Clyde Street

Learning, Teaching, Performing


Leave a comment

#OAPS101: A Sense of Balance

We are into Day 19 of the small open online course (SOOC) Observing and Analysing Performance. Although we are having new enrollments each day, the volume of exchange on the OpenLearning platform has lessened. I do hope that there is peripheral participation going on and that we are exemplifying how a self-organising learning community operates.

The course has given me an unprecedented opportunity to reflect on my practice and my aspirations for education as enlightenment. After writing the Daily Wrap this morning, I followed a Twitter link to the Ernst and Young Report on the University of the Future. Page 6 of the report has a graphic of five megatrends transforming higher education:

I am fascinated to discover that our SOOC seems to be meeting these megatrends head on. I am very conscious that e-activity has a cost (a point made in today’s #Converge12 discussions in Melbourne). A few weeks ago Kent Anderson pointed out in a Scholarly Kitchen post:

Energy costs continue to be a focus of digital dissemination, especially as online becomes the predominant mode of information exchange. As you may recall, a small study we published here found that even running an archive in maintenance mode could cost tens of thousands of dollars per year in energy costs. This didn’t compare the carbon footprints of print to online, but it’s clear that digital publishing has an appreciable carbon footprint as well as significant energy costs.

The Internet was supposed to be magical — a virtual realm, an effortless superhighway of information, elevating us from the mundane into an electronic otherness. But it’s not magical. It’s a set of technologies that require resources, including extensive infrastructure composed of expensive and dangerous elements and metals; plenty of human support and intervention to keep it running; and lots of energy to light it.

Print is a set of technologies. Online is a set of technologies. The digital world is not clean or cheap. It is expensive …

Notwithstanding these issues I do see the SOOC approach we have taken to be a scalable and inclusive way of sharing expertise within and between institutions and industry sectors.

We have not pursued a gamification approach in our SOOC but after hearing Helen Keegan’s account of Rufi Franzen I am thinking that there are some important pedagogical issues to address as we stimulate and connect learners.

Our SOOC has 450 enrollments and we have had visits from 80 countries. We have taken a non-linear approach to content (participants follow their interests) and offered Open Badges.  I am hopeful that many of those enrolled will provide a summative comment about the course to help the next phase of planning and sharing.

I am thinking that a SOOC model can offer adaptive flow to learning experiences. I am hoping too that a SOOC can be personal and connected.

I am keen to learn how to support a course that has developed its own sense of balance. A free open course has time, I think, to ponder these issues.

Photo Credit

Balancing Act (State Library of New South Wales, no known copyright)


Leave a comment

#OAPS101 Goes Live 5 November: Starting Out

I am posting this blog post on OpenLearning today to welcome participants in the #OAPS101 course, Observing and Analysing Performance.

The course goes live later this morning.

I think we have a remarkable month ahead of us.

Starting Out

Introduction

Today is the first day of our small open online course, Observing and Analysing Performance in Sport.

Welcome.

Thank you for enrolling on the course and being part of an open approach to sharing ideas and practices.

This is going to be a wonderful learning journey for me and I hope for you too.

I have been writing about the ideas that underpin the SOOC in my Clyde Street blog. For the duration of this course I am going to use the OpenLearning blog facility as my primary blog. This way I hope to share updates and summaries with you directly.

I have posted a video welcome here. There is a written welcome here too. … and an audio welcome (using Vocaroo). Video, text and audio will be important characteristics of this course.

The Course

The characteristics of this course are:

  • It is free.
  • It is open.
  • It is self-paced.
  • It is non-linear.
  • It is an introduction to observation and analysis.
  • It shares content from a number of authors.
  • It offers open badges to acknowledge your involvement and engagement in the course.
  • Content is shared under a CC BY 3.0 license unless otherwise indicated (see for example the licenses of the three images used in this post).
  • It will flourish with discussion and sharing.
  • It will change throughout the course.
  • It will remain on the public internet as a resource for discovery and sharing.

This Week: Week 1

We recommend that you:

Look at the Connecting and Sharing resources in the About the Course Module.

Spend some time finding your way around the OpenLearning platform (including the Need Help? page) for this course.

How about …

Visiting the Getting Started Activity.

Looking at the Introduction: Connecting and Sharing.

Then checking out Connectivism.

We realise that this is a personal learning journey for all of us. One of my hopes is that we share these journeys through the open sharing of our personal learning environments. You might find the Personal Learning Environments resource of interest

Modules

This course has five modules. All five of them are available today. Other content will be added subsequently and we will let you know about any changes to content.

Our idea is for you to follow your interests.

We have set aside a month to share and discuss ideas.

I am hoping to monitor discussions and deal with any requests for clarification. Please let me know if I can be of help.

To make this a 24 hour a day experience, Darrell Cobner and his colleagues at Cardiff Met will monitor the course whilst Australia sleeps.

We do see enormous opportunities for conversations and exchange. We do not have any formal webinars planned and we are not using Universal Time stamps for our work.

We realise that what we are offering is fallible and that it is constructed by all of us.

We hope you are going to enjoy the course and I am keen to learn if I can be of any service to you as you work your way through the course. I am just an email away either through OpenLearning or at this email address.

The Whisperings Within The Course

It is fascinating to find other locations where the approaches used in the course are explored.

For example, Uberveillance‘s Ethos statement is:

This website provides the general public, the community and those afforded free and unconditional access to the world wide web, access to information regarding the concept and understandings of Uberveillance. This website provides invited Authors an opportunity to directly contribute to the development of the website whilst maintaining an open dialogue with the general public.

Uberveillance’s objective is to provide open comment that is:

  • relevant to the topic – is not selling nor spamming
  • conversational – pictures and addresses the audience
  • coherent – maintains consistency
  • respectful – provides reading enjoyment, challenge and value
  • generative – builds trust and connection

 

The spirit of this  #OAPS101 course is invitational, voluntary and supportive. It aims to build trust and connections through participation. It seeks to do so through public sharing.

Photo Credits

Dawn Platform (Isuru Senevi, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

The Road Ahead is Shrouded in Mist (Joysaphine, CC By-NC 2.0)

Share @Mehanata Bulgarian Bar, NYC (o.blaat, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)


6 Comments

A Day at the #ASTN2012 Conference

The Australian Sports Technologies Network (ASTN) Annual Conference was held in The Captain’s Room, Simonds Stadium, Kardinia Park, Geelong on 2 November.

Senator Kate Lundy opened this inaugural ASTN Conference. Senator Lundy, the Minister for Sport and the Minister Assisting for Industry and Innovation is a passionate advocate for sport and technology. I think Australian sport is served remarkably by her. She even found time to tweet (#ASTN2012 was the tag for the conference) about the event.

 

The Chair of the Board of the Australian Sports Commission, John Wiley added his welcome to Conference delegates. In his talk, John noted the creativity, and risk appetite in the United States of America. He commented on the rewarding experience of entrepreneurial spirit and discussed how this might be expressed as a national competitive advantage through the combination of sport, science and research. John saw a great opportunity to combine these in the ASTN.

John did discuss the retention of Intellectual Property (IP) and the systematic approach commercial success. He thought the NASA model was an excellent example of this approach. John cited two examples of the commercialisation of IP in Australian sport: the development of the MiniMax tracking units that emerged from a Cooperative Research Centre; and the emergence of the CSIRO/AIS RF WASP technology.

John concluded his talk with the observation that the sport sector is good at innovating but poor at commercialising. He noted that risk capital is becoming more available. He suggested that two key issues need to be addressed in growingsports technologies markets: how to develop a culture of partnership and collaboration; and how to support the people who do make a difference.

He noted that post London Olympics and Paralympics, ASTN has a very important role to play and he welcomed the Australian Government’s support for ASTN.

The newly elected Mayor of Geelong, Keith Fagg, welcomed delegates too.

Thereafter there was a packed day of presentations and discussions.

Danny Samson shared the findings of his Lifting Our Game: Developing sports technologies to create value in his Crossing the boundary: from invention to commercial outcomes talk. Danny discussed pathways from invention to commercial outcomes. He lauded sport technology invention engines but lamented the limited commercialisation activity to date. He shared his experience of his involvement in the Diggerworks community of practice as an example of how a sector can come together to integrate research, development and commercial outcomes. He pointed to Samsung’s flourishing as a research and development organisation.

John Bertrand followed on from Danny and discussed Leading High Performance and Technology Innovation in Sport. He shared his experiences of start up ventures in the 1990s and used his current involvement with Sailing’s High Performance program in the pursuit of best practice to discuss how successful organisations position themselves. At present, the High Performance program is undertaking a benchmarking study of systems that support athletes, coaches, and administrators. John concluded his presentation with a the discussion of the soul component of success and the spirit of winning inspired by his conversations with Victor Kovalenko.

There followed five panel presentations and discussions.

First Panel Discussion

National Sporting Organisations and Their Technology Needs

Phil Martin (Australian Football League), Alisa Camplin-Warner, Alec Buttfield (Cycling Australia) and Nick Brown (Australian Institute of Sport)

Second Panel Discussion

The Sporting Goods Industry and Sports Consumer Trends

Ian Krawitz (10 Thousand Feet), Shannon Walker (Australian Sporting Goods Association), Paul Faulkner (Nike Asia-Pacific), Chris Morgan (Associated Retailers)

Third Panel Discussion

Australia’s Sports Technology research expertise: Insights from our universities and research centres (Part 1)

 Franz Konstantin Fuss (RMIT University), Michael McKenna (Victoria University), Paul Collins (Deakin University), Richard Helmer (CSIRO).

Fourth Panel Discussion

Australia’s Sports Technology research expertise: Insights from our universities and research centres (Part 2)

Daniel James (Griffith University), Keith Lyons (University of Canberra), Leon Piterman (Monash University), Nick Brown (Australian Institute of Sport)

Fifth Panel Discussion

(Chaired by James Demetriou, Australian Sports Technology Ventures)

Sports Technologies and Business: What it takes to be successful

Brian Cooney (IMG Sports Technology Group), Brendan Denning (Albion Sports), Geoff Maloney (POD Active) Nick Maywald (Sporting Pulse)

The day concluded with the ASTN’s inaugural Sports Tech Investment Pitching Competition. Albion Sports took out the first prize.

It was a whirlwind of a day in the Captain’s Room. I was very impressed by the range of ideas and practices that were shared at the Conference. I do think that this is a great time to explore a connectivist approach in a burgeoning Australian Sports Technologies Network.

I am optimistic that the day stimulated thoughts about a non-zero sum approach to the flourishing of Sport Technology in Australia. There are enormous opportunities to be explored and realised.


1 Comment

Off to the ASTN Annual Conference 2 November

I am travelling to Geelong tomorrow to attend the first annual conference of the Australian Sports Technologies Network (ASTN).

You can find a copy of the program here.

The conference is preceded by a Sports Tech Commercialsation Boot Camp.

University partners in the ASTN have an opportunity to present some background about their interest in Sport Technology.

This is the presentation I will make on behalf of the University of Canberra.


Leave a comment

#OAPS101 Participants

It is less than a week now to the start of the Observing and Analysing Performance in Sport SOOC (#OAPS101).

As of this morning we have 134 participants enrolled. I am delighted that so many people are interested in this small open online course (SOOC).

It is intended to be an exploration in open sharing and connecting. I like the idea that this course will be sustained by intrinsic motivation.

We have tried to make participation as easy as possible. Although nominally the course will run through November, all the content for the course will be available when we go live on 5 November.

We think it will be important for participants to look at the Connecting and Sharing Module first in order to appreciate the functionality of the OpenLearning platform but even this is negotiable. Thereafter the course welcomes non-linear participation in the SOOC.

We have no webinars planned in universal time and I see three ways we will connect and share:

1. Discussion forums

2. Video posts

3. Participation portfolios within or beyond the OpenLearning blog and wiki options

We aim to manage the discussion forum as a 24 hour activity each day. Colleagues here in Australia and in the United Kingdom will monitor the discussions. I aim to follow as much of the discussion as I can throughout the course.

I am hopeful that the month will be a great time for produsers … using and producing resources to share under a Creative Commons license.

We have two Open Badges to offer in this course.

Enrolled

* You enrolled for the course.
* You hose a personal path through the material.
* You submitted a summary statement about your experience of the course.

Participant

* You enrolled for the course.
* You chose a personal path through the material.
* You used the OpenLearning tools to contribute to discussion or to comment (karma).
* You developed an e-portfolio to record your involvement in the course and to reflect on your experience of the course.

We hope the distinction between enrollment and participation is reasonable. We think that the participation mode will enable a community of practice to flourish.

Earlier this month I wrote about the kind of atmosphere that we hoped would pervade the course.

Stephen Downes provided me with a timely reminder about this in one of today’s OLDaily posts. In it he observes:

If you were to review my writing on MOOCs and similar phenomena you would see me most frequently refer to (what we would call) ‘students’ as ‘participants’. The term ‘participant’ to me most accurately represents the relation between MOOC and an individual person – they are not ‘students’ because that implies studying and the master-student relationship, which are antithetical to MOOCs. Nor either are they referred to (much) as ‘learners’, as this suggests that learning is the dominant paradigm at work here. In fact, the logic of MOOCs is not the logic of learning, but rather, of participation, and that’s why I use the word.

This is why we use the term participant too in #OAPS101.

Photo Credit

Fireworks


1 Comment

Environments

I happened upon three discussions of environments yesterday.

The first came via Stephen Downes with a link to to a post about the Telefonplan School in Sweden. The school was designed by RosanBosch.

Other designs include the Efterskole, Brotorp and Sodermalm. These are some of the links to the coverage of these designs.

Shortly after reading about school design I was on my way to Canberra listening to Radio National. Michael Dunlop was Cameron Wilson’s guest on Bush Telegraph. The trail for the conversation was:

A new CSIRO study shows that ecosystems we grew up with will be changed so much as a result of climate change that they will look, sound and smell completely different in years to come. The study is the first Australia-wide assessment of the magnitude of the ecological impact that climate change could have on biodiversity. It says the scale of the problem could have major implications for conservation policy and the management of Australia’s system of national parks and reserves. The report predicts that by 2070 most places in Australia will have environments that are more ecologically different from current conditions than they are similar.

Shortly after interviewing Michael, Cameron spoke with Danica Leys. She is a co-founder of the social media platform AgChatOz, a community forum for rural Australians to connect and discuss issues affecting their lives. AgChatOz hosts a weekly discussion on Twitter on Tuesday nights from 8-10pm.  This week there was a live event in Canberra.

There is more information about AgChatOz at their web site. I liked the rationale for social media use:

The great thing about #AgChatOZ is that allows farmers to tell their side of any story. It is breaking down barriers of rural isolation and allowing for consumers to engage with farmers and understand the inner workings of a farm and rural environment.

With more than 50% of the world’s population under 30 years old, more than 80% of online Australians familiar with Twitter, and Facebook reaching nearly 1 billion users, it is no surprise that social media is one of the most powerful communication tools of the 21st century.

Social media has allowed users of the AgChatOZ platform to have a global reach with relative ease. Our discussions have trended globally on Twitter more than twice, which has been one element of measuring our success. The calibre of groups and individuals participating and continue to engage also prove we are reaching the right audience, not purely “preaching to the converted”. We often engage with; Ministers, peak farm lobby groups, environmental groups, farmers and city consumers to name a few.

Social media can empower and connect country people, it can assist in bridging the gap between “country and city” and it allows for the paddock to plate story to be told. It is vital and crucial in building relationships and forming a better understanding of the diversity of rural people, their lives and industry.

Most importantly, it is crucial to remember that social media is simply a tool in the process of communication. Social media is not a “silver bullet” to the issues the industry faces and will continue to face, but it does provide a free, powerful and limitless platform to be heard.

My environment day ended with showing a friend the INSPIRE Centre on the University of Canberra campus. It has been built with sustainable principles and supports approaches to learning evident in Swedish plans and #tag conversations.

 

Photo Credits

Telefonplan School

INSPIRE Centre

 


Leave a comment

Space, Place and Flourishing

I have been wondering what to write as my 700th blog post on Clyde Street.

A link shared by my wife, Sue, provided the answer.

Jon Henley wrote in theguardian this week about a residential community near Amsterdam.

His article contains within it some of the issues that have become important for me in my growing interest in space, place and learning.

Jon reported on developments at Hogewey, “an innovative, humane and apparently affordable way of caring for people with dementia”.

Hogewey is a “smart, low, brick-built complex, completed in early 2010. A compact, self-contained model village on a four-acre site on the outskirts of town, half of it is open space: wide boulevards, cosy side-streets, squares, sheltered courtyards, well-tended gardens with ponds, reeds and a profusion of wild flowers. The rest is neat, two-storey, brick-built houses, as well as a cafe, restaurant, theatre, minimarket and hairdressing salon”.

There are 152 residents who have been classified as suffering from severe or extreme dementia. The residents average 83 years of age. Jon notes that “They live, six or seven to a house, plus one or two carers, in 23 different homes. Residents have their own spacious bedroom, but share the kitchen, lounge and dining room.”

Hogewey aims to “relieve the anxiety, confusion and often considerable anger that people with dementia can feel by providing an environment that is safe, familiar and human; an almost-normal home where people are surrounded by things they recognise and by other people with backgrounds, interests and values similar to their own”; and to maximise the quality of people’s lives by “Keeping everyone active. Focusing on everything they can still do, rather than everything they can’t. Because when you have dementia, you’re ill, but there may really not be much else wrong with you.”

There are 25 clubs, residents are encouraged to keep up with day-to-day tasks they have always done.

Hogeway has homes designed from seven “lifestyle categories” with moods evoked through choice of furnishing, decoration, music, and food. It is connected to its local community.

What I liked about Jon’s account of Hogeway was exactly what attracted me to Kevin McLeod’s ideas for The Triangle. I have learned it is possible to plan for and support personal difference through a commitment to the quality of life in a designed context. This has encouraged me to think about spaces and places for learning.

I felt very reassured by Hogeway and encouraged to think about dignity and care.

Photo Credit

Oma Zylstra, biking along the canal