First - I tend to agree with Donald that most Web 2.0 activities are more independent actions of individuals than true collaborative work (team work) on a work product.
But - I think Donald's missed the point that you can have independent activity that builds on itself to form a type of collaboration. This is true in most project teams. You don't have everyone work on the same part of the document at the same time. Rather, you divide the work, and bring it together.
Donald has missed some things. For example, he asserts - "Even Wikipedia is written by separate individuals, not collaborative groups." Okay, sure, there are individuals contributing to an article, but if several people edit the same article (such as the definition of eLearning 2.0), is that somehow not collaborative? I don't get it Donald?
Another quote from the post:
I’ve never really bought the idea that I’ll learn from a group of learners who know as little about the subject as me. I don’t force my twin son to learn
French from his equally poor French-speaking brother, and am now convinced that much of what passes for groupwork in primary and secondary school classrooms is just chaos.
Donald - do you think you'll learn French without speaking it with other people? Have you been in an MBA course that uses case studies? Yes, you do need intelligent individuals to discuss the case with. But, wow, I think you've really missed something.
I also wonder if Donald's bias is shared out there.
I'll be very curious to see if Nancy White or Stephen Downes respond to this. They'll likely be even more animated in their response.
No comments:
Post a Comment