Paper - Transformative Learning Conference 2014 at the Columbia University (NY)

Department of Education

University of Siena

25-26 October 2014 – Columbia University NY

Transformative Learning and Social networks.

Workplace, School and Informal Educational Settings

by Claudio Melacarne, Loretta Fabbri

What about the research group…

¨  Three universities involved

¨  Two years long ¨  Funded by Tuscany Region (Italy) € 530,000

Claudio Melacarne – Loretta Fabbri

Digital Learning

-  On average of people who use S.N. is 37% -  The online courses in and out workplaces are growing

Is it an opportunity to promote TL? If so, how can we plan on-line setting to support TL?


Region % of population in each group at 2014 (Emarketer.com)

North America 53%

Western Europe 44%

Central and Eastern Europe 44%

Latin America 40%

Asia- Pacific 22%

Middle East and Africa 18%

The research objectives

¨  Different contexts ¨  Online settings

¨  Organizational conditions

Transformative Learning


The point of view

¨  Transformation needs specific conditions to happen

¨  The learning is a mediated process and technology is increasingly the medium we use everyday to learn


The contexts

Schools Workplace Informal adult groups

-  Digital Natives -  Formal learning -  Age: 15-18

-  No familiarity in the use of SN -  Non formal learning -  Age: 30-50

-  No familiarity in the use of SN -  Informal learning -  Age: 50-60

Why?


What we asked the 3 communities to do…

Community of students

Sonna Platform

Community of adults

Community of doctors

Research group

Would you be interested in working/studying with a new on-

line platform to resolve a problem of yours?

- A platform mixed with Facebook - A friendly platform where you can learn using a ‘serious game’

How we worked: the 4 work packages

WP1 – Understand the situated knowledge

WP2 – Plan the tools to support learning processes (Sonna online platform)

WP3 – Coaching and supporting the users (5 workshops for each group)

WP4 – Support the stabilisation of the platform in the community


a) Engage the group sharing the

contents

The data

Using Sonna Platform we can monitoring whole users’ activities in personal Facebook profile too

¨  Overall, the platform has registered about 2.600 accesses

¨  The platform has traced the publication of content on the 113 content management system, 51 of which have been modified several times over the course of the trial

¨  The users involved in the experiment from 16 October 2012 to 13 January 2013 made about 222.000 comments, 4.000 feeds, 174.000 links posted, 386.000 “likes”

Findings. The theoretical and practical implications


①  The technological practices embodied in the 3 communities

②  Different type of learning (instrumental, communicative and transformative learning) ③  The online and organizational settings

①  Why do they use SNs or Technological tools in their communities?

Social Network

Technological practices

Professional or education problems

Personal and informal problems

Hospital: Medical problem

Formal communication

Schools

Informal adults group

①  How do they use SNs or Technological tools? Social Network

Technological practices

Share information

Build new knowledge

Hospital

Schools

Informal adults group

The limits of theories and practices in use in the communities involved

¨  Why are you asking me to use my ‘personal identity’ to work into a ‘formal setting’?

¨  Why do I have to use a “serious game” to learn something?

¨  How can I trust the information if I don’t know your formal role?

¨  Role Vs Identity

¨  Game Vs Serious issues

¨  Ambiguity of the SNs communication

①  What do they think about the suggested use of our on-line platform?

+ high technological literacy − the use is defined by users


②  Different types of learning

Subjects who used the platform told us in the interviews and in a final questioner that it was important to understand what someone means when they communicate through the platform.


SNs opportunities + developing communicative learning processes − developing instrumental or transformative learning processes


③  The online and organizational settings (SNs)

+ Fast feedback (1 day) + The goals have to be satisfied in a short time + Blended approach (reducing the ambiguity) + Do not mix personal and professional issues + Align the on-line work (SNs) with the organizational strategies


Suggestions. Are SNs an opportunity to promote TL? Yes, but…

¨  Fast

¨  Oriented and situated ¨  Blended

F

O

B


Contact us to share projects and researches:

[email protected]

[email protected]

https://unisi.academia.edu/CMelacarne

Thank you…


References Blin, F., Munro, M. (2008). Why hasn’t technology disrupted academics’ teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory.

Computers & Education, 50(2), 475-490. Boud, D., & Middleton, H. (2003). Learning from others at work: communities of practice and informal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning. 15(5), 194-202. Brookfield, S.D. (2005). The power of critical theory: Liberating adult learning and teaching. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Carrozzino M. (Eds.) (2013). Social networks and Web-based Serious Games as Novel Educational Tools, Procedia Computer Science. 15, 303-306. Cragg C.E. (Eds.) (2001). Perspective transformation in RN-to-BSN distance education. Journal of Nursing Education. 40(7), 317-322. Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide for educators of adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cranton, P. (2010). Transformative Learning in an Online Environment. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology. 1(2), 1-9. Erstad, O. (2014). The Expanded Classroom – Spatial Relations in Classroom Practices using ICT. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 1, 8-22. Fedeli M., Giampaolo M., Boucouvalas (2013). The Experience of Creating and Using Learning Contracts in a Higher Education Blended Course: Analysis of

Student Voices in an On-line Discussion. Educational Reflective Practices. 1, 59-76. DOI: 10.3280/ERP2013-001005 Heath, C., Luff, P. (2000). Technology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. King, K. P. (1997). Examining learning activities and transformational learning. International Journal of University Adult Education. 36(3), 23-37. Marsick, V.J., Manigaulte, J.D. (2011). Supporting the Development of Youth Development workers through Action-Based, Critically Reflective Learning.

Educational Reflective Practices. 2(1), 7-36. DOI: 10.3280/ERP2013-001004 Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Mezirow, J., Taylor, E.W. (Eds.) (2011). Transformative Learning: theory to practice. Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher Education. San Francisco:

John Wiley. Taylor, E. (2010). Transformative learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. 119, 5-15. DOI: 10.1002/ace.301 Taylor, E. W., Cranton P. (Eds.) (2012). Handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Wang, Victor C.X, Cranton P. (2013): Transformative Learning and Technology in Adult and Vocational Education. International Journal of Adult Vocational

Education and Technology. 9(1), 26-37. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-5780-9.ch063 Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ziegahn, L. (2001). ‘Talk’ about Culture Online: The Potential fro Transformation. Distance Education. 22, 114-50.

Paper - Transformative Learning Conference 2014 at the Columbia University (NY)

Documents

Transcript of Paper - Transformative Learning Conference 2014 at the Columbia University (NY)