Moodle Moot UK 2010 – Closing Keynote

Closing keynote/plenary: Geoff Rebbeck, Thanet College

Moodle brings teachers and ‘technicians’ together. Moodle removes the technical barriers for teachers when properly implemented.

First challenge: the wider world of technology

We used to think the institution needed to be the host of the learning technology, and use it by the institutions rules.

But students now have their own technologies and devices, and we need to know how to incorporate those learning technologies.

Best way to use Moodle is to put very little content in, and give students the power to put their own content in. Moodle is organise and grows as part of the life of the course it is supporting. If you set it up you’re making assumptions about how the students should behave.

Personalised and social learning. Need to make sure we capture those. Moodle consolidates what ‘we’ already do as teachers. Moodle isn’t simple, but it is intuitive.

When we think technology can do everything for us can let us fall into the trap of becoming passive teachers. Getting the set up of your course right is more of an art than a skill.

Using Moodle to save money, is the wrong way to approach it.

Need to develop experts who are capable of managing their own learning. That’s where we need to go with Moodle, it shouldn’t be just a repository.

Skills we need to develop:

  • have to have a drive to be able to think reflexively, not just one way to do things
  • have to have the ability to adapt technology to purposeful pedagogy – make do with deficiencies of software and bend it to work  the way we need it to
  • need vision to be imaginative in using blended learning

Moodle Moot UK 2010 – Afternoon Keynote

Afternoon keynote: Philip Butler & James Ballard

Learning spaces: bridging the gap between personal and professional discourses

As we evolve within a more ‘knowledge-based’ society, knowing what to learn next becomes more relevant than what has already been learnt. This is evidenced in the recent focus on higher-order thinking or trans-disciplinary skills in the literature of personalisation, professional development, employability, PLTS and other strategic agendas.

Development of such skills requires complex dialogue and is difficult to measure. How can we ensure learners engage with a sufficient range of discourses for their development and where does Moodle ‘fit’?

Three phases for Harnessing Technology: Enabling, Capable and Confident

Helping learners to learn individually – personalisation. The systems should conform to the learner, not the other way round.

  • Lifelong learning is a process, not a product.
  • Edubcators have a responsibility to make this an inclusive process.
  • This is not a technical issue, technology provides new affordances for personalisation but is not a panacea
  • The 21st Century learner requires us to understand where Moodle fits in within their learning discourse.

Moodle Moot UK 2010 – Day 2 Welcome

Welcome to day two by Martin Dougiamas

Moodle 2.0 Overview

Over past ten years code has grown, features been added, and came to the time  when it needed an overhaul. By 1.9 was inevitable to go to 2.0 rather than 1.10. Been working on 2.0 for about two years now.

Have resisted all sorts of features that sit outside of a VLE, instead woorking to make it easy for people to integrate it with their own peripheral systems.

Moodle has 49,000 registered verified sites in 210 countries. Registered sites contain 34 million users, 3.4 million courses, and 1.2 million teachers. At least 500 sites have more than 10,000 users. Interface translated into 75 languages and there are 54 specialised Moodle partners.

UK has 3rd most Moodle sites in the world (US 1st and Spain 2nd).

Moodle 2.0 has some major rewrites and some major new features.

New flag to mark courses as complete (will be useful for our archived modules).

Cohort enrollments (will this be like enrollment streams?)

Files 2.0 will move from on-disk normal storage to database storage. 1.* to 2.0 upgrade process will take hours if you have a  lot of files.

Files have a licencing system where it can store and keep track of licence information on files (e.g. will automatically pull in flickr licence information when adding files from a flickr repository).

Greater flexibility on the design – as design and functionality more divorced from each other. Can change design via PHP templating as well as just CSS.

New roles 7 permissions system. Far more visually understandable permissions overrides.

New comments block that can be stickied on every page in a course to allow back and forth commenting/feedback between students and teachers.

Web services API. SOAP, XML-RPC, REST, AMF

External systems can now remotely control Moodle. Bridge could now use the API to do enrolments rather than DB injection?

Community Hubs: every Moodle comes with a hub that can be turned on, and will turn it into a course repository that can feed into other Moodles.

Moodle 2.1 won’t have code refactoring, will instead focus on pedagogy, education, and usability.

Thoughts on Moodle 3.0 flying around, and some quite radical, but too hazy to go into details. 🙁

Beta release end of April, rough but usable for testing and trying out themes. Full release will be in July, even if they have to cut features.

Book tool is very popular, but possibly won’t be ready for integration in Moodle 2.0, worst case will be updated to work with Moodle 2.0 even if not integrated. Will be in Moodle 2.1 as standard module.

Moodle 2.0 plans to use the tango icon set which is open source and has clean naming scheme so easy to add more icons to it.

Moodle Moot Uk 2010 – Afternoon Keynote

Afternoon keynote: Dr Ross Mackenzie, Strategic Development Manager, The Open University

Didn’t plan to use moodle at first. Changed on 6th July. Realised they were going with Moodle because it did lots of what they needed, they could make it do the things it didn’t do, it would scale to the levels they needed.

Shoddy track record using open source, used a lot but never contributed back. Decided the all Moodle developments would be released back to the community.

Funded moodle community on some basic needs OU had.

  • Roles & permissions (1.7)
  • Accessibility improvements (1.8)
  • Gradebook (1.9)

Some in house developments. Most available in moodle contrib.

OU Blog, OU Wiki, ForumNG, study Calendar course format, Newfeed, Mystuff, Dataplus, etc.

OpenMark (,

Elluminate integration, Content authoring (structured content, xml-based authoring via MS Word)

Lots of changes to core code. 2000 changes to moodle within the localisations.

Parallel development model. quarterly releases, resyncing with stable moodle once per quarter. Three month development period/two month test period ahead of each release to students.

Process: requirements gathering, development, functional testing, pre-release testing, & in service.

Try not to make changes between releases unless it is really critical.

VLE is never finished, development keeps on going.

General stats:

  • 5330 sites on main vle, 579 currently live(archives kept for 3 years in read-only mode)
  • 648,000 users in database. 168,000 currently active.
  • In 24h period 35k-50k unique users
  • Concurrency: 2k-2.5k

3 layer architecture. red hat linux. 5 webservers, 4 load balanced serving users, 1 running cron. Database cluster – postgresql 8.3, NFS cluster, storage area network. Bottleneck the SAN.

Multiple systems. Live systems, acceptance test (near mirror of live), technical testing system (replica od dev), development systems.

Teams: Dev team, support team, testing teamevangelism team.

Current developments: Working with google on google apps for education integration. Associate Lecturer dashboard (pulling stuff from different modules into 1 place).

Moodle2: working on conditional activities, quiz engine (perhaps for 2.1). Not making any decisions until beta release, and nothing substantive until stable release. Will migrate their mods and look at cost of migrating localisations.

Moodle 2 options: ignore it, adopt it and remake localisations, adopt it and not have as many localisations (do things more the Moodle way and less the OU way).

Life in the clouds: looking at google apps, maybe later some cloud (amazon? ec2/30) hosting for storage and/or computational load.

Will they get to a point where they have to decide between google tools and moodle tools within the VLE?

Moodle Moot UK 2010 – Morning Keynote

Morning keynote: Professor Sugata Mitra, Newcastle University

The Future of Learning (or A future of learning)

Everywhere on Earth, there are places where, for various reasons, good teachers do not want to, or cannot, go.

We have the above problem even in this country.

How would poor children get to work with computers?

The Hole in the Wall.

Can’t get teachers to go into slums (India) and teach children. you can’t in principle have a good computing teacher at the primary level.

Sugata wanted to know what would happeen if you put a computer in a slum, and see what the children do. Where to put it? Where to put a computer outdoors, let alone in a slum?

Built a computer into a wall, glass screen over front, bricked in securely, like an ATM. Then asked a colleague to walk around, keep an eye on it, and see what happens. Video of 8 hours later shows kids excitedly playing with it: 8 yr old boy teaching a 6 yr old girl how to browse the internet, even though the boy didn’t know himself. Assumption was a passing adult must have shown the boy to start with.

What would happen if it was put in a place where no-one could pass by and provide that initial teaching. So another hole in the wall in a small north indian village.

Adults showed no interest, men walked past, women kept eye on the children. Video shows excited children again. 10 yr old boy and 12 yr old girl, and they ask him 9when he returns a few months later) for faster processor and better mouse. Asked how they know this, and girl says, you gave us a machine that works only in english, so we had to teach ourselves english to use it. Adult response in same situation would be “can’t understand language, so can’t use the machine”. When do the 2 positives of childhood turn into the 2 negatives of adult hood? Who is responsible? teachers? Our processes reinforce that learners need teachers.

Groups of children can learn to use computers and the internet on their own – irrespective of and and where they are.

Graphed child IT literacy from his holes in wall, and from a posh Delhi school, and results were the same. Worrying from a teacher’s perspective.

Putting hole in wall in a public space,, with large screen visible to community, and computer use/misuse is controlled without any controlling software needed.

Between 200-300 children can share 1 computer and become computer literate in 3 months.

hole in wall process:

bullies take over, can’t work things out, and then leave it.

then 8 yr old hackers take over and play

eventually 12yr old girls invest organisation and administration to provide order and fair use for all (e.g. getting taller boys to hold up smaller kids to use machines)

Costs approx 3 US cents per child per day.

Design of ‘new’ hole in the wall such that uncomfortable for adults, and comfortable for children.

Groups of children, given the appropriate digital resources, can attain educational objectives, on their own.

Gave children computer with speech-to-text software.

Pre-trained the software with accent neutral british accents, then disabled training feature. Gave to children and it wrote gibberish when they spoke. he left them to it, and told them to make themselves understood. When asked how, he said “I don’t know”. He left them, isn’t sure what they did.

Video of girl speaking english before and after. barely understandable before, much  more understandable afterwards.

During the time he was away they downloaded some examples (speaking oxford dictionary), and then grouped up testing and correcting each other.

Around same time, Pascal Monteil (French) did experiment with new media art. Sugata took him to his children who didnn;t even know where france was. He spoke to the kids aand they understood nothing. He send pascal to the hole in the wall, showed kids stuff, and they copied him.

Can groups of children complete their schooling on their own? (phase 2 research)

He proposed experiment: let’s show the sorts of things that children can not teach themselves. Can Tamil speaking children learn Biotechnology in English – on their own?

Downloaded biotech material from internet, and loaded it into the hole in the wall computers.

Two months later, asked them what they understood, and they said nothing.

Asked how often they looked at it, they said, everyday.

He asked how they can look at it every day and no understand.

One girl said, well apart from improper replication of dna can cause genetic mutation, we learned nothing.

In 2 months test scores went from 5% to ~30%.

Still 30% is a fail. So what would it take to make them pass? he extended experiment and got a local NGO person to teach them more biotechnology by hanging around as they learn and admire them while they self teach. 2 months later their scores were up to 50%.

No longer ‘just’ computer literacy, but proper real hard science.

Next The Gateshead Experiment, Feb 2008.

Rule: make groups of 4, only 1 computer per group, can look over the shoulders of other groups – see what they are doing – and claim it as your own work. The gave the 10 year olds 6 GCSE questions. Then took teacher away for a cup of tea and left kids to it. Took 20-45mins to get all questions right.

SOLE – Self Organised Learning Environments (cyber cafes for children working in groups of 4)

Self organisation gets kids to 30%, but getting to a pass takes friendly mediation.

Remote presence by retired people with broadband. Beams in his Granny cloud wherever they are needed.

The Future of Learning

  • Need subsidised broadband and electricity in developing world.
  • SOLE as part of timetable.
  • Clouds of mediators.
  • Change curriculum, make it based on questions.
  • Change assessment structures.

ALT-C 2009 Keynote and Closer

Keynote and close
2 keynote speaker(s)
704 Terry Anderson
Terry Anderson – Professor and Canada Research Chair in Distance Education at Athabasca University
opening slide -worldle tag cloud

  • taxonomy of the many
  • open learning


  • we must continuously improve the quality/effectiveness/appeal/cost/time efficiency of the learning experience.
  • student control is integral to life-long education and learning in 21st century
  • education for elites is not sufficient for planetary survival

Harmonising disruptive technologies

  • managing and aligning pedagogical, technical, and administrative issues is necessary when using emerging technologies
  • takes leadership and disruption

no real systemic innovation since 1960s
net presence means creating and sustaining social capital
choosing the right tools
wengler’s ideas of community of practice
distributed web 2.0  group tools – wiggio
what motivates learners?

  • personal and social relevance
  • opportunity to do well abd be recognised
  • chance  to meet cool peope and engage in coolactivities
  • disequilibrium
  • rewards

Google wave …
networks of practice rather than communities of practice?
network pedagogies – connectivism, participatory pedagogy, complexity
student organised networks
open education
open journals
open scholars
moodle plugin – brainify
open textbooks – flatworld
705 Closing session with the ALT-C 2009 and ALT-C 2010 conference co-chairs
Tom Boyle, Gilly Salmon, Richard Noss, Vanessa Pittard
Into something rich and strange – making sense of the sea-change
next year in Nottingham

ALT-C 2009 Day Two Roundup

Pedagogic Innovation

I didn’t really see much pedagogic innovation (boy, that phrase is difficult to type on an eeepc 1000 keyboard on a rocking train), but there were a few nice things.

QR codes. I can’t see our lecturers using them in lectures to relay information to students, but the idea of a library book/journal/etc search spitting out a QR code is interesting. Student can then snap it with their mobile, walk to the shelf with all the info they need and more converted into text form on their phone. No need to scibble down location onto a scrap of paper.

Visitor/Resident principle. Kinda like Prensky’s Native/Immigrant idea, but trying to get around the negative connotations of being a digital ‘immigrant’, trying to separate it from being a generational thing. There still seems, to me, to be connotations that being a resident is better than being a visitor, but that’s my own bias, seeing myself as a resident. This distinction however isn’t about competency, but about the use one makes of online systems. You could be as ‘power-user’ fully knowledgeable aboutt using online systems etc, and dip in and out where necessary to ‘get the job done’ without maintaining an online persona, without ‘leaving something of yourself behind’ in the sense that a resident does.

But what’s the point? It isn’t about identifying yourself and feeling smug if you fall into the bracket you wanted to be in, and them pitying those that fall into the other. The point is to identify and categorise your students, your target audience, and make sure thst they way in which you present your learning doesn’t exclude them. If they’re all residents, that would allow you to embrace, perhaps, a different teaching style. if you have a half/half audience, that doesn’t necessarily exclude you from a new style, as long as there is sufficient differentiation to benefit all, and you ensure your implemntation doesn’t exclude anyone. If you’re looking for me to tell you how, tough luck.

The paper (271) on flexible working (nothing to do with gymnasts) seemed more like a sales pitch for the beyond9to5 ‘platform’, I wasn’t too impressed with the paper. Though I should make sure I am on record saying I fully support the principle and ideals of flexible working. If we want to embrace the new technologies to teach in new more flexible ways, what’s stopping us working in new flexible ways? Nothing.

Being the fourth paper of the session, I may have been in fatigue-land. Something about drawing pictures, pencil on paper, in order to design stuff. Truly rocket science!

Redesigning Teaching

No Frankenstein-monsters being created by grafting technology and teacher together, although making a campus fully covered by wireless (802.11) and bluetooth sounds like it’ll mutate staff and students (or just insta-cook them!).

But seriously, the little mobile apps zapped out to every phone in the room was pretty cool. Yes we had to be in discovery mode with security off. Yes, we’re naively trusting of the man that told us we could trust him. I seriouslly hope a campus full of students has more sense! If not, they deserve everything they’re going to get from their less scrupulous colleagues.

Tony Lowe’s drag’n’drop apps were also really cool. Needing everyone in the room to have a laptop to participate, I think we’re not there yet for class work. For work at home, awesome. Great tie in to last year’s keynote from ummm.. that guy tottering around on a ladder regurgitating his TED talk, yeah, Hans Rosling.


Martin Bean’s keynote. How to make a keynote fun, take the p out of Americans. No, seriously… yes! Best. Keynote. Ever. (ALT-C 2009 anyway)

I was concerned at Martin’s background working for the great enemy of societ. Yes, I mean Microsoft. An ex-Microsoft guy moving to the OU? Surely a sign that the OU is about to reach singularity, and not in a good way. But once you listen to Martin speak, either he’s a very good Trojan-horse, or his enthusiasm and ideals managed to escape Microsoft unscathed. Freedom of information, or resources, of education. Very inspiring. Best thing I can say is, go watch it for yourself! (I may even remember to come back here and provide a link).

Infrastructure Technologies

Hyperlinked information. And we’re not talking about twenty pages of content neatly linked back and forth. We’re talking aboutsufficient hyperlinking between different bits of information that lets a user choose their own path, rather than have a path chosen for them. Is it really beneficial? Probably not for everyone, possibly for only some. Is it worth going for this approach when designing e-courseware? I find it very difficult to advocate such a seemingly disorganised approach. When it comes to designing e-courseware, should we even be doing so? Or letting students freely search and discover their ownwas materials as suggested elsewhere! educational use

Lecture capture systems, on a large scale, sound grand and appealing. I don’t think there was really anything in that paper that really challenged though, and no reason should. It seems to be working well for them, and I wish we had similar funds to be able to invest in this. What I would take from this, is the approach theyto have two groups, one on raw implementation from the technical perspective, and one one the educational use, to make sure that educational use was being considered at every stage in the wider context without being consumed/distracted by the technical implementation. Of course this does assume that those implementing a project have a clear vision from the educational use group, a vision that isn’t going to change and undo all the worrk of the implementors.

So, finally, Huddle. This was just a sponsor session, trying to flog their product. As such I wasn’t put off it, which I guess is a small victory for them. I wasn’t however wowed by it. Especially in context of so many other sessions where the concept of a single University-owned product is seen as out-dated with a move to a more open approach letting students choose what they want to use.

ALT-C 2009 Day Two Keynote

Keynote speech
1 keynote speaker(s)
703 Martin Bean
Martin Bean – Vice-Chancellor Designate of the Open University

Scepticism about innovative technology is not new.

many funny quotes on how paper, ink, and pens are relied on too much and won’t supercede the then present ‘tech’

Thomas Friedman ‘The Changing Landscape’

  • globalisation is a reality
  • competition is global
  • we work in a turbo-charged environment
  • business goes where the talent is

Changing nature of HE

  • Globalisation
    • so many options out there, competition across the world
  • Massification
    • despite increase of supply, can NOT keep pace with demand with traditional brick and mortar
  • Privatisation
    • fastest growing delivery sector is private education
  • india and china outpacing US and UK investment in HE and research
  • collective challenge – need to educate citizens for new types of work
  • STEM is key for a competitive workforce
  • innovation agenda is vital
  • increasing importance of sustainability
  • transforming information into meaningful knowledge

classroom like being on an airplane: sit down, put trust in the pilot, turn off electrical devices

many students have not known a world without: www, mobile phone, sms, video files, mp3s

UK homes: 70% in 2008 had internet

went up by 2 million into 2009

  • learning in the workplace needs to become integral
  • break down barriers between formal and informal learning
  • got to put learner in the middle, learner-centric focus

The opportunity for technology:

  • extending the reach of high quality education to all
  • nurturing powerful communities of learning
  • enabling relevant, personalised, engaging learning
  • giving educators greater insight and more time
  • agile, efficient, and connected learning systems

Making change possible – three key considerations (in order of importance)

  • people
  • process
  • technology

when it fails, 9 times out of 10 it is because of too much time spent on thinking about the hardware/software than on brainware

change delivery models

  • content creation
  • consumption
  • manipulation

OpenLearn -free learning resource

going multi-channel

producing a whole new generation of innovative/engaging content – not just repurposed material

education meets social networking

exciting, fast, disruptive, inhernatly social


  • rich personalised resource archives
  • learner selected mentors
  • enabling people and processes to embrace technologies
  • motivated learners create their own reuse models
  • innovative learners create their own sharing contexts

ALT-C 2009 Day One Roundup

Well, I am exhausted! It has been a busy day. I don’t feel like I’ve done anything, and yet it feels like I haven’t stopped.

Mike Wesch’s keynote this morning was very interesting. I’ve seen his youtube videos before and the content of his talk seemed very familiar. I don’t think I’ve attended one of his talks before, but I wouldn’t be surprised if I have.

While I don’t necessarily agree with any conclusions he may make, I did find his research fascinating. I’ll go so far as to agree that technology and media do shape how we see the world and how we let the world see us.

There did appear to be the insinuation that the lecture theatre will always limit, to some extent, how far we can change learning and teaching. I suppose it is inevitable that every part of the learning environment imposes a limit of some kind, but does the lecture theatre impose a harsh enough limit that we need to break free of it? He didn’t necessarily say that, and I wouldn’t necessarily say that. ut at times like this (end of a long day at conference) I am reminded of my student days and I now (as then) don’t want to see a lecture theatre for a long time. However, two more days to go, so I’ll have to grin and bear it 😉

As for the rest of the day, there are a few things I want to pick up on.

Last year I attended an ‘audio feedback’ talk, and was very much taken with the idea. This year’s feed-forward paper renewed my interest in forms of feedback that differ from ‘boring’ text. There was, however, an important caveat that I had not thought of before. Audio feedback is a different medium from textual feedback, and therefore does (after the paper today I believe it does) require a slightly different set of rules to go with it. A different way of communicating is needed. Critical audio feedback delivered in an un-careful (so much feedback to record, recording teacher is getting bored/impatient) tone of voice can be very damaging for the receiver to the point of destorying their confidence rather than helping them improve. Speech is a much more powerful means of communicating than text. While there are dangers with text (difficult to deliver a tone of voice which can totally change the meaning of words) there are similar dangers with speech if you aren’t watching your tone or are more critical than you are positive.

When it came to the video feedback, video footage recorded live in the Biology lab of instructors walking around talking to students, asking and answering questions, I saw much potential. Such students did not recognise the value of the feedback at the point in which they received it, but looking back got the benefit of the feedback to themselves, as well as all the other feedback to colleagues. In addition the video played a valuable role in providing instructors lab instruction best practice (where done well) and opportunities to see where improvements could be made (where they see flaws).

Paper 132, the two year switch to Moodle was a very rewarding session. Many, if not all, of the experiences spoken of, could easily have been Kent’s story. One other member of the audience raised his hand at the end to say that he could hhave given the exact same talk, so similar was it to his experience too. One flaw in the project plan was that training had been given too early to their staff. Training that had been mandatory and unavoidable, with the result being that refresher courses had to be run by the time Moodle arrived. Looking at Kent’s Moodle project, we planned similarily early training sessions (although not mandatory) and as a result of poor attendance we have had to run more and more training sessions running into September (the month we said we would not run any!). The result is

  1. an absolutely insane (approx 6 hours a day, every day, 2 weeks straight) training workload for us (grrr!!) at a critical point of the year when we should be free to deal with day-to-day VLE queries (of which there are so many before a new year)
  2. staff that receive training very close the the point at which they are putting it into practice and, hopefully, not needing refresher courses.

Is (2) the silver lining or everything working out for the best? I’ll let others be the judge.

Paper 306, the SLE. It’s interesting to see people looking at the big picture. After implemennting Moodle it would be easy for them (and would be easy for us) to see Moodle as the final and sole product. But instead they are only looking to Moodle as a core set of tools, and specifically relying on a range of other tools to fill in where Moodle may have a feature, but doesn’t do it best.

This is just a very shallow scratch in the surface of Day One, and I am sure that by tomorrow I’ll have forgotten more than I will remember.

ALT-C 2009 Welcome and Opening Keynote

Conference welcome and opening keynote
2 keynote speaker(s)
701 Introduction and welcome from the 2009 co-chairs and from the University of Manchester
Tom Boyle, Gilly Salmon
702 Michael Wesch – Mediated Culture/Mediated Education
Michael Wesch – Assistant Professor of Cultural Anthropology at Kansas State University, USA
Nice photos of Papua New Guinea, very ‘low tech’. MW spent several months there on a research grant. Huge cultural and linguistic divide. He lost sense of self and needed to rebuild his identity. Entire identity built up based on modern media. Introduced read/writing (for a census), many people didn’t have a fixed name, possession of a single name their ‘own’ name didn’t exist. Called each other by relationship or friend names, rather than ‘proper names’.
Media aren’t just tools, they mediate relationships. When media change, relationships change, cultural change. How are media tools shaping us?
Problem in US, high drop out rates – not in it to learn. Many not liking ‘school’ but not necessarily not liking learning.
Causes: growth of surburbia, modern mass production, 1-way communication of TV.
1992- MTV generation .. short attention spans

Thomas de Zengotita – quote

A brief history of ‘whatever’
Reality TV, wanting to be on TV.
Jean M Twenge, ‘Generation Me’
The search for identity and recognition. The search for the authentic self.

  • self-centred modes of self-fulfilment (disengagement)
  • negation of all horizons of significance (fragmentation)

Charles Taylor’s ‘Ethics of authenticity’ (1991)

  • not controlled by the few
  • not 1-way
  • group formation easy
  • indiviidual pursuits transformed into collective action
  • created by, for, and around networks, not masses

Why does it matter?

  • We know ourselves through our relations with others.
  • new media create new ways of relating to each others
  • new media gives us new ways of relating to ourselves

Youtube communities, people talking into their webcam.
The medium shapes the possibility of self-awareness.
The medium shapes the message – the medium is the message.
Our lecture theatres are part of our medium and despite the content of the lecture, we can’t avoid the roomm itself being part of the message.

  • To learn is to aquire information
  • information is scare and hard to find
  • trust authority for good information
  • authorised information is beyond discussion

from knowledgeable to knowledge-able
able to find information, question it, and create new knowledge
Crisis of significance in learning.
Power Corrupts. PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely. By Edward Tufte