EC&I831, eduMOOC, Higher Education, Learning Community, Learning Technologies, Open Education, PLN, Virtual Communities, Web Design

#mtmoot Opening Keynote: Digital Pedagogy to Engage

This morning I will be joining the Mountain MoodleMoot at Carroll College in Helena, MT to share some thoughts and ideas around engaged digital pedagogy. Our learners are connected; however  I think more educators and instructional designers need to support our students in developing effective learning skills to navigate this new culture of learning. For those of you interested in following along, be sure to tweet with hashtag  #mtmoot, check out my slides (below), and feel free to scope out the digital handout http://bit.ly/mtmoot12 I compiled for this session.

 

Today’s learners operate in a world that is informal, networked, and filled with technology. Connectivity and digital access is an increasing need for our students and a vital requirement to excel beyond structured learning environments. Our learners are now able to interact with information, learning materials, and peers from around the globe. There is an increasing need to expand and enhance our learners’ involvement in learning technology to support engagement in online learning environments.

With the emergence of collaborative, online tools, educators can take advantage of multidimensional and engaged participation to reach their learning outcomes. Social media creates a space where “everybody and anybody can share anything anywhere anytime” (Joosten, 2012, p.6). Educational paradigms are shifting to include new modes of online and collaborative learning and student-centered, active learning to challenge our students to connect curriculum with real life issues (Johnson, Adams & Cummins, 2012). As a new generation of learners begin to create and share content, educators need to understand how to effectively utilize social web resources to impact in instructional practice create a culture of online participatory learning.

Emerging technology platforms and devices are beginning to disrupt education as we know it. To coevolve and positively impact learner success, it is critical that instructors and instructional designers consider how digital pedagogy can support learning outcomes. This keynote plenary will share ideas and suggested practices to develop a richer learning experience and thrive in the changing digital learning frontier.

References

Johnson, L., Adams, S. & Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC Horizon Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

Joosten, T. (2012). Social Media for Educators. San Francisco, CA: Wiley/Jossey-Bass.

AcAdv, Collaboration, Higher Education, Learning Community, SAchat, StudentAffairs, Virtual Communities

Creating Digital Communities of Practice to Enhance #StudentAffairs & #HigherEd

Last year, I wrote a piece for the NASPA Technology Knowledge Community (TKC) after responding to a post made by the TKC Chair @JedCummins via the TKC Facebook Group. I was just noticing that the Summer 2012 call for submissions is coming up and Osvaldo is looking for submissions (due June 8/12 – see the Facebook Page for further details). Although the TKC publication is geared towards a newsletter format, I think it provides Student Affairs professionals an opportunity to write and share about their technology trials, tribulations, and accomplishments on campus.

Little did I know that my submission would go into the #NASPA12 Knowledge Communities publication (my piece can be found on pages 50 & 51) that was distributed at the conference. Thanks for sharing it beyond and sending me copies via “snail mail,” Jed! I appreciate it.

The overall just of this piece describes how the social web and emerging media is  coevolving with the changes and developments of higher education and the Student Affairs profession. New learning environments and networks allow higher education professionals and faculty to connect, curate, and collaborate beyond on our college campus. It is exciting to see how online networks afford new joiners in the field of student affairs, advising, and MORE to access information, contribute to the conversation, and develop a digital footprint. Whether you call it a PLN, PLE, hangout, community of practice, network, gathering space, or “water cooler” chat — there are great things happening in social, online spaces to enrich the work we do at our institutions with ourselves and our students. I like where this informal learning and development is going. This is probably also why @julieclarsen and I decided to share our “Developing Your Network” presentation one last time at today’s #UNTAdv12 Conference for the advising professionals as well:

There are amazing things that lie ahead for these informal networks in higher education. This is an exciting time. I look forward to participating and learning where these digital communities of practice, including as #SAchat, #SAtech (hoo-ray for the new chat!), #AcAdv Chat and others go. With this fine group of educators and practitioners, I am sure these networks have the potential to move mountains. I would challenge and encourage participants in these communities to use these spaces to think critically, solve problems, create innovative ideas, develop effective practices, share knowledge, and support one another.

Collaboration, Learning Community, PLE, PLN

Organizational Networks, Relationships & Sensemaking

In organizational life there are interpersonal networks, within and across organizations, and internationalizational networks, with exchanges of resources, alliances, and shared directors. Network thinking has a long history in sociology , such as the dynamics of triads and the “web of group affiliations.” New constructs such as resources dependence, institutional theory methodology, and computer power encouraged formal methods for network analysis, assessing relationships and structures, and testing new theories.

 

Networks provide a way to visualize and analyze patterns among relationships of the nodes (parts) and ties to determine distribution of information, resources, energy and authority. This type of network analysis has lead to further review of organization connectedness, including:

  • formal and informal networks among members and units
  • social network analysis to quantify position or importance of actors in the network
  • characterization of technology, industry and product space
  • types of ties among organizations
  • organizational alliances, partnerships & affiliations
  • review networks of organization distinct from functional, divisional or matrix form
  • hybrid of ties among organizational units
  • dynamic networks in industrial districts
  • networks structures and differences depending on economies and politics
  • cross-cultural comparisons of networks
 Practical applications for organizational networks and relationships include application of the following steps for both individuals and organizations:
  1. Setting up a personal learning network (PLN) – developing a PLN to meet your personal and professional goals
  2. Establishing a professional presence online –establishing you digital identity and presences online
  3. Selecting online networks & tools – where to start, tools, tips and social spaces
  4. Finding your voice – developing a sense of self in the community of practice and contributing to that shared community
  5. Network collaboration – being able to weave your online network to learn, grow, curate and contribute

References

Scott, R. W. & Davis, G. F. (2007). Networks in and around organizations. In Organizations and organizing: Rational, Natural and Open system perspectives, Chapter 11.

Further Readings

Borys, B. & Jemison, D. B. (1989) Hybrid arrangements as strategic alliances: theoretical issues in organizational combinations. Academy of Management Review, 14, 234-249.

Daft, R. & Weick, K. (1984).  Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems.
Academy of Management Review, 284-295.

Granovetter, M. (1983). The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited
Sociological Theory, Vol. 1, (1983), pp. 201-233.

Levine, S. and White, P.E. (1961) Exchange as a conceptual framework for the study of interorganizational relations. Administrative Science Quarterly,5: 583-601.

Milliken, F. J. (1990). Perceiving and Interpreting Environmental Change: An Examination of College Administrators’ Interpretation of changing demographics. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, No. 1 (Mar., 1990), pp. 42-63

Park, S. H. (1996) Managing an Interorganizational Network: A Framework of the Institutional Mechanism for Network Control. Organization Studies, 17: 795-824.

Ring, P.S. & Van de Ven, A.H. (1994) Developmental process of cooperative interorganization relations. Academy of Management Review, 19, 90-118.

Salancik, G. R. (1995) Review: WANTED: A Good Network Theory of Organization
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 2 (Jun., 1995), pp. 345-349

Weick, K. ( 1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 628-652

Weick, K., Sutcliffe, K., & Obstfeld, D. ( 2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16 (4): 409-421.

Learning Community, MGMT6820

Population Ecology & the Evolution of Our Learning Organizations

During last week’s organizational theory seminar, I helped lead a discussion about population ecology. As defined by Colyvan (2008), a population is a collection of individual of the same species that live together in a region. Population ecology is the study of populations (especially population abundance) and how they change over time.” Organizations are often classified into different “species” that coexits in an environment that change over time and space. These changes that occur at the environmental level, lead to selection of the best fitting organizations.  In other words, the organizations who survive will be those who best fit the environment and are therefore selected.  There are other arguments in population ecology that imply adaptation and sustainable systems may be alternative routes for survival.  Here is a quick snap shot of the population theories we reviewed that explains the evolution:

After examining the dynamics of populations and how populations interact with the environment, it is easy to see how this is currently impacting learning organizations. Learning networks are both changing and challenging what traditional learning looks like. Beyond the influence of technology, there are paradigm shifts within education – both in the K-12 and higher education environment. The focus is now student-centered with engaged and experiential learning. More educators include authentic, problem-based, and self-regulated learning opportunities into their curriculum. When the classroom is flipped, learners are encouraged to be part of the cooperative learning program. As learning population ecology evolves it also gives way to new players that impact the environment, such as P2PU and Udacity. It is relevant to consider how the open learning environment will interact with traditional educational models. Will these seats be filled for long?  How can open and connected learning environments “play well” with the current educational models?

Many of these issues are being reviewed at different organizational levels to determine the efficiency and value added.  For sustainability of learning and to support our learners needs, it is important for more institutions to think broadly about the impact of population ecology for learning. Are we considering the rational organizational system as a function of accountability? Or do we need to consider how resources are being adapted to support creation and our changing learner needs?

When applying population ecology theory to current learning organizations, it often provides more questions than solutions.  I do not have answers for these issues yet; however I think they are quite relevant and more educators need to consider what the future learning environments will look like. 

Population Ecology Resources:

Smith, Adam (1776) Of the division of labour. In Shafritz and Ott (eds.), (1987) Classics of Organization Theory, 2nd edition, chapter 2, 30-35.  (chp 2, 6th ed)

Fayol, Henri (1949) General principles of management. In Shafritz and Ott (eds.), (1987) Classics of Organization Theory, 2nd edition, chapter 6, 51-66. (chp 5, 6th ed)

Weber, Max (1946) Bureaucracy. In Shafritz and Ott (eds.), (1987) Classics of Organization Theory, 2nd edition, chapter 8, 81-87. (chp 7, 6th ed)

Blau, P. M. (1970) A formal theory of differentiation in organization. American Sociological Review, 35, 201-218

Hannan, M. T. & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology 82(5): 929-964

Carroll, Glenn R. (1984). Organizational ecology. Annual Review of Sociology 10: 71-93.

Baum, J. A. & Oliver, C. (1992). Institutional embeddedness and the dynamics of organizational populations. American Sociological Review 57(4): 540-559.

Hannan, M.T. & Freeman, J. (1984) Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, Vol.49, 149-164.

 

Additional readings

Gulick, L. (1937) Notes on the theory of organization. In Shafritz and Ott (eds.), (1987) Classics of Organization Theory, 2nd edition, chapter 9, 87-97. (chp 8, 6th ed)

Burns, T. & Stalker, G. M. (1961) Mechanistic and organic systems. In Shafritz & Ott

Thompson, J. D. (1967) Organizations in action. In Shafritz & Ott

Lawrence, P.R. & Lorsch, J.W. (1969) Organization-environment interface. In Shafritz & Ott

Stinchombe, A.L. (1959) Bureaucratic and craft administration of production: a comparative study. Administrative Science Quarterly, Sept. 168-87.

Van Witteloostuijn, A. (2000). Organizational ecology has a bright future. Organization Studies, 21(2): V-XV. Editorial

Amburgey, T. L. & Rao, Hayagreeva (1996). Organizational ecology: Past, present, and future directions. Academy of Management Journal 39(5): 1265-1286.

Singh, J. V. & Lumsden, C. J. (1990). Theory and research in organizational ecology. Annual Review of Sociology 16(1990): 161-195.

Kearney, R. C. (2003). Patterns of union decline and growth: An organizational ecology perspective. Journal of Labor Research 24(4): 561-578.

Salimath, M. S. & Jones, R. (2011) Population Ecology Theory: Implications for Sustainability. Management Decision, 49 (6): 874-910.

Learning Community, Micro-Blogs, PLE, PLN, web 2.0

Happy My Twitter Story Day! #mytwitterstory

I often talk about my personal learning network (PLN); however I cannot deny that a large part my PLN is located on Twitter. In honour of the #MyTwitterStory Share event happening today, I will tell you about my Twitter experience, involvement and why I engage. Thanks for your story and initiating the #mytwitterstory blog prompt, @michaelmgrant

Once upon a Twittersphere, there was a Canadian Princess Laura who moved to Texas to for a new job, new place, new academic program, and a new life adventure. While relocating from the metropolitan county of Toronto to to the Dallas realm, she thought it was wise to stay connected to friends, family and colleagues she was leaving behind. Princess Laura was socially connected via Facebook, Skype, blogging, Flickr, LinkedIn and more. Then in August 2008,  she was introduced to Twitter by a new @NACADA friend, Eric Stoller, who wanted to use this tech tool for the 1st  #NACADAtech Seminar.

Although Princess Laura was not quite sure about the 140-character perimeters or the random personal updates, she did fancy the cute little bird and thought she would keep an open mind about it. In the beginning, Princess @laurapasquini decided to lurk on Twitter to figure out why others were using this  social media tool. Through her observation, Princess Laura discovered a couple of great learning opportunities using Twitter (and other social web resources with@courosa ‘s #ECI831 and #CCK09 facilitated by @gsiemens  & @olddaily. While engaging in these open, online classes Princess Laura found the value in connecting to others to share resources, swap ideas, hold discussions and ask questions. Twitter was a space to participate in on-going learning and training initiatives to enhance her personal & professional development. The experiences in open learning courses, conference backchannelsTwitter listshashtag communities, following supportive Tweeters, and the participation in a few of the many Twitter Chats opened Princess @laurapasquini up to the educational potential of the Twittersphere.

By using third-party clients like  Hootsuite Seesmic, Princess @laurapasquini was able to discover the power of micro-blogging with great learning communities such as #edtech, #SAchat, #AcAdv, #SAtech, #HigherEd and MORE!  Princess @laurapasquini continues to archive her tweets & URLs to her Delicious account via packrati.us, which also pays it forward and shares and RTs. Now Princess @laurapasquini places great value in the tweets of others for news, information, trends and happenings for her personal, professional and academic interests.

This Twitter tale really expresses Princess @laurapasquini’s love for her PERSONAL LEARNING NETWORK…

maintaining old and new CONNECTIONS…

and most of the FRIENDS who make her #MyTwitterStory complete.

The End! [Or is it? Follow along for more Twitter tales @laurpasquini.]