Comments on: University 2.0? http://pedablogy.stevegreenlaw.org/?p=188 Sat, 04 Sep 2010 07:34:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: gabinetedeinformatica.net » Blog Archive » Universidad 2.0 http://pedablogy.stevegreenlaw.org/?p=188&cpage=1#comment-359 gabinetedeinformatica.net » Blog Archive » Universidad 2.0 Tue, 05 Sep 2006 12:46:53 +0000 http://jerryslezak.net/pedablogy/?p=188#comment-359 [...] Me gustó leer el artículo universidad 2.0 publicada hoy en el blog EuskadI+D, que contiene argumentos con los que estoy totalmente de acuerdo. Soy firme creyente en que la universidad española funcionaría mejor si su gestión se aproximase a la de una empresa (”2.0″, a poder ser), compatibilizándola con un fácil acceso social y económico; no haciéndola restrictiva en cuanto a las tasas de matrícula; financiando por otros vías; fomentando el trabajo en equipo; incentivando a los profesores para las innovaciones didácticas e incorporación de las TIC en las aulas, etc. Término extraido de la conceptualización aglosajona de “University 2.0″ y que autores como D’Arcy, el aspecto crítico de Jerry Slezak y otros. Recomiendo la lectura del post citado. [...] [...] Me gustó leer el artículo universidad 2.0 publicada hoy en el blog EuskadI+D, que contiene argumentos con los que estoy totalmente de acuerdo. Soy firme creyente en que la universidad española funcionaría mejor si su gestión se aproximase a la de una empresa (”2.0″, a poder ser), compatibilizándola con un fácil acceso social y económico; no haciéndola restrictiva en cuanto a las tasas de matrícula; financiando por otros vías; fomentando el trabajo en equipo; incentivando a los profesores para las innovaciones didácticas e incorporación de las TIC en las aulas, etc. Término extraido de la conceptualización aglosajona de “University 2.0″ y que autores como D’Arcy, el aspecto crítico de Jerry Slezak y otros. Recomiendo la lectura del post citado. [...]

]]> By: Gardner http://pedablogy.stevegreenlaw.org/?p=188&cpage=1#comment-358 Gardner Tue, 14 Feb 2006 03:26:12 +0000 http://jerryslezak.net/pedablogy/?p=188#comment-358 I myself do not want to take courses in pedagogy, nor do I want them to be required of my colleagues. Pedagogy, like every process in a school, is a means to an end. I want our society to talk about what "education" means, what "understanding" means, and what we mean by a community of learning that forms around experts but is not focused on them. I think that talk about pedagogy can and will degenerate just as quickly as talk about anything else in our society. The key is not methodology. The key is understanding. And understanding may be encouraged and demonstrated in many ways. I myself do not want to take courses in pedagogy, nor do I want them to be required of my colleagues. Pedagogy, like every process in a school, is a means to an end. I want our society to talk about what “education” means, what “understanding” means, and what we mean by a community of learning that forms around experts but is not focused on them. I think that talk about pedagogy can and will degenerate just as quickly as talk about anything else in our society. The key is not methodology. The key is understanding. And understanding may be encouraged and demonstrated in many ways.

]]> By: Steve http://pedablogy.stevegreenlaw.org/?p=188&cpage=1#comment-355 Steve Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:02:09 +0000 http://jerryslezak.net/pedablogy/?p=188#comment-355 Academia is a strange entity where the assumption is that you know how to do your job (teaching) without any expectation that you've been trained in it. Most graduate programs are in research rather than teaching, so I can't see them requiring pedagogy classes for the degree. I think that change will be more likely coming from the employer's side. But perhaps more important than a requirement of courses would be a change in the culture of universities with some explicit discussion of what constitutes good teaching. Along with this should be greater opportunities for workshops and other training on the job. Academia is a strange entity where the assumption is that you know how to do your job (teaching) without any expectation that you’ve been trained in it. Most graduate programs are in research rather than teaching, so I can’t see them requiring pedagogy classes for the degree. I think that change will be more likely coming from the employer’s side. But perhaps more important than a requirement of courses would be a change in the culture of universities with some explicit discussion of what constitutes good teaching. Along with this should be greater opportunities for workshops and other training on the job.

]]> By: Angela http://pedablogy.stevegreenlaw.org/?p=188&cpage=1#comment-357 Angela Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:56:56 +0000 http://jerryslezak.net/pedablogy/?p=188#comment-357 I'm not much of a blogger myself, but I am very much interested in your central points--which are, as I understand them, that how we define "education" and what constitutes "learning" are undergoing fundamental transformation in the academy. From Interdisciplinary Liberal Studies programs to the "Learner Centered" approach (as defined by Maryellen Weimer) to Team Teaching strategies for transcending traditional disciplinary boundaries to incorporating technologies as means to transcend other kinds of boundaries (between students; between students and faculty; between the classroom and the real world, etc.), teaching faculty are seeking new ways to assess our outcomes and how we achieve them. Under scrutiny are the processes by which students best achieve learning and our learning goals (how does one balance, for example, content and/or skills acquisition--communication, writing, public speaking, critical thinking--how do we define competence in each of these areas, and how do we seamlessly marry content-driven goals with skills-development goals--these are very important issues). This reconceptualization extends from "content" and "skills acquisition" to assessment, too. At stake is not just how we assess the success of our own courses, or how we can best assess student work/ quality of learning and expression; also at stake is the "teaching moment" that assessment can provide--that is, the opportunity to help students develop critical thinking skills by involving them in the process of assessment (a process which requires critical thinking). E-media and other kinds of instructional technologies really are the "Brave New World" in terms of providing endlessly adaptable tools in the construction (of University 2.0) process. The trouble is that creating the kinds of infrastructures require both risk, time, and resources. These are not insurmountable problems, but they can, at times, be considerable. I’m not much of a blogger myself, but I am very much interested in your central points–which are, as I understand them, that how we define “education” and what constitutes “learning” are undergoing fundamental transformation in the academy. From Interdisciplinary Liberal Studies programs to the “Learner Centered” approach (as defined by Maryellen Weimer) to Team Teaching strategies for transcending traditional disciplinary boundaries to incorporating technologies as means to transcend other kinds of boundaries (between students; between students and faculty; between the classroom and the real world, etc.), teaching faculty are seeking new ways to assess our outcomes and how we achieve them. Under scrutiny are the processes by which students best achieve learning and our learning goals (how does one balance, for example, content and/or skills acquisition–communication, writing, public speaking, critical thinking–how do we define competence in each of these areas, and how do we seamlessly marry content-driven goals with skills-development goals–these are very important issues). This reconceptualization extends from “content” and “skills acquisition” to assessment, too. At stake is not just how we assess the success of our own courses, or how we can best assess student work/ quality of learning and expression; also at stake is the “teaching moment” that assessment can provide–that is, the opportunity to help students develop critical thinking skills by involving them in the process of assessment (a process which requires critical thinking).

E-media and other kinds of instructional technologies really are the “Brave New World” in terms of providing endlessly adaptable tools in the construction (of University 2.0) process.

The trouble is that creating the kinds of infrastructures require both risk, time, and resources. These are not insurmountable problems, but they can, at times, be considerable.

]]> By: Christopher D. Sessums http://pedablogy.stevegreenlaw.org/?p=188&cpage=1#comment-356 Christopher D. Sessums Fri, 10 Feb 2006 02:22:17 +0000 http://jerryslezak.net/pedablogy/?p=188#comment-356 I recently stumbled onto your blog and am happy I did. You model what I call good teaching strategies and you maintain an open posture (i.e., you appear to be more of a learner than a teacher, in the traditional sense). I have been writing along similar lines as your U2.0 thesis. However, I feel I am a bit more skeptical about the future. Universities in general will be one of the last bastions to adopt a student-centered approach. Why? Anybody with enough perserverence can become a professor; there are no pedagogical qualification exams. I have spoken in front of large faculty groups at my uni and posed the following "white elephant" questions: how many of you have ever taken a course on effective teaching and learning? How many of you have taken a course that focuses on how people learn? Until universities require their professorate to engage in coursework that focuses on teaching and learning strategies, no amount of 2.0 will make a difference. That said, I am actively working on building a program at my uni to require all graduate assistants and teaching assistants to participate in two to three seminars in effective teaching and learning courses where we go over all aspects of engaging students. And I am doing it not because anybody asked. I simply want to see you your vision of U2.0 come to life. -cds I recently stumbled onto your blog and am happy I did. You model what I call good teaching strategies and you maintain an open posture (i.e., you appear to be more of a learner than a teacher, in the traditional sense).
I have been writing along similar lines as your U2.0 thesis.
However, I feel I am a bit more skeptical about the future. Universities in general will be one of the last bastions to adopt a student-centered approach. Why? Anybody with enough perserverence can become a professor; there are no pedagogical qualification exams. I have spoken in front of large faculty groups at my uni and posed the following “white elephant” questions: how many of you have ever taken a course on effective teaching and learning? How many of you have taken a course that focuses on how people learn?
Until universities require their professorate to engage in coursework that focuses on teaching and learning strategies, no amount of 2.0 will make a difference.
That said, I am actively working on building a program at my uni to require all graduate assistants and teaching assistants to participate in two to three seminars in effective teaching and learning courses where we go over all aspects of engaging students.
And I am doing it not because anybody asked. I simply want to see you your vision of U2.0 come to life.

-cds

]]>