Specific educational practices
The reasons to adopt new technologies are at first educational, in connection with the trainees needs.
So they can have important impacts on the design of the device and on the modalities of supervision. Here are some tips :
Motivation and participation support
Designing trainings needs to plan important fluctuations in interest and participation and to implement measures to arouse and maintain it beyond initial enthusiasm. Tools only are not enough, the purpose or direction given by the pedagogical scenario for their use remains central.
Social media play a motivating role in most educational experiences. They offer an empowerment feeling to trainees and new possibilities of socialization. They advantageously request each trainees perseverance on longer trainings.
Two items related to the motivation of the trainees are often given:
- evaluation of participation : it's more a forced choice to participate than a deliberate one. It is also a risk of a minimal participation aiming only at the infringement of the evaluation's criteria. Contrary to the preconceived ideas according to which the pupils will make only the works which will formally be estimated, the absence of stiff constraints (relative to the blog e.g.) incites the pupils to blog even more. The dosage between constraint and freedom is to be found.
- wide broadcasting of the contributions : opening gives visibility, pride and allows the reuse. It is thus generally seen as a factor of motivation. This practice is systematically used in Animacoop's trainings. The trainees produce diffusable contents. It is a more binding but also more appreciated work. (e.g.: http://animacoop.net/wakka.php?wiki=ContenusProduits).
Individual, collaborative or cooperative paths
The multiplicity of communication tools and the different needs lead to a diverse range of pathways. Then the good teaching position would be to vary in order to give trainees, whom have different learning styles, the possibilities of a more adapted path.
Collaborative activities, facilitated by Web 2.0 tools, have however a particular interest : they are both "a good learning vector" and a mean "to promote the development of social ties between trainees", they allow to "fight against the risk of isolation and demotivation especially in distance learning". They achieve various goals simultaneously:
- accomplishment,
- reasoning of higher level,
- gain of working time,
- transfer of learning,
- motivation for achievement,
- intrinsic and continuous motivation,
- social and cognitive development,
- interpersonal attraction,
- social support, friendships,
- reduction of stereotypes and prejudices,
- valuing differences,
- psychological health, self-esteem,
- social skills,
- internalization of values,
- quality of the learning environment ... and many others.
However the arrival of digital technologies only reveals some hang-up of collaborative learning: sharing critical information efficiently for a joint project is an additional step that many organizations do not take, on one hand by lack of shared culture, and on the other hand because of the basic needs of individuals. The collaborative work is based, primarily, on voluntary service and can not be an obligation.
A more personalized apprenticeship and environment
The culture and the multiplicity of choices given by the Web 2.0, combined to its opportunities of directing the "I", calls for a greater personalization of paths, as indicated above, but also for methods of expression and tools. It can be a very limited personalization : profile and personal pages, photos, etc, added inside an institutional apprenticeship environment, focused on the course or the term rather than on the trainee. But more often, as said in the former chapter, we talk of a more fundamental questioning in which
the trainee builds his own apprenticeship environment, from his own choice of tools, independantly from successive institutions that he will spend time in and where he will constitute the portfolio testifying of his training and experience and of his digital identity.
Active educations and more contextualized apprenticeship
More over tools of the Web 2.0 promote an apprenticeship in action, more authentic or more located. The trainee can for example build up resources reusable by the community. E.g. : articles written by Animacoop trainees are reused by trainers for the production of new courses.
Multimedia contents
Another challenge for educators presented by these tools is the trend towards less textual learning resources. Videos in particular encounters a lightning popularity.
- The use of blog : it allows to leave tracks of one's apprenticeships and is excellent in the practices of formative assesment.
- Wiki shows the contributions of each member to a collaborative work.
- Vidéo and video conference enable to assess the spoken expression or the content's appropriation. We can also build on existing content, e.g. evaluate or complete an article on a wiki.
The use of appropriate tools
Placed in front of an abundancey of tools, the trainer must be able to choose the most relevant for the desired apprenticeship. Often, if his institution hasn't done it for him, he also has to select the software to support them. The discussions between trainers on specialized newsgroups show very well their perplexity in front of the multiplicity of offered tools and the difficulty to choose those which will fit best their educational activity.
Farther we propose you a small selection of tools classified according to their uses.
Support
To exceed the level of simple comment or formatting, to progress to a training of higher level, such as the development of argument, criticism and synthesis, a steady veducational support is essential.
The supervision of interactive progresses as those allowed by Web 2.0 asks thus not only more time, but also a steadier availability. To face this greater need for time and for availability, several solutions are proposed.
- the need to establish, from the beginning, slots of availability,
- the collaborative work. The supervision was assumed in team of four trainers : "This way of working favors students who receive instant answers as well as trainers who share the task of answering emails".
What we learnt from Cooptic
Hybrid training combining distance and on-site “learning” is an excellent tool for life-long professional development.
However, many conditions are required for this type of training tool to be a real learning ecosystem.
The Cooptic experience has reinforced our convictions regarding certain conditions for training to be successful in the digital era.
Training is no longer a pyramidal transmission of knowledge, where the person that knows passes information down to the person that is learning. It is a co-building of knowledge by networking available information, chosen by the trainers; individual knowledge and experiences that are collectively enriched by reflective exchanges. The training process is rendered explicit by the trainer so that the training provided enables the process of learning to learn.
People are at the centre of the learning process. But these people are easily connected to the world and to others thanks to the new technologies available.
In the training, Cooptic and Animacoop, its French equivalent, we have experienced the construction of learning communities that operate in a similar way to epistemic communities (cf.
supra). Trainees publish articles and create training itineraries while gradually becoming active “amateur-experts”. This new quality in people that are training is a real conjunction of intellectual, pedagogical, and even democratic ambitions that really sets the grounds for the pleasure of learning.
The work of trainers changes because it entails several roles in parallel:
- “Expert” trainer: is the reference for the subjects dealt with and transfers knowledge.
- accompanist: is the person that structures and accompanies the group’s progression in a learning environment based on communication and exchange.
- tutor: is the person creating an individualised link with each of the learners helping them to overcome the isolation induced by distance learning.
- "technician": is the person that makes sure that all technical devices work properly.
These new "roles" fulfilled by one or more trainers require deep changes:
- reconsidering “distance” as a space and time with multiple possibilities for interaction and learning. It is possible to learn, create links, work together and produce a resource in multiple ways:
- asynchronous distance contribution based on availability of a space for writing, sharing resources, exchanging via email or a forum,
- synchronous distance during video-conferences or exchanging practices between groups,
- on-site and distance at the same time…it is possible to organise a course on video-conference with two groups in parallel at two different sites.
- making the relationship between trainers, learners and knowledge more horizontal. In the flow of information and exchanges, the trainer is just one element among many others.
- adopting the "surf method "1 ....accepting uncertainties and being brave enough to experiment during the process. Trainers are the ones guaranteeing the methodology: they create the balance conditions and do not necessarily master the form of co-production outcomes.
Innovation elements and the effects they have on the training tool and the cooperative learning
| How Cooptic innovates |
The effect on training |
The effect on cooperative learning |
| Choosing a wiki as a training platform |
Technical device that is easy to use with an intuitive configuration and carefully designed graphics. The trainer tries to minimize any possible technical difficulties. |
Reduces difficulties for participation. Generates trust in the tools. Creates a feeling of pleasure. Encourages trainees to publish on the NET. |
| A common space and individual spaces |
The wiki platform enables creating personal spaces that are easily linked to a collective support. |
Belonging to the learning group is natural (common spaces). Individualised learning is possible (personal space). |
| Open contents |
Courses are posted on-line and are accessible to all outside training times. |
Freedom to refer to the courses at all times. Greater availability for activities and exchanges. |
| Learning contents that extend beyond those in the courses |
Posting the course on-line “frees” time to accompany trainees along the process of acquiring skills. |
Knowledge acquisition: "learning to learn" and "learning to work with others". |
| Modular structure |
Contents are divided into units (granulated). The general itinerary is defined, but it can be modified during the training. |
Building a more personal itinerary is possible. |
| Systematic approach |
Contents are selected so they correspond to the activity as a whole, the collaborative network and to the different levels (individual, group, environment). |
Acquisition of global perspective. Relatively complete study of the collaborative processes. |
| A multiplicity of structured itineraries |
Modular course itineraries (the life of a network). Group activities itinerary (learning community). "professional project” itinerary (collaborative environment). |
Multiple opportunities to deal with issues on cooperation and collaboration; put them into practice, facilitate them. Analysis of the collaborative process. |
| Gradual change in the size of work groups |
Activities are programmed based on progression: individual exercise, work in pairs, in groups of 4 to 8 |
Practice on epistemic communities. Exercise on ephemeral groups (change in scale). |
| Networking and exchanging practices |
The activity is conceived as a knowledge aggregator. The trainer provides the methodology. |
Valuing experiences as a source of knowledge (reflective practitioner). A particular form of professionalisation (based on the experiences of others). Reinforcing self-esteem. |
| Co-production of contents |
An evolutionary platform: everyone can add pages and text. The trainer accompanies the process and ensures it is consistent. |
Active stance towards knowledge. The sense of creating a “common good”. |
| Notion of "presence" from a distance |
A fine-tuned articulation of distance and on-site times. The effort of accompanying is placed on interaction between participants. “Distance” accompanying is systematized (fixed points with the trainers). |
The effect of distance decreases or even transformed. Removing project and culture proximity methods. |
For further information: epistemic communities
Epistemic communities can be defined as a (small) group of representatives who share a common cognitive aim to create knowledge and a common structure that enables a shared understanding. They are heterogeneous groups. Therefore, one of the first tasks for its members is to create a codebook, a form of "code of conduct", defining the aims of the community and the means to achieve these aims, as well as the rules of collective behaviour. Therefore, what distinguishes an epistemic community is, first and foremost, the procedural authority, that ensures progress towards the established aim while allowing participants a certain degree of autonomy.
The production of knowledge is done based on the synergy of individual specificities. This requires that the knowledge that flows within the community is made explicit. This is done by converting tacit individual knowledge into explicit and collective knowledge: the members of epistemic communities are united by their responsibilities to value a particular set of different knowledge. The aim of the assessment is therefore related to the individual contribution of effort towards a collective aim that is to be achieved, and the validation of the cognitive activity (production of knowledge) of each member is done by their peers based on the criteria established by the procedural authority. The same applies to the recruitment of new members in this type of groups: it is done by the peers, following the pre-established rules regarding the potential in new members to achieve the community’s aim.
Bibliography
Cohendet, P., Créplet, F. et Dupouët, O., (2003), Innovation organisationnelle, communautés de pratique et communautés épistémiques : le cas de Linux. Revue française de gestion, n° 146, 99-121.
- 1 Rosnay, Joël. Surfer la vie : vers la société fluide. Paris : Les liens qui libèrent, 2012