Jess’ E-Learning Blog

I was just reading my las tlbog entry (checking for typos ^_^) when I had a thought. Part of the reason that Second Life is still on the cards for DoCS is that they feel that they can afford to wait an extra few years for the system requirements for SL to come down, while DoCS (perhaps, maybe?) upgrades the NGO computers to ba able to handle SL. 

But, in a few years time, what is the possibility that there be some brand new, fantastic use of the internet for learning which is better for DoCS and the NGO’s than virtual worlds? Or what if the technology to support SL improves, but so does SL’s demand on said technology? Could DoCS possibly be chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow?

I think that it might be more important to design and implement basic e-learning strategies sooner rather than later, which can then be evaluated and re-designed or added to. This allows for DoCS to make have their first e-learning on a smaller scale, where they can learn a lot about how to implement e-learning in their situation while minimising risks.

I made a bit of an idiot out of myself at class a few weeks ago when we had the presentation in Second Life and our lecturer told us that DoCS is interested in using virtual worlds in training. I just went ahead and blurted out “why?” in front of everyone. To me it was simply black and white - virtual worlds don’t check the ‘must be able to function with limited resources’ box so let’s move on – so i thought what I said was completely logical and warranted.

Until I remembered that what I saw in black and white, DoCS and Anne want us to see in shades of grey. So, just because the technology isn’t up to scratch, doesn’t mean that I should void the whole option. Second Life is great because it provides a social learning environment through interaction with others, which is something the NGO learners relate well to and enjoy. In addition, while a lot of e-learning technologies can feel quite isolating, having your own avatar and being able to see other people’s avatars may facilitate a sense of community and personalism in this type of learning.

I still think that there are problems with using virtual worlds. While download pressures may decline in time, issues such as NGO learner’s trust in and knowledge of computers may not improve. If this is the case, it means that the learners will find it difficult to adapt to the idea of a virtual world – students in my class last year had a hard time wrapping their heads around it, and we’re supposed to be technology savvy – and the quality of learning derived would be low. 

I think that if DoCS is determined to implement virtual worlds, now or in the future, then they will need to set up some initiatives so that learners can gradually become accustomed to computers and the Internet in general before they’re thrown into virtual worlds.

I’ve been thinking about organising my Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) for my Cert IV in training and assessment, and I’m encountering a few problems which are starting to convince me that I really shouldn’t bother trying to do this… or at least not this way.

Firstly, while it may not appear to be huge, with only about a half dozen competencies, the TAA04 has a whole bunch of elements and performance criteria inside those competencies. So, if I manage to find enough evidence to support that I have actually learned all of the content, my final product won’t be big; it will be enormous. 

Which leads to the next problem; an easy way to store all of this, without losing paperwork, is to have it all stored digitally. So I made a wiki and devoted a page to each competency, where I can put copies of all the assignments, letters and other proof I need to prove RPL. But then I realised that putting three years of my schooling on the net could become a big security problem as I’m not really comfortable with people just accessing and using my hard work however they want. Plus, the final product would still be enormous, only intangibly enormous. 

Then, another problem I’ve encountered occurred when I saw the bits and pieces of what I need get to prove RPL. Start with letters from so and so, add specific assignments and then combine with specifically altered assignments. Toss the whole thing in a bowl and garnish with work experience (which I don’t have) and you’re ready to go: provided you pay the required fee when you submit your portfolio of RPL. I haven’t learnt half the elements listed, and I need to go through a lot of beaureacratic red tape to provide evidence of the rest.

And, to top it all off, the certification is only valid for five or so years, after which you have to go through the whole process again…

I don’t think it’s worth going to that much hassle to get the RPL. I do value the certification, but this amount of work is going to interfere with the rest of my university work. I think that I might just go to TAFE after uni, enrol in the TAA04 and apply for exemptions in subjects which I’ve already done.