http:www'apple'com

1
(No Transcript)
2
(No Transcript)
3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
http//www.apple.com
6
http//kedayan-bana.blogspot.com
7
MY OBJECTIVE An all-in-one centralised and
easily controllable learning environment that
promotes collaborative learning for various
skills and its usage is sustainable throughout
the year. BENEFITS OF AN ALL-IN-ONE VLE An all
in one system with a single interface allows
access to a range of learning materials and
communication tools. The academic may use the
system to provide enhanced resources
(bibliographies with live links to electronic
journals, simulations expanding practice) or
initiate online collaborative projects to
stimulate and develop ideas and theories beyond
their face to face meetings. Jennings, D.
(2005, p.159)
8
(No Transcript)
9
TWO-TIER LIMITED ACCESS TO KEEP OUTSIDERS OUT
DOUBLE-LOCK SYSTEM
ADMINISTRATOR ACCESS TO CONTENT,DESIGN AND
SOURCE-CODES
ALL-IN-ONE INTERFACE CREATES BOUNDARIESTO KEEP
LEARNERS IN
10
CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT Parents and communities
place faith in school board members and educators
to protect students during the school day and
that means securing their safety when theyre
online. National School Boards Association,
2007 An effective educator should create a
safe environment for learners to express
themselves freely in appropriate ways, to share
their ideas and to ask questions. (Hamilton,
1996 Porter, 1997). In this positive, safe
and motivating environment, learners might feel
free to fail and try again (Chen, 1997 Spitzer,
1998). cited in Huang (2003, p.33)
11
EMBEDDED INTERFACE
ONE LEARNING CURVE
DEVELOP LEARNING FLOW
12
EMBEDDED INTERFACE INTEGRATED INTO ONE ONE
LEARNING CURVE We see a pattern where the
technology is front and center stage, rather than
the academic content. In case after case we see
that when computer technologies are adopted,
the learning about the technology often takes
over, and it is only after several rounds of
integrating technology with content that content
emerges in strong ways. The technology learning
curve tends to eclipse content learning
temporarily . Shelley, Cole and Syer (1999,
p.3)
13
LEARNERS DEVELOP LEARNING FLOW (FLOW THEORY) A
flow activity is one in which the mind becomes
effortlessly focussed and engaged on an
activity, rather than falling prey to
distractions. Flow is a continuum from no flow to
maximum flow Stage 1 A perception of challenges
that are well matched to the persons
skills. Stage 2 A merging of action and
awareness A sense of control over the activity
and concentration. Stage 3 Loss of
self-consciousness time distortion and a
feeling that the activity becomes worth doing for
its own sake (autotelic). Pearce, Ainley and
Howard (2004, p.747)
14

• A PLETHORA OF INTEGRATED CMC TOOLS
• Discussion forums
• Group forum
• Synchronous chatbox
• Comment boxes
• Videos
• Pictures
• Blogs
• Personal Pages
• Ning E-mail
• Webcams

FACILITATES COLLABORATION
PERSONAL PAGE AND SPACE
15
PERSONAL PAGES AND SPACE Wenger (1999) notes
that the issue of education should be addressed
first and foremost in terms of the identities of
the participants and the ways in which we create
a sense of belonging, two elements that are
critical factors in the creation of community,
whether it is ff or online. It is the social
aspects of education that are the most
important. Social identity drives
learning. Rocci Luppicini (2007, pp.3-4)
16
FACILITATES COLLABORATION Owen (2006, p.11)
stated that if learning to learn, if
collaboration, and if the personalisation of
educational experiences are at the core of
current educational agendas, we need to find ways
of enabling young people to come into contact
with, collaborate with and learn from each other
and other people. Social software is about
bringing minds and ideas into contact with each
other and is already, in the world outside
schools, creating the global village. Our
question is whether it is possible to draw on the
activities emerging through social software to
create learning communities which offer young
people personalised, collaborative learning
experiences such as those that are already
emerging in the world outside the school gates.
17

• OBJECTIVES OF THE EDUCATION SYSTEM
• A learning environment that replicates
  collaborative experiences in society
• The blending of technology into the classroom.
• SUPPORTED LEARNING APPROACHES
• Socio-constructivist approach
• Gradual change from teacher-centred to
  learner-centred
• Salmons (2002) e-tivities approach

18
SOCIO CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH. A
CHECKLIST Social constructivism emphasize the
socially and culturally situated context of
cognition, in which knowledge is constructed in
shared endeavours. (Duffy Cunningham, 1996
cited in Felix, 2006). Constructivists go
further than pure cognitive approaches by
recommending that we help learners to construct
meaningful and conceptually functional representat
ions of the external world. (Jonassen, 1991,
p.29 cited in Felix, 2006, p.87). By creating
social networks around academic topics, or even
about specific projects for a course, an
instructor can facilitate a strong sense of
community among the students, encouraging
personal interactions that can lead to the
creation of new knowledge and collective
intelligence. (from 7 Things You Should Know
About Ning, 2008). THESE POINTS WILL BE
ELABORATED IN RELATION TO NING IN THE CLASSROOM
IN PART 4.
19
SALMONS E-TIVITIES APPROACH.
LEARNER CENTRED
DEVELOPMENT
KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION
INFORMATION EXCHANGE
ONLINE SOCIALISATION
ACCESS AND MOTIVATION
TEACHER CENTRED
20
A REMINDER Ning was chosen because of the need
to have a centralised, controlled and
communalistic learning environment that would be
sustained throughout the academic year and
further. Ning was chosen because of its VLE
qualities as well as to come extent its Managed
Learning Environment (MLE) qualities. Ning was
not chosen to accommodate the teaching of
particular skills but because of its potential to
accommodate the teaching of most, if not all, of
the skills.
21
NING IN COLLABORATIVE WRITING TASKS Warschauer
(1996b) states that Computer Mediated
Communication allows users to share not only
brief messages, but also lengthy (formatted or
unformatted) documents - thus facilitating
collaborative writing. He further elaborates
that students can also use the Web to publish
their texts or multimedia materials to share with
partner classes. Many composition and language
teachers believe that word processing encourages
new pedagogical relationships in the class, by
facilitating student revision and collaborative
writing (Warschauer, 1996a, p.2) Warschauer
(1996a) points out L1 composition teachers were
the earliest proponents of CMC using computer
conferencing among the students in a class to
enhance collaborative writing and the social
production of knowledge (as exemplified by
Batson, 1988 DiMatteo, 1990 Faigley, 1990
Hawisher and LeBland, 1992 and Susser, 1993)
followed by L2 composition teachers such as
Sullivan (1993).
22

• NING IN COLLABORATIVE WRITING TASKS
• 01a. Teacher provides instructions.
• 01b. Teacher and students negotiate groupings.
• 02. Learners access Ning.
• 03. Negotiation of tasks among learners and
  teacher in Ning.
• 04. Learners take over information exchange
  learning process. Options include
• Researching for and discovering materials in
  Ning.
• Commenting on materials in Ning.
• Forming groups.
• Collaborative communication or individual
  progress.
• Sharing materials in Ning.
• Address enquiries to peers or teachers.
• Enter writing processes Drafting,
  proofreading, editing in blogs
• 05. Submission through featuring their blogpost.
• 06. Helping others in completing their work.

23
REFERENCES Chen, L. (1997). Distance delivery
systems in terms of pedagogical considerations a
re-evaluation. Educational Technology.
pp.34-37. Duffy, T. M. and Cunningham, D. J.
(1996). Constructivism implications for the
design and delivery of instruction. In
Jonassen, D. H. (ed.). Handbook of Research for
Educational Communications and Technology. New
York Macmillan Library Reference.Felix, U.
(2006). E-learning pedagogy in the third
millennium the need for combining social and
cognitive constructivist approaches. ReCALL. 17
(1), pp.85100. Hamilton, D. (1996). Learning
about education an unfinished curriculum.
Bristol Open University Press. Huang, H.
(2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners
in online learning environments. British
Journal of Educational Technology. 33 (1),
pp.27-37. Jennings, D. (2005) Virtually
effective The measure of a learning
environment. In ONeill, G., Moore, S., and
McMullin, B. (Eds). Emerging Issues in the
Practice of University Learning and Teaching.
Dublin AISHE. pp. 159-167. Jonassen, D. H.
(1991). Evaluating constructivistic learning.
Educational Technology 31 (9), pp.2833. Luppicin
i, R. (2007). Online Learning Communities. North
Carolina Information Age Publishing. National
School Boards Association (2007). Creating and
connecting Research and guidelines on
online social - and educational - networking.
Retrieved from http//www.nsba.org/site/view.asp?C
ID63DID41340 Owen, M., Grant, L., Sayers, S.
and Facer, K. (2006). Social software and
learning. Futurelab. http//www.futurelab.org.uk
/resources/documents/opening_education/Social_Soft
ware_report.pdf Pearce, J. M., Ainley, M. and
Howard, S. (2004). The ebb and flow of online
learning. Computers in human behavior. 21 pp.
745-771.
24
REFERENCES Porter, L. R. (1997). Creating the
virtual classroom distance learning with the
Internet. New York John Wiley Sons. Salmon,
G. (2002). e-tivities The key to active online
learning. London. Kogan Page. Shelley, G., Cole,
K. and Syer, C. (1999). The technology/content
dilemma. In Proceedings from the Secretary's
Conference on Educational Technology, 1999
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Technology.
Spitzer, D. R. (1998). Rediscovering the social
context of distance learning. Educational
Technology. pp.52-56. The EDUCAUSE Learning
Initiative (2008). 7 Things You Should Know About
Ning. EDUCAUSE. Warschauer, M. (1996a).
Motivational Aspects of Using Computers for
Writing and Communication. In Warschauer, M.
(Ed.), Telecollaboration in Foreign Language
Learning Proceedings of the Hawaii Symposium.
(Technical Report 12) (pp. 2946). Honolulu,
Hawaii University of Hawaii, Second Language
Teaching Curriculum Center. Warschauer, M.
(1996b) Computer Assisted Language Learning an
Introduction. In Fotos, S. (Ed.) Multimedia
Language Teaching, (pp. 3-20). Tokyo Logos
International.