Inquiry topic 1. What would a LMS that is independent of institutions look like?
Inquiry topic 2. How would teachers from the COP learn to use this LMS?
Issues related to this topic are that the learners and teachers from different institutions, need a common LMS for a blended course, and the issue of incorporating more 21CLS and in particular, upskilling teacher’s digital literacy.
This is a reflection for future practice. The relevant and meaningful COP are my colleagues in the domain of medical education. We are informally bound together by our involvement in a joint project, namely teaching a new blended course in Post Graduate Pathology. We are distributed around Auckland, with different employers and affiliations. We share a willingness for implementing new technology to enable effective 21st Century learning experiences for our learners, but are time poor. I expect our levels of participation will be different because we have different levels of interest in teaching with technology.
 |
| Add caption |
Some of us like myself, will be core members, and will be the instigators, researchers and testers. This role can be mapped to the early adopters in the adoption of innovation curve by Rogers. I think the majority of teachers will be active or peripheral participamts (Wenger), and will use the LMS once the early adopters have ironed out the problems and have created some model lessons as examples. I think these different levels of participation contribute to the COP by focusing the development effort to one or two teachers who have the specific interest in this role of technology research and implementation. Active participants will contribute course content within their area of subject matter expertise. I think this division of tasks will be time efficient and distribute the cognitive effort, which has appeal to the time poor.
Once a feasible LMS is implemented, core and active participants will share knowledge as training resources firstly in a familiar format such as instructor led a workshop within our COP. If I follow this up with blended learning, I think this will further familiarise the early and late majority teachers with digital learning technology. This will contribute standardised minimum knowledge level on the use of the LMS across all members of the COP. Examples of building bridges across different levels of participation are one on one sessions between core and active/peripheral members. We can share in our COP what worked and didn’t, to save repeating mistakes. Sharing success and vulnerabilities should engender camaraderie, trust and compassion, which along with purpose and friendships results in happiness with and at work (McKee, Friedrickson).
We could all contribute to a shared Knowledge repository of FAQ and answers, such as a wiki, which would evolve organically over time and contribute an alive yet permanent , valuable resource (Wenger). The knowledge and skills gained in using this institutionally independent LMS for a PG course, could then be transferred, rather than linked, to my other COP such as professional development of a special interest groups which operate across institutions and are geographically distributed across Australia and NZ. This is likely to reduce the sense of professional isolation, and increase connectedness. One example of such a COP would be neuromuscular biopsy pathologists in ANZ, of whom there would be less than 10, where if members of the CoP could use a similar institutionally independent LMS, or perhaps just the knowledge base wiki, to act as a shared evolving, inviting shortcut to valuable relevant information (Wenger). Valuable content would include journal articles, laboratory methods, quantitative analytics, recorded lectures, tutorials and workshops, reporting templates, and links to websites.
Once a feasible LMS is implemented, core and active participants will share knowledge as training resources firstly in a familiar format such as instructor led a workshop within our COP. If I follow this up with blended learning, I think this will further familiarise the early and late majority teachers with digital learning technology. This will contribute standardised minimum knowledge level on the use of the LMS across all members of the COP. Examples of building bridges across different levels of participation are one on one sessions between core and active/peripheral members. We can share in our COP what worked and didn’t, to save repeating mistakes. Sharing success and vulnerabilities should engender camaraderie, trust and compassion, which along with purpose and friendships results in happiness with and at work (McKee, Friedrickson).
We could all contribute to a shared Knowledge repository of FAQ and answers, such as a wiki, which would evolve organically over time and contribute an alive yet permanent , valuable resource (Wenger). The knowledge and skills gained in using this institutionally independent LMS for a PG course, could then be transferred, rather than linked, to my other COP such as professional development of a special interest groups which operate across institutions and are geographically distributed across Australia and NZ. This is likely to reduce the sense of professional isolation, and increase connectedness. One example of such a COP would be neuromuscular biopsy pathologists in ANZ, of whom there would be less than 10, where if members of the CoP could use a similar institutionally independent LMS, or perhaps just the knowledge base wiki, to act as a shared evolving, inviting shortcut to valuable relevant information (Wenger). Valuable content would include journal articles, laboratory methods, quantitative analytics, recorded lectures, tutorials and workshops, reporting templates, and links to websites.
To cultivate my different COPs I need to design elements to have value, relevance, allow for organic growth, and evolve over time (Wenger).
Amanda Charlton
References
Barbara L. Fredrickson 2009. Positivity: Top-Notch Research Reveals the 3 to 1 Ratio That Will Change Your Life.Harmony
Mckee A. (2017) The Happiness Traps. Harvard Business Review Sept-Oct p67-73
Rogers, E. (2002). Diffusion of preventive innovations. Addictive Behaviors, 27(6), 989-993.
Sandars J (2011) It appeared to be a good idea at the time but … A few steps closer to understanding how technology can enhance teaching and learning in medical education, Medical Teacher, 33:4, 265-267, DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.550972
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Comments
Post a Comment