Home

Bluesky · LinkedIn

Category: Continuing Education

  • Online people tagging: SNS and work-based learning

    Online people tagging: SNS and work-based learning

    Cook, John, and Norbert Pachler. “Online people tagging: Social (mobile) network (ing) services and work‐based learning.” British Journal of Educational Technology 43.5 (2012): 711-725.

    After a break for a holiday, I am down to the last few articles I want to review before I submit my assignment. I am not going to get through them all but wanted to review this one first. This is another review article which looks at SNS in the context of informal learning in work place based assessment.

    Again this starts with a critical overview of the literature. The first part is spent linking workplace based assessment with informal learning. Often a GP registrar will learn a considerable amount from working in teams, from other healthcare professionals, being supervised, from significant events and complaints. The author cites another author, Michael Eraut, who has done quite a lot of research on workplace based learning. A synopsis of one of his studies is available here which is easy reading and from which I have taken the following table from.

    A typology of Early Career Learning (Source: Eraut, 2008)

    The table is also present in the article. The point being made is that a lot of learning at work is one to one, but this can be from peers, from the teacher, from colleagues and from patients.

    The article then discusses Social Network(ing). Eraut identifies the key enablers for confidence, learning and retention of information in workplace learning were support and feedback. This in turn leads to self-efficacy, the adult learner/reflective thinker. Whilst there is a dearth of research on SNS and how they can facilitate this, the author cites several papers which explore self-efficacy and the use of scaffolding to achieve this. Scaffolding is what we do as educators in GP training, by providing face to face feedback (e.g. Problem Case Analysis) and the ePortfolio as a SpR builds up a portfolio of experience. I do not foresee a major role for SNS in this but GP training is a one to one learning environment. Computer supported scaffolding is then explored briefly. The author mentioned some papers demonstrating promise in this area. I suppose with the ePortfolio we are already doing this.

    People Tagging

    The author describes people tagging next, using examples of social sites such as Linkedin. Two types of tagging are described – ontology’s and folksonomies. I had never heard of these terms. The former is a system classification (no examples are given but I would imagine rather like rank in the military), the latter is a user driven collective system. I would imagine this would be like Facebook likes, interests and hobbies. The two are linked but a folksonomy is disordered requiring ontological clarity. In a nutshell, sites such as Linkedin try to provide this. My own experience of Linkedin is that I keep on getting recommended for various skills by colleagues. If I agree, I get tagged for that skill eg medical education. The relevance of this is not clear. The author goes into some detail presents a typology of factors in social networking and work-based learning (it is probably worthwhile looking at this) and then describes a case study of a project called the MATURE project. This used a tagging system done by employees and/or superiors referring to expertise or interests. This can then complement self-assessment as well as competency assessment. The article is quite technical but in summary it is suggesting that this type of tagging (either ontological or folksonomy) can assist in work-place assessment.

    Summary

    I found this article quite hard going as it is very technical but there were some useful features. This review is my interpretation. I am not convinced of the value of SNS in work-place assessment. People tagging may be useful for networking and, in the case of Linkedin, potential employment, but not assessment. The work-place assessment we do for the MRCGP has prefined competencies as per the curriculum. It already has the ePortfolio which provides the ontological rigidity required for assuring competence. The authors conclude there is potential for social media in informal, professional, work-placed learning. I would argue whilst there is a role in informal learning, it is not thorough or discriminative enough for a formal work-place assessment delivered against set criteria.

  • Tweeting For Learning

    Tweeting for learning: A critical analysis of research on microblogging in education published in 2008–2011

    F Gao, T Luo, K Zhang – British Journal of Educational Technology 43.5 (2012): 783-801.

    I came across this article when searching for microblogging papers. It is a useful article in that it summarises the research done between 2008 and 2011 on microblogging, or more succinctly, microblogging in education (MIE). It is worth a read due to the design of the study. What the authors did was to try and look specifically at evidence for the benefit of MIE whilst excluding opinion pieces and review articles. During my various searches, I have come across a lot of opinion pieces which although relevant, do not always provide the evidence for benefit. This paper is essentially a systematic review. Due to the variety of the included studies, it isn’t a meta analysis but it does provide a nice summary. One can delve further into the individual studies if one wants to and I hope the title above links to a free text version of the paper.

    The article attempted to answer 4 research questions:

    1. What types of research were conducted on MIE?
    2. How was microblogging used for teaching and learning in these studies?
    3. What educational benefits did MIE have on teaching and learning as identified in these studies?
    4. What are the suggestions and implications for future MIE research?

    The method involved is one of the clearer descriptions I have read in a paper for a while and I would recommend reading this part of the paper. Four rounds of searches identified a total of 21 papers which met the criteria for inclusion. They were then analysed. Reassuringly some of the papers I have already reviewed plus ones which are pending were included in the datasets so I did feel a bit smug. It rated the paper by Ebner et Al as having greater validity (sample size, duration etc). Another rated highly is by Kop et Al available here which I haven’t read yet. The submission date in October is getting closer and every time I scratch the surface, another paper pops up.

    RESULTS

    The article described the papers included. These varied in several ways. For example a couple explored microblogging in the context of a conference and the positive effect of real time feedback and questions to the lecturer/presenter. Most were set in higher education. The sample size varied greatly. My own view is that this is less important as these tend not to be quantitative studies. The duration varied as well. A conference or lecture may only last a few hours yet some of the interventions extended to 2 semesters. Ebner’s study lasted 6 weeks yet was very labour intensive & meticulous. It also drew some very balanced conclusions.

    The areas further identified and explored by the authors are: Who is participating? When to learn? What to learn? How to learn? Participation and Engagement; Reflective thinking; Collaborative learning.

    The ‘who’ and ‘when’ are fairly straightforward. Examples of who given include delegates at conferences and the when is essentially at anytime. The concept of education when & where you want it. MIE has been used for informal communication outside of the classroom sustaining engagement by posting updates and relevant links.

    A lot of the positive benefits of MIE have already been described when looking at collaboration and these are all positive effects in the studies looked at. The remaining ‘how’ is a bit more interesting. ‘Fostering interactive activities’ and ‘encouraging informal learning’ are known strengths of MIE. The main educational effect from the review was the development of learning communities, promoting interaction between conversations between students as well as students and teachers. MIE is not meant to be a conversation tool but using the @ prefix achieved this. My own experience is that this is not the case but by flagging with a #, response and conversations are more likely. Apart from all these, there was no objective evidence on the educational impact of MIE. For example better scores in assessments. This is discussed in their future research suggestions. Only one of the studies was experimental, the rest being descriptive. This is what I am finding. Whilst these studies are important, it would be good to find an experimental study which perhaps compared marks with & without a Web 2.0 tool. This would be dependant on students being without their smartphones for a period or not using SNS, something which may prove more challenging.

  • Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education

    Maged N Kamel Boulos*, Inocencio Maramba and Steve Wheeler

    BMC Medical Education 2006, 6:41  doi:10.1186/1472-6920-6-41

    Free text here

    I found this article whilst doing a search trying to find evidence of the educational impact of SNS and Web 2.0 tools. Unfortunately it is a slightly older article so some of the concepts and ideas are a bit outdated but it is useful summary. It looks specifically at three types of Web 2.0 tools – Wikis, Blogs and Podcasts. It was written in 2006 and its age is shown slightly when it talks about the lack of evidence of the effect/impact of Web 2.0 tools in the context of medical education (although the research base is still expanding). However what I found most useful is it lists the advantages and disadvantages of the three tools. The article mentions the tools and resources to create a Blog or Wiki are freely available and easy to use. Since 2006 of course there has been an explosion of apps, programme & online resources which have made things even easier. I could not believe how easy it was to construct a blog from a freely accessible website. Since 2006 mobile platforms have expanded and become more powerful. I was still using a Palm 650 then. I compare this to my latest smart phone and the number of apps I can get for it, the expansion has been exponential. However, the article is not about this. It is about the impact on education.

    There are a couple of useful additional PowerPoint annexes to the article which I would recommend reading.

    Wikis

    I didn’t realise a Wiki is from the Hawaiian term wiki, to hurry, swift. I still don’t know why this term was used. Essentially it is an on-line resource which has open editing. Most people are aware of Wikipedia. This concept can also be used to make an educational or medical Wiki. It is clear for anyone who has used Wikipedia that this would be a useful too for increasing collaboration and indeed some examples are cited. Ganfyd is one which can be edited by any registered medical professional.

    A term I hadn’t heard before is Darwikinism. This refers to the evolution of Wiki pages as authors & collaborators edit and update the page. Indeed unlike evolution, this process is rapid. The authors mention a comparison with the Encyclopaedia Britannica and the fact both had similar numbers of errors. Unlike a printed publication, Wikipedia is corrected far more quickly. There is a downside to this, namely vandalism. A famous case was that of the American journalist John Seigenthaler. This downside is outweighed by the benefits of openness and the ability to restore a quality page using tools such as rolling back.

    Sharing a digital tool such as a Wiki (and to a lesser degree a Blog) enables participants to become a stakeholder in the outcome. This outcome could be part of a project or developing a reference resource. It also encourages a deeper understanding of the subject matter by encouraging online collaboration. This is a key concept underpinning the pedagogical impact of a Wiki and its main advantage.

    Ensuring accuracy is a concern but having a group of peer reviewers plus the ability to change an incorrect entry at the click of a mouse provides some assurance. Obviously for a large Wiki this may mean a large number of reviewers with subsequent time constraints but for smaller educational projects should be manageable.

    Blogs

    Of interest to me, blogs have obviously exploded in their popularity since 2006. It took me until June 2014 to start my first. As mentioned previously, it was a simple thing to set up and the tools are free. Unlike Wikis, it is the author (or co-author) that moderates the entries so this can make the moderation more consistent and refined. However this could skew the information posted given the lack of a group consensus. I would argue this is more advantageous as article meta-information is known. Wikis can lack this due to the anonymity of the contributors. I own my blog and have a sense of authorship.

    Both Blogs and Wikis run the risk of inadvertently posting copyright material as I found out. In my case it wasn’t malicious, just accidental (it was rectified easily by editing the post). As a single author this does protect me whereas the collaborative Wiki could be vulnerable. This lack of collaboration may reduce the educational impact of a blog – it could be perceived as an opinion piece which it essentially is. This article for example is my interpretation & critical evaluation of a journal article.

    Another downside of blogs as I have found out is that whilst people may like to read them, encouraging active participation is a different matter. What one does get is other bloggers following you so this is in itself, a Network of Practitioners. It is a diverse network however, not just medical. The educational impact is therefore about blogging (I have enjoyed reading followers own blogs), not about medical education. I am learning from an informal curriculum and its great fun.

    Podcasts

    Despite my best efforts I have never got into Podcasting and I worried that this might mean I never had anything interesting to say. I actually think the reason is it involves having either headphones on your head or listening in a car/at home and therefore requires more concentration. I started downloading BMJ & NEJM Podcasts but never actually got around to listening to them. The ones I listened to tended to be a background noise, rather like a nice piece of music, whilst I did something else. I did not learn from them. On this background of negativity, I was interested to see what the authors thought.

    Both audio & video Podcasts are used extensively. From recordings of lectures to audio recordings of text books, it is a tool which nicely encapsulates what m-learning is. One of the advantages described is the superior support for auditory learners (primary learning style in at least 30% of learners). The same applies to visual learners. On this basis, and not commented on by the authors, I would suggest this is their main disadvantage. I could not attend a Hot Topics course once so opted to do the ‘Webinar’ instead. This was essentially a video Podcast of the lectures with PowerPoint. I duly completed the exercise, answered a fairly straightforward quiz & was awarded my PGE credits. I reflected that I learnt very little but had a big thick textbook of Hot Topics & 6 hours accredited. It is clear that Podcasts do not work for me but I have always found Problem Based Learning & Small Group Work more effective. I like to be hands on. So whilst there is a pedagogical basis for some learners, it is not for everyone.

    To summarise, this is a nice review article which provides an interesting snapshot of Web 2.0 tools and their potential educational impact in 2006. It recognises the lack of an evidence base for this and encourages readers to get involved in research. And therein lies the rub. I am already out of date according to some teenagers I know (Facebook is sooo middle aged). I should be using WhatsApp and Instagram, until the next great thing comes along. Trying to research the educational impact of Social Networking tools when those tools are continuously changing is a challenge.

  • HOW BLOGGING CAN FACILITATE CPD AND LEARNING

    Bodell, S., et al. (2009). “Creating a learning community in today’s world: how blogging can facilitate continuing professional development and international learning.” The British Journal of Occupational Therapy 72(6): 279-281.

    Unfortunately I do not have the full text of this opinion piece to share which I had to get hold of via the Warwick University library. It is a shame as I have two by the same author both exploring how social media can assist with education. The other one I will eventually appraise (it is about professional Face booking) but I will start with this article from June 2009. One thing I have learnt in critically appraising a generic educational subject is that the first thing I look at – relevance – is less important. I am a primary care physician; the author of this article is an occupational therapist. Yet the principles of SNS and healthcare education are still the same.

    A blog (web log) is an example of a Web 2.0 use. I was always under the assumption Web 2.0 was a type of HTML or application. Actually Web 2.0 is a term used to describe second generation Internet capability. It is not specific. The benefits of Web 2.0 (and specifically blogging) in healthcare education are not widely known. Indeed one of the future considerations for research is to look at Web 2.0 and its educational impact in postgraduate education.

    The author describes 3 areas where a blog may be helpful.

    As a Tool for Reflection. Blogging is a useful way of reflecting both as an individual physician as well as in group reflection. The latter is my aim with writing a blog linked to the Salisbury Plain PBSGL.

    As a Tool for Peer Discussion. This follows on from using blogging as group reflection. Indeed these two are probably part of the same entity. Certainly receiving my POEMs or reading my journals, my intent is to write my own take on the articles (with a critical hat on) to try & promote discussion. Related to this is dissemination of guidelines and best practice amongst a Network of Practitioners. This sounds great in theory but with two cautions. Firstly it is time consuming. I am trying to work full time, trying to complete my assignment as well as have a home life. The limitations of a blog are it is author orientated so the onus is on me. This can be mitigated by engaging some of my fellow PBSGL members for which I will canvass support at the next meeting. The second area of concern is confidentiality. This I think will limit clinicians engaging and sharing experiences in a public forum.

    As a Tool for extending knowledge. The reverse chronological order of a blog is cited as a way of developing knowledge. I personally cannot see this as a decent search engine will find posts. It can however run alongside the traditional ways of acquiring knowledge to augment it and the author cites a couple of studies reinforcing this. Since starting my blog, and through microblogging (Twitter), I have viewed other blogs and sites and now have numerous tools at my disposal to answer questions that arise from my day to day practice. My most recent literature search involved registering with www.researchgate.net and I have also become reacquainted with CHAIN again ( http://chain.ulcc.ac.uk/chain/index.html ). Indeed if the term ‘tool for extending knowledge’ is defined loosely, through NoPs, informal learning, Web 2.0 applications etc, this is probably the most powerful effect of blogging.

    In summary, this opinion piece summarises nicely the potential of blogging in healthcare education. I am concurrently reading a research article which is attempting to put some meat on the bones; some objective evidence of improved outcomes using microblogging. However I have run out of time and have clinic so I will save that for another time…