parties
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Visualising organisational structure
Kathryn
Bryan
Roxanne
Steve
Vernon
Charles
David Eva
Fay
Graham
Hans
Philip
Max
AliceDevelopers
Planners
Instructors
TAs
This is only one way of interpreting the data, but it does suggest thatthis team has a centralised structure
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Mining the transcripts
• Triangulation…– KATHRYN: I think that if I didn’t have a funnel… of
Bryan having everything come through him, it would be very difficult to keep up. If I had to spend more time responding to individuals and less time on tasks. And at the same time, what’s even more confusing than just the response time is how do I prioritize this? Is this something Bryan wants me to do, or is this something that is just kind of an off-hand request from somebody else?
– INTERVIEWER: Does Bryan stop you having to get involved with that kind of politics…?
– KATHRYN: Yeah, he definitely does do that and makes those decisions, which is good…. not that I avoid talking to people or anything, but I think in a situation like that…it lets me be the programmer.
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Adding the “unnamed” interactions
Developer Instructor Planner TA/DA
N U Tot N U Tot N U Tot N U Tot
Total 11 21 32 15 5469 106 22 128 16 44 60
mentioned by developers 4 6 26 9
mentioned by instructors 4 7 24 26
mentioned by planners 18 32 51 13
mentioned by TA/DAs 6 24 27 12
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Total
by developers
by instructors
by planners
by TA/DAs
Developers
Instructors
Planners
TA/DAs
A different visualisation: a second form of triangulation
Each visualisation alone has limitations: but they reinforce each other – and help establish the validity of the “picture” of each case study
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Summary of “ERD”
• Relatively strong core of planners, who mediate much of the interaction with the developers
• Instructors have strong links with TAs, but not with other instructors nor developers
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Comparisons with E-TECH
Irina
Janet
Luis
Niall
Quentin
Terry
William
Yvonne
Vernon
Olivia
Kathryn
Bryan
Roxanne
Steve
Vernon
Charles
David Eva
Fay
Graham
Hans
Philip
Max
Alice
A more distributed “cognitive social structure”?
ERD… …E-TECH
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Comparisons with E-TECH
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Total
by developers
by instructors
by planners
by TA/DAs
Developers
Instructors
Planners
TA/DAs
ERD…
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Total
by developers
by instructors
by planners
by TA/DAs
Developers
Instructors
Planners
TA/DA
…E-TECH
• E-TECH – a more integrated development team, and a more inclusive development process• Planners have less of a “gatekeeping” role• Still a lack of instructor – instructor interaction though…
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Why might this matter?
• Co-evolution of organisation & system… procedures, etc.
• Compatibility of CMS with organisational structure
• Who shapes? (E-TECH more inclusive…)
• Note also strain that E-TECH might come under – if mandated to use particular CMS?
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Close relatives!
Both programs are hosted at the same university – indeed inthe same building!
Could a “campus-wide” solution be imposed here? Would either program find it easy to change?
Something I haven’t mentioned yet…
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Conclusion
• No generalisation from case study…• but “thick” descriptions…?• Understanding the complexities of
the technology – organisation relationship is crucial for the effective implementation of e-L in everyday working contexts in all their different configurations
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Moving on
• Limitations acknowledged… • but lessons were learnt about how to
research the other cases• 7 out of 8 cases, data collection now
complete• Further developments: longitudinal?
Develop techniques for assessing other contexts?
Mapping e-Learning Whitworth & Benson ALT-C 2006
Contact us…
• Drew:– [email protected]
• Angela:– [email protected]
• We would particularly like to talk to anyone working with, or with contacts at, the Open University.