And in conclusion...

In reviewing each of my entries to help me summarize what I have learned, I realized that I have absorbed quite a bit in seven weeks, and the readings and discussions have raised some questions in my mind that I hope to pursue as studies. I have enjoyed my first venture back into the world of the scholar.

I regard myself as someone who thinks critically as part of my nature… the culture of the city I grew up in, New York, is one of skepticism, and then my extensive training in the physical sciences has taught me how to question and analyze. However, there has been much to learn with this course, and many take-away lessons… First is a clear awareness of bias across media sources.

Ownership of news organizations is becoming more and more centralized, as with Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. Consequently, the viewpoint in which the news is pitched is becoming more and more narrow. To circumvent this issue, there are now many independent sources of information through the Internet, cable tv, and others, but you still have no assurance that any of it is true. Despite their bias, conventional news sources like newspapers and broadcast channels at least go through a verification process, if not for the altruistic higher ideal of bringing accurate content to the public then to avoid law suits. There is no such assurance on the web. Within the KA readings, the suggested steps to help ascertain the sources and veracity of online information was helpful (whois.com, About Us, …) although as I stated in my blog, none of these approaches is full-proof.

As a result of this course, I will be more diligent about analyzing the sources of content that I access. Who/what is the agent that produced the information, and is there a possible bias there? As I thought about this point, I remembered the Saccharin study published during my childhood and the ensuing controversy that had a lasting impact on me. Saccharin was the first commercial sugar-substitute that hit the market, and was very popular until a study was published that linked this substance with cancer. It was not until an investigative report was published years later that people learned the “definitive” study was funded by the Sugar industry, and the results were brought into question. The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that it should be a requirement for each credible published study to identify its funding source, so that readers have full disclosure as to possible biases.

Also, I need to be aware of my own biases, which will affect my approach to my research. In forming my hypothesis and experimental design, in my literature search and in my discussion of the results, I will be sure to address alternative views and how my study will address these as well. I need to be especially vigilant in not just looking for studies that support my viewpoint, but also determining whether there is a body of evidence that points to other concepts. This is not to say that I have to abandon my theory in the wake of conflicting studies, but that my study will need to address how my experiment results support my hypothesis and negates theirs in order to be accepted and make a contribution.

When I think about the issue of urban legends, directed to my area of interest, I am drawn to considering the validity of sources of information, and in particular, whether news outlets are becoming conveyors of urban myths rather than actual news content. If urban legends truly are a manifestation of our hidden fears, then the trend for news to be shaped into whatever fear, or myth, draws their audience means they are myth makers and commentators rather than reporters. I will regularly check sites like Factcheck.org whenever dealing with current publicized issues, like political campaigns or proposed legislation.

Turning to my area of interest – new media and education, I found the discussions around the tEcosystem, with concepts like “technology both connects and disconnects”, very informative and intriguing. I think it is evident that the Millenial Generation is very comfortable with using more remote forms of communication to convey more personal kinds of information than preceding generations (Gen X or Baby Boomers). With respect to education, I also believe that one’s reaction and therefore ability to learn online also varies by generation. Readings in this area have helped me to focus some ideas I already had exploring the generational differences in online learning.

(On a personal note, reading about the various aspects of the tEcosystem has convinced me of the importance to purposely “unplug” and make the time to be alone with my thoughts, as I think those can be the most creative periods.)

It is clear to me that the way people will learn and the role teachers will play in the future will be quite different. Richardson states that “educators will need to co-learn with their students – enable them to learn according to their passions”. Through the Internet, there is access to more information than anyone could use, so that students will no longer have to rely on the memory and presentation skills of their teacher, a model of “what to learn”. Instead, teachers will need to train students in “how to learn”, how to access information and more importantly, how to evaluate its authenticity. The ability to employ critical thinking skills will be more critical than ever. I recall reading a study that predicted anyone born after 1980 will have at least 8 different careers. There are no more life-time career positions, and the ability to learn and re-learn will be a critical skill in the future.

During our NSO, we discussed the effect of music in media. I am interested in investigating how this aspect might affect learning. As I currently deal with online training, I wonder how the addition of music to web-based education might impact the ability to absorb material, especially since this pedagogy is rather impersonal – could music help offset this?

When discussing consumer psychology, we focused on the need to belong as a motivator for consumer purchases. The related body of information, about needing to relate and to belong, is very important in understanding how to motivate people. In my case, these studies may provide insight in how to motivate people to learn.

As an instructional designer and technical writer, I have to be very aware of how the written word is changing and evolving. Will more terse forms of communication still be as effective in conveying knowledge?

As a technical writer, I am well aware of the importance word choice has in conveying technical information, but in reviewing the readings on Clothaire Rapaille, I began to wonder whether the selective use of certain "code" words could exert an enhancing effect on learning when used for the “bridging” or “motivational” parts of the content, perhaps words associated with success, or determination? (I should note that I do not believe in code words as derived or presented by Rapaille, but I do believe that some words conjure up an automatic association that perhaps could be utilized.) 

Another area of interest from my readings to my potential research - does knowledge acquisition correlate with the state of the technology? As Shirky said, “when the technology becomes boring, the social aspects become interesting”. First, the focus is on the tool itself… then, once the technology becomes familiar, how it is being used becomes the focus. With current online education, you can see both stages co-existing across various audiences, although with each year, the technology becomes more commonplace. As we have discussed, this is one of my areas of research interest – the potential generational variation in the effectiveness of online education. Generations alive today have had differing degrees of exposure to media in their lifetime, and for older generations, I believe learning will be more a function of the pedagogy or delivery mechanism.

Probably the most important aspect of this KA for my profession is how the new media will be utilized in education. I am particularly interested in whether its adoption pattern will follow the classical form for technology of “it solves all issues” to “it solves no issues” to “it solves some issues”. I hope to be on the forefront in analyzing and advising on the appropriate uses of the media in education to avoid these extreme ups and downs and instead focus from the beginning on its proper uses, based on a more analytical, reasoned approach.
While we talked about the negative aspects of gatekeeping in media, I can also see a role for it. As I mentioned in an earlier post, of course it is possible to have folks post questions and answers in a wiki or blog as an alternative to formal training, but you have to ask some important questions… are the answers being posted correct? Are they presented in a format that is readily understandable, especially when dealing with people from diverse cultures, or with varied skill sets, or those who have disabilities, etc.? So, I think there is a need for a gatekeeper, a quality check, when using media to convey formal knowledge, as opposed to using it to informally communicate thoughts or experiences.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, Shirky’s idea that 2-way communication tools don’t actually create groups, and vice-versa, is a provocative, insightful, and important idea, and deserves more thought about how this might apply to the use of new media in education.

I’ve really enjoyed this KA and look forward to exploring some of the research topics it has raised in my mind.