M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Wiki pedagogies

Mira Vogel

Goldsmiths, University of London

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Overview

• Why wikis?

• Considerations– Learners' epistemological beliefs – Peer relationships

• Implications– Design of wiki tasks– Assessment

• A scenario for discussion

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Why wikis?

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

(The intensifying economic drivers for peer learning.)

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Wikis: legitimate learning institutions

“…a collaborative, knowledge-making impulse in humans who are willing to contribute, correct, and collect information without remuneration: by definition, this is education. To miss how much such collaborative, participatory learning underscores the foundations of learning is defeatist, unimaginative, even self-destructive.”(Davidson and Goldberg 2009)

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Wikis: real-world

“…the user-centred focus of Web 2.0 activities supports the learner in transgressing and resituating content and practices between the formal and informal learning settings in which s/he participates.”

(Dohn, 2009)

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Wikis: real-world

“... amplify the students’ sense that there may be multiple interpretations of the same topic of study or discussion point ... It also underlines the fact that interpretations may converge or diverge, highlighting the natural complexity of interrelations within the realms of knowledge.”

(Trentin, 2008)

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

But so far they haven’t taken off in higher learning.

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Great Expectations, JISC IPSOS MORI, 2008

Familiar

Unfamiliar

ComfortableNot comfortable

Instant messaging

Text messageadmin updates

Administrativematerials online

Using existing online socialnetworks to discuss coursework

Emailing tutors

Course-specificmaterials online

Posting questionsOnline to tutors

Web CT

Using social networkssuch as Facebook asa formal part of thecourse

Submittingassignmentsonline

Using podcasts

Making podcasts

Making wikis

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Considerations

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Epistemological beliefs- beliefs about the nature of

knowledge and the process of knowing.

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Desirable beliefs about knowledge

Knowledge as complex, tentative, derived by reason, acquired gradually, and related to persistence and hard work.

Teaching can make a difference.

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

“accepting the challenge of struggling with the domain”

(Tolhurst, 2007)

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Relationships

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Group work behaviour• ‘Social loafing’

– Less individual effort compared to lone work– Infectious

• ‘Diligent isolate’ depends on self alone to get the job done– Compounds any loafing

• However, smaller groups– Can easily meet offline– May lack critical mass or creative friction

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Cooperation is not collaboration

• Where learning is viewed as acquisition, peer editing isn’t viewed as constructive:– Multi-centred, individualistic contributions – Adding rather than editing – let alone deleting– Bargaining

“I think I will cry if anyone changes my page!!!”

(Wheeler et al, 2008)

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Design of tasks & assessment

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Sharing knowledge

Paradigm Entails

Shared mental representations

Transferring, comparing, not necessarily changing

Shared objectNegotiating a consensus on artefact, problem, or goal

Others?

Stahl & Hesse, 2009

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Trentin, 2008

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Trentin, 2008

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Scaffolding, rules, constraints• Help keeping abreast of developments

• Prefab or templated pages to edit

• Taxonomy for tagging– e.g. only link designated words (boundaries)

• Set of peer questioning stems

• Division of labour (equal opps; control)

• Things you can count (words per page, minimum number of entries)

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Assessment - giving credit• Negotiating assessment criteria

– More than demonstrating a knowledge object– Interdependence

• Multiple assessment points (stops free-riding)• ‘Procedural justice’ (metrics)• ‘Distributive justice’ (recognition)• Peer, group, and individual marks

– For the overall process– For each student’s role in the process – For the end product

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

References / bibliography• Davidson, C. & Goldberg, D., 2009. The future of learning institutions in a digital age. Available at:

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/Future_of_Learning.pdf.• Dohn, N.B., 2009. Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. International Journal of

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), pp.343-363. • JISC Ipsos MORI (2008) Great expectations of ICT: How Higher Education institutions are measuring up.

Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/greatexpectations.aspx• Karasavvidis, I., 2010. Wiki uses in higher education: exploring barriers to successful implementation. Interactive

Learning Environments, 18(3), pp.219-231.• Larusson, J.A. & Alterman, R., 2009. Wikis to support the “collaborative” part of collaborative learning.

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(4), pp.371-402.• Piezon, S.L.,& Donaldson, R.L. (2005). Online groups and social loafing:Understanding student-group

interactions.Online Journal ofDistance Learning Administration, 8(4). Retrieved from: http://www.westga.edu/*distance/ojdla/winter84/piezon84.htm

• Schommer, M. (1990) Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension, Journal• of Educational Psychology, 82, 498-504.• Stahl, G. & Hesse, F., 2009. Paradigms of shared knowledge. International Journal of Computer-Supported

Collaborative Learning, 4(4), pp.365-369.• Trentin, G., 2008. Using a wiki to evaluate individual contribution to a collaborative learning project. Journal of

Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), pp.43-55. • Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D. (2008). The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated

content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 987–995.

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Scenario

A colleague from Psychology approaches you. He wants his cohort of 20 MSc students to co-write reviews of the course’s weekly visiting presenter series.

He says these will be assessed, but he hasn’t yet decided how.

He asks only for a guide to using the VLE’s wiki tool that he can circulate to students.

How do you respond?

M25LTG, 29 Nov 2010

Issues to resolve with wikis• Group task needs to be

integrated• Uneven or low

participation• Free-riding• Competition for popular

content• Students skeptical about

value of own knowledge• Complexity of editing• Trepidation about editing

peers’ work

• Bargaining for credit• Resistance to being

edited• Need for sustained

attention / awareness• Need for good

communication• Plagiarism• Demands of software• Gaming the assessment• Resent being assessed

as group