Google Reader - using feeds to have content sent to you

Found something interesting you want to follow? For example a student Blog? Then use an Aggregator like Google Reader. If you Bookmark Google Reader, then you can simply click on it to open Google Reader and view all the sites you have told Google Reader you want to follow (called feeds). This can include Student Blogs but also any site that produces content that you are intersted in keeping up to date with (e.g. BBC news).

This is one of a good number of helpful video clips that will help you be effective in the use of this powerful tool:

Google Reader YouTube Clip

Not what is, but what else?

A dominant perspective on practice is that of the discipline. The discipline establishes the conventional ways in which particular practices operate. For example, the discipline of dance delineates both what dance practice ’is’ and ‘is not’. For example, dance is not Quantum Physics … 

.... or is it?

What if dance was accepted as many things? If you like a ‘non-disciplinary’ recognition of its power and value?

For me this idea opens up new opportunities for practitioners and the latent capabilities of any practice, not last, dance. The opportunities exist to reconsider ‘what is’ the immutable qualities of the discipline, and to explore ‘what else’ could the disciplinary qualities could be applied to; for learning, to foster understanding, to gain new insights and to do many other things.

Take a look at John Bohannon: Dance vs. PowerPoint, a modest proposal and let me know what you think.

Data Gathering Tools

-->

Here is the MDX YouTube channel link to the Data Gathering Tools Presentation. 

This will give a flavour of the responses from our 20th November 2012 workshop. If you would like to view a more in depth evaluation of the Data Gathering Tools, then these can be accessed as a Google Doc at Data Gathering Tools. Please add or edit as you see fit. If you do add further thoughts on the data gathering tools, then you can cite this in your work.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this work at the 20th November workshop.

Can this be True? …

It seems on face value, perfectly reasonable to conceive of asking questions to get at the truth. When reading or watching TV I often think ‘is that true?’ ‘what is the truth behind that?’ and I’m sure you probably do to.

But what do we mean when we seek the truth in something? Does truth equate to Factualness? Or authenticity? Or righteousness?  Or other measures?

I pretty much think the notion of ‘truth’ is very difficult to handle in research that has a social basis (like a professional enquiry that seeks insights relating to professional practice as a social entity). This may be because truth is partly founded in the notion that something can be understood as factually correct. Now that is fine in the natural sciences (e.g. physics, biology, chemistry etc.) because the natural sciences seek to test empirically the basis of any fact statements. So for example, from a natural science perspective, we can be completely positive in stating that the Darwinian Theory of Natural Selection is true. It is established, scientific fact. But it is important to note that it may be true as a scientific fact, yet fail as a theological (social) truth. Within particular theological conceptions, Natural Selection is not true because it does not agree with particular theological teachings. Illogical as it might seem, when operating within certain religious contexts, Natural Selection is untrue.

Within professional practice, we seek to use social scientific methods to explain the human condition and experience. In doing so we recognise that any explanation is contingent on the particular social, cultural, political, economic, geographical and historical context that the experience exists within. To say there are underpinning ‘truths’ is to grip the experiences too tightly, squeezing out the relevance and meaning that comes from the situations in which the experiences occur.

So perhaps we should not ask whether something is ‘true’. But rather ask ‘what different possible accounts can we give for a particular phenomena?’ and ‘to what extent do we think one or more of these explanations is useable or worthwhile within a specific context?’ In making these assertions, we may seek underlying features (we call these generalisations) however in a great deal of social science research, absolute generalisable rules have to live alongside other features such as relevance of knowledge in a particular context.

The tighter and more specific the focus of our questions, the more we can block out the noise from all the different situations and contexts in which our questions could be posed and that would lead to different responses.

When we ask ‘What is the best way to teach Ballet’ we carry notions of absolute truths. The question starts with the premise that there is actually only one ‘best way’. The question ignores the range of situations, places, times, cultures, age groups etc. in which ballet may be taught.

Better perhaps to ask ‘In this very specific given situation, what different approaches to teaching Ballet produce what effects?’

You may like to view my previous Blog on the-art-of-asking that relates to this post.

the art of asking

Following on from a very stimulating and interesting discussion with BAPP Arts students last week and in relation to developing inquiry questions, I wanted to post some thoughts on the making of questions …

So what is a question?

If we were to visualise a question in the most general sense, then we could liken it to a torch. It is a tool we make and use to reveal new insights into the half-dark gaps in our knowledge. It is a tool in that we fashion and craft questions so they are the best tool to reveal the deepest insights and understanding. And in fashioning our questions, we seek to capture qualities in the question that illuminate and direct the searching within those half-dark gaps.

So what are the qualities or attributes of ‘questions’ that make for ‘better’ questions?

Firstly to recognise our own starting point, motivation or need. Why precisely do we want to know something? What would that knowledge enable us to do? What value do we attribute to that knowledge (or better still, who would value it and for what reasons?). Within this attribute lives the notion of bias. Bias is at one level the recognition that our questions are coming from somewhere, a need, a want, an interest. Bias to a question is like the beehive to the bee. It is where the bee comes from; its perspective is a hive-perspective. The hive gives the bee meaning in is constant search for nectar. To be biased is to be normal. To understand that the questions we ask are by their very nature, biased, provides us with a basis to understand where the questioner is coming from.

Agency is another attribute and is, probably, a category of bias, but worth mentioning separately. I think of agency as the ‘who’ or ‘what’ the question is asked on behalf of. So when we ask ‘is ISTD or National Curriculum a better framework for teaching dance’ we ask a question sanitised of any agency. We think, or imply, that there is some natural ‘truth’ out there, which this question hinges on. Untrue. This question is simply nonsense. However, were we to ask ‘what qualities to do KS3 dance teachers attribute to ISTD and National Curriculum’ we add an essential ingredient. That is, the agency in terms of teachers’ views’. 

Pragmatism is another worthwhile attribute of all questions. Pragmatism focuses our attention on what the question is being used for. What is produced or intended by the question? What is the question driving at? A question lacking purpose lacks both meaning and the means of producing an answer.

The next attribute that comes to mind is scope. This is about the appetite of the asker. When forming a question, what is the dimension(s) of the question? and number of issues? Connections? Variations? similarities and contrasts does the question imply? The question can simply be too big to answer given the time, resources and ability of the questioner. Recognising that within the limits of a given resource (time, ability of the questioner etc.) that a broader question will most likely lead to more superficial results. Depth of understanding, of quality of answer, of knowledge, will come with more focused questions.

So lastly I come to the attribute of the question making process itself. I see this as about crafting, honing and refining of questions, and through this process, the value and meanings themselves develop and become more concreted in our minds. As in all human endeavours, sustained engagement with any process helps to clarify where we are coming from, what we value and what we are trying to do. Asking questions is no different.

From Ink to Click

Imaging a world without books, without newspapers, without any basic form of mass media. A world where subversive, new ideas are spread by clandestine individuals ever fearful of the dominant and controlling influence of state and church. Where word of mouth was the main medium to transmit ideas, and that any digression from the authorised ideas were deemed heretical and a special police force existed precisely to hunt down any ideas that challenged that of the central power of state and church. Imagine a world where ideas were prevented from spreading in order to maintain the existing hierarchies of a few powerful individuals and families.

This apparent alien world was the world of 15^th Century Europe just prior to the invention of the printing press by Johannes Guttenberg.

This single technical development laid the foundation for mass media and in Europe heralded the sweeping away of 1500 years of church hegemony as Europeans for the first time had access to the Christian bible and could read the teachings of Christ for themselves. The printing press produced an explosion of ideas that fuelled the renaissance as classical Greek, Roman and Arabic texts were distributed and read by a mass audience. This spawned a vast array of technical and scientific developments that catapulted Europe from the medieval into the modern world.

Now, in the early 21^st century, many would argue the world wide web may reveal itself to be a seismic event no less significant than the labours of Johannes Guttenberg labouring in his workshop by candlelight back in the 15^th Century.

The connections made through the early developments of social media may well foretell a change of the most radical form. A change in how we work, trade, play, communicate and think. A change that might transform our thinking from the national to the global and carries the potential to democratise ideas at least as powerfully as the Guttenberg press? 

I would be really interested in your thoughts on this topic.

Web 2.0 in Higher Education

If you are interested in the principles and practices of using Web 2.0 for learning and teaching in higher education / work based learning you might wish to look at the following two publications:

Moteleb, A. & Durrant, A, (2009) ‘Using Web 2.0 technology in work based learning’, Proceedings of The 8th European Conference on e-Learning (ECEL 2009), University of Bari, Bari, Italy edited by Dr. Dan Remenyi. http://www.academic-conferences.org/ecel/ecel2009/ecel09-home.htm (2009) [pp. 391].

Bryant, P. Durrant, A. & Akinleye, A. (2012) Educating the Early Career Networked Arts Professional using a Hybrid Model of Work Based Learning in The Journal for Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning. Emerald Publishing.

I can also highly recommend Stephen’s Web which has consistently high quality and up to date information and evaluation of the use of Web 2.0 for higher education:

http://www.downes.ca/