Note to self:
I’ve downloaded Swan, K. and Shea, P. (2004) ‘The Development of Virtual Learning Communities’, Learning Together Online: Research on Asynchronous Learning Networks. Remember to read it when writing literature review.
Well, I’ve written up my pilot study in the form of a 5000-word journal article. The idea is that my supervisors critique it, then it gets critiqued at my probationary review, then it emerges as a lovely fully formed article which I can send off for publication. The only slight snag is that, owing to pressure of time, I’m only halfway through the pilot study. According to my article I have this wonderful, validated research instrument. I suspect, when I actually finish the pilot, that I’ll have something that works a bit. In some cases. And not all of the time. Still, the difficult lit review bit is in place, and the justification of why I did the study. It’ll just be more interesting to other people if it actually works 🙂
 And my U500 conference abstract is written and my presentation prepared and practised. For the first time since (um, checks PDA) 28 March I’ve got my workload down to a manageable level and things look as if they’re on target, and nobody’s imminently expecting me to organise a birthday party.
of course, over the next month I’ll have to actually domy pilot study, write the other half of my probationary review, give my U500 conference paper, finish the now-three articles that I have sitting three-quarters written on my desktop, write a 32-page annual report for Bethany and Jacob’s school, arange to get the school CD copied 250 times, take over as chair of governors at Miriam’s school… I’m beginning to feel quite tired again. Good thing it’s the weekend.
Right, I’ve pulled my data to pieces, word by word. Not sure how useful that was. Time wil tell. Now I’ve read through the majority of my notes for the last six months, and I’ve made a list of ways to come at this data. I’ve listed them below so I won’t lose them.
Questions
Are they happy online?
How do they acknowledge / react to M?
Are they supported or hindered by the ‘real world’?
Where are their networks / weak ties?
Do I see them gaining trust and respect? Do they demonstrate reliability and ability?
What types of thing are praised by the group?
What forms of validation are there? Which ideas are valued and respected?
Which ideas and suggestions are ignored?
How do they work to establish identities?
Which stories are being rehearsed?
How embodied is it? (Interesting, but possibly irrelevant)
Are identities mobilised to support learning?
How is identity established?
What are the backstage areas, and how are they used?
When do people first model each online skill? Which are taken up?
Identities
Who creates the subject positions? OU? BPS? Students? Tutors?
Which identities/positions are readily taken up? Eg nervous, unsure.
Online identities: suckers, newbies, social loafers
Is this text or identity? How do they treat it?
Constructing identity via projection of beliefs / expectations / social states (Crook).
ApproachesÂ
Follow the trajectories of individual students. When are they involved? Who with?
Key incidents: breakdown, Xmas, M, deadlines
Social network theory: Haythornthwaite
Prototype theory
Informality
Do their emotions relate to their engagement?
What informal relations do I see developing?
Is the effectiveness of the group in any way related to social interaction?
Playfulness / informality / nonsense / off-topic discussion.
Follow up
Lapadat – the advantages of asynchronicity. Are these borne out here?
Find out more about interpretative repertoires.
Weinberger on social scripts – I think this is like modelling behaviours. Check.
Do I see clarification / elaboration / interpretation? – other criteria CF Mercer.
Schrire on higher-order thinking. What evidence of that is visible?
Murphy’s graded classification of collaboration.
Burnett – who don’t they accept info from? Who gets ignored? M??
Learning community / Community of practice
What makes this a learning community or a CoP? Find a definition.
Seems to have all the aspects of a CoP except for being voluntary.
Do they articulate their purpose / goal? Is it the same for all of them?
Remember to consider the links between prototype theory and interpretative repertoires.
Won’t say too much about this, as I’ve recalled Holland’s book to the library and I guess I’ll get round to reading it one day.
‘”Perhaps an AA member can/will tell the story of her life as an alcoholic only sith support of other AA members. The story lies within her zone of proximal development, if not within her sole capacity.'”
Holland and co point out that Vygotsky de-emphasises power, ownership and control in considering the ZPD. Participants are not equal – the ZPD is a place for struggle. They propose the concept of positionality to visualise individual stances in sociocultural worlds [it looks as if Rasmussen is saying that Holland et al came up with this in 1998. That can’t be the case? Can it? No, not according to Google].
Holland refers to the positional aspects of identity. Wonder whether everyone agrees with position and identity being separate? Or, would I be more correct in wondering whether positionality and identity are separate?