Clyde Street

Learning, Teaching, Performing


Leave a comment

Connected through discoverability: Zeitgeist 2012

Zgrab

I am fortunate to receive regular news feeds from John Kessel (Director, Sport Development at USA Basketball).

John and his network have shared some remarkable resources with me this year.

This one arrived today and i thought I would share it too. It is the Zeitgeist year in review (1.2 trillion searches in 146 languages).


Leave a comment

Online Resources for Coaches

4344268766_1ae903c997_bIn the early days of public Internet access I found my way to Brent Rushall’s Coaching Science Abstracts. In the mid and late 1990s I found it a revelation to be able to access curated resources that saved me time and introduced me to a range of topics I may not have considered.

Volume 1(1), Training Principles, was my induction to online sharing. Between 1995 and 2002 I monitored Brent’s summaries with great interest. On the current welcome page to the Abstracts, Brent notes:

These abstracts interpret research articles for practicing coaches and others interested in applied sport science. They are drawn from the personal files of Professor Rushall. Some dated articles are included because their content is still current. Most articles are interpreted for coaches of elite athletes and programs. The contents are changed monthly and may or may not be thematic. Usually six issues per year will be provided.

Since Brent’s retirement from San Diego State University in 2004, abstracts included in Coaching Science Abstracts:

have increasingly come from the annual ACSM conference. The scope of other reading sources has diminished. ACSM contributions represent a wide variety of very recent works. Often they go on to become published articles in formal journals. It is my belief that what is presented now on this web site remains a good cross-section of the current thinking on the many topics covered. The standards for inclusion of referenced works remain high because each is originally supervised by at least one ACSM Fellow and this editor retains high conservative standards for evaluating the scientific rigor of each abstract’s origin.

In 2000, the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports (ISBS) launched the Coaches’ Information Service. I thought this was an outstanding initiative and was particularly impressed by Ross Sanders’s work in sharing information with coaches. The current version of the service, CoachesInfo.com, shares research from sixteen sports.

Back in 2000, the Coaches’ Information Service aimed to present scientifically sound information in an appealing and coach-friendly way. The site had scope for scientific contributions based on research and ideas expressed by coaches and sports participants.

Memories of Brent and Ross’s work came back to me this week when I received an alert to the International Rugby Board’s Coaching platform. This online resource “designed to help coaches and match officials get their hands on essential and up-to-date information for improving their coaching and officiating”. The site provides opportunities to:

  • listen to and watch coaches explaining their practices
  • plan sessions on-line and share them with fellow coaches and players

The resources on the site are available in English, Spanish and Cantonese.

IndexMy memories were stirred further by the work Stephen Mellalieu, Keith Stokes and Grant Trewartha are doing as Network Editors of the IRB Rugby Science Network. The Network is “a global network of researchers who are interested in the study of the Rugby Football codes”. The Network was launched in November 2012 at the IRB Medical Conference.

The aims of the Network are to:

  • Promote the scientific study of the game and the transfer of scientific knowledge into professional practice through international collaboration.
  • Provide an international forum for the interaction between people interested in the science and practice of Rugby Football.
  • Work towards the establishment of a periodical conference and publication for academics and practitioners interested in Rugby Football.

The Network has an application process. Network editors respond within seventy-two hours to an application to join. I was very impressed by the speed of response to my request to join. I was able to acquire an IRB passport to the site within twelve hours.

There are nine Digest Sections available in the Network. I am keen to see how all of them develop and I have a particular interest in the Match Analysis Section edited by Ken Quarrie and Simon Roberts.

It is fascinating to see the seventeen-year evolution of online resources from Brent to the IRB. I think other services like the Clearinghouse for Sport in Australia and the England and Wales Cricket Board’s new Hub Application for high performance coaches will continue this transformation.

Photo Credit

Coaches watching the fight (Michael Heiniger)


Leave a comment

Cowbird, Alex and Zadie

BCEach morning, I receive a Cowbird Story.

I have read a story a day since I my invitation to join Cowbird arrived earlier this year.

I think it is a great way to share stories within a community dedicated to personal stories.

Today’s story is from Alex Smith.

Her What is a life? story is about her grandfather, Zadie. In a short story, Alex has time to write this:

So what is it? This life. What is it when we leave this world behind? I thought about this over and over and a quote I’d come across just before I found out Zadie had passed. Words about living the width of life, not just the length. In Zadie’s case, his life is now breathing in and out in me, my brothers and sister, my cousins. We each have slices of him. Some of us givers. Others hard workers (sometimes too hard). Others too humble. There are his blue eyes in my brother. The thick glasses in a few of us. The ladies man is there. The adventurers and the gardeners are also thriving. And I definitely got the ‘talking to strangers’ gene.

Fresh from the weight of the weekend, I came back to Colorado and hung a windchime of Zadie’s on my porch. When the wind blows through it, it’s a reminder that each and every life we touch is the legacy we leave. Each story we take the time to hear. Each hug we give. Song we write. The story we create is our life… and it endures in those who are woven into it.

I like the idea that “each and every life we touch is the legacy we leave”. It makes each touch of each life very important.

Photo Credit

Bennett the Cleanser


Leave a comment

Making Connections

8104702951_b3c9388a4f_b
I am mindful of the saying “when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail”,  but …

… there are some excellent discussions going on about open learning at the moment. Even with my limited number of feeds, I have noticed a surge in discussion and sharing of practice.

This morning, I viewed Stephen Downes’ presentation The Virtual Learning Organization. I was interested in Stephen’s discussion of cooperation (slide 22), self-organisation (slide 24) and learning as immersion (slide 27) in the context of open learning.

I found David Worlick’s recent post on Cultivating Your Personal Learning Network 2.0 a fascinating read. It gave me renewed enthusiasm to engage with Apple’s iBooks Author (iBA).

I had the same feeling about the announcement of the launch of the Sketchnote Handbook. I wondered if Mike Rohde’s insights might help me develop my aesthetics of sharing. Today was the first time I accessed Sketchnote Army (courtesy of a Paper.Li feed).

I liked Dave Cormier’s discussion of Open courses and content creation. I have spent some time thinking about multiplicity mentioned in the post:

When all participants create content, you have the potential for multiplicity. You can have a discussion from multiple viewpoints, from different contexts, from different life experiences. When different contextual beliefs are combined with difference in ability, race, gender, culture, race etc… a myriad of possibilities and viewpoints can come to the fore. When the course is opened up to the world, your chance for this increases manyfold.

I followed up on Deleuze and Guattari’s work as a result of Dave’s discussion.

I had an opportunity to read John Daniel’s Making Sense of MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility too.

All of which took me back to Stephen’s presentation and the attraction of cMOOCs:

Slide 10

Photo Credit

Sketchnote of Tina Seelig’s TEDxStanford Talk on Creativity, (Stephen Collins)


2 Comments

Open By Design

Art

My involvement with the small open online course (SOOC) Observing and Analysing Performance in Sport has encouraged me to think a great deal about facilitating open access and supporting disparate learning expectations.

I saw the SOOC as a modest approach to the educational issues raised by cMOOCs.

There is a growing (daily) discussion of the structure of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Yesterday I linked to posts by Alan Levine and Ryan Stacey. Today I was interested to read Dave Cormier’s post Why I think open courses should be about content creation.

In the post Dave observes:

There are many good reasons for creating content when we are learning. It provides an excellent method of personal curation of ideas, of being able to keep track of your work. It allows for others (beyond an educator) to be able to see and respond to your work. For some it provides encouragement to work a little harder, to polish a little more. It could also provide an excellent opportunity to explore other skills around publishing in numerous formats. These are all quite nice… but not what I’m on about at all.

When all participants create content, you have the potential for multiplicity. You can have a discussion from multiple viewpoints, from different contexts, from different life experiences. When different contextual beliefs are combined with difference in ability, race, gender, culture, race etc… a myriad of possibilities and viewpoints can come to the fore. When the course is opened up to the world, your chance for this increases manyfold.

I think there are language issues in there too.

An alert to Inge Druckrey’s Teaching to See film encouraged me to think about the aesthetic and design possibilities for Dave’s multiplicity (note Dave’s comment on this post about Deleuze and Guattari’s work). I was delighted to learn that Edward Tufte was the Executive Producer of the film.

Once again a combination of disparate elements freely available has taken me off to think about re-presentation. Dave’s conclusion helped me to do this:

We have the capacity to connect with each other, to share experience and perspectives and to learn both from and in spite of each other. I’m certainly not suggesting that we should live in some fantastical utopia where everyone’s opinions should be shared and equally valued. Quite the contrary. One of the most difficult thing about learning with shared content is the vast amount of crap you need to sift through. Just like life.

Photo Credit

Frame grab from Teaching to See (3 minutes 20 seconds)


Leave a comment

Three Weeks at the SOOC

We have completed three weeks in the small open online course (SOOC), Observing and Analysing Performance in Sport.

It has been a relatively quiet week for online exchanges. It has given me time to reflect on the format of the SOOC and explore ideas with my fellow facilitators.

I have written daily wraps for the course.

We have 477 enrollments for the course. I am hopeful that the asynchronous, non-linear format of the SOOC enables enrollments at any time. I feel that there is nothing to miss and everything to gain through enrollment.

The quiet week has led me to think about peripheral participation and how an invisible community of practice can flourish.

I am clear that we are a SOOC rather than a massive open online course (MOOC). Following Alexis Madrigal’s lead I have been thinking about how SOOCs can mobilise the power of the dark social to grow their connections.

I have been reflecting too on the role of facilitators in SOOCs . I am extremely fortunate to have five colleagues who have shared the workload of the first three weeks of the course. This has made it possible to have a twenty-four hour service should anyone have teachable or sharing moments.

I am keen to extend the SOOC exchanges beyond a single language and during the week have been thinking about the Tower of Babel and an alternative … polylingual diversity … with nodes of sharing. The visitors to the SOOC from eighty countries could make this possible.

Photo Credit

David asks for directions


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)