Does Web 2.0 render materials design obsolete?
I'm wondering if in the age of Web 2.0 and user generated content whether materials design and materials writers are becoming obsolete. After all, shouldn't a Web 2.0 course be user generated - created by its students?
What do you think?
best
Nik
Good discussion topic. I think it's important to distinguish between user generated 'content' and user generated 'course design'. I don't know of a group of learners who have actually designed their own course (I'd love to hear of any examples of this though), although I agree that web 2.0 tools move us further in that direction and that the use of blogs, twitter, forums, etc. do blur the lines between learner and teacher, and do facilitate self-directed learning.
But most teachers know how to design materials so courses can be created / designed by teachers with the active participation of students. Language teachers can perfectly design their own materials adapting them to their own audience, context and resources. Commercial books sometimes fail to take into account the "learning idiosincracies" of the groups we deal with in the classroom.
Hi Olwyn
Nice to be compared to Shakespeare, but really who needs him?? Or perhaps who needs to be taught about him?
You say "Learners are situated (we could say mired) in the particular. They do not necessarily understand general ideas like different types of syllabus design (it isn't just about grammar and skills) or different approaches to learning (it's healthy not to stick to your own 'learning style' but to experiment with other ways of learning)."
With an increasingly large number of teens growing up alienated from an education system that fundamentally hasn't changed in centuries, perhaps what you write above could better describe our educational system and many of the teachers in it!
Students may not understand many of the concepts of syllabus design, but many are just 'getting on' with taking care of learning what they want to know autonomously in a way that is appropriate to their context and interests.
Best
Nik
Hi Nik,
I'm sure the people in the literature and culture forum might have something to say about your Shakespeare - who needs him comment :-)
In my comment I certainly wasn't suggesting we don't use web 2.0 tools as they are an important way of engaging teens - the plenary by Mark Prensky at IATEFL 2009 showed us that. However, I stick by what I said: teachers and materials writers also have something to bring to the education enterprise - not out of date syllabuses and old ideas but the ability to generalise and provide an overview. So I'd see it as important for teachers to look critically at the new technologies and evaluate their potential for real language learning as opposed to entertainment value. I think the studnets have a role in educating the teachers about the value of these tools. Perhaps we should ask the students explain to us why these tools are valuable?
Olwyn,
I have to confess that I shudder when I read "the ability to generalise and provide an overview". I (and I suspect many other people) don't want to deal in generalisations and get overviews - I want to learn what I want to learn, and what I need to learn in order to use the language for my own special purposes.
Whilst a teacher should certainly be able to help me there, I'm fairly sure a materials writer won't, not unless she sits down with me and asks me what I want - and let's not forget my answer will be different from the person sitting next to me...
I'm afraid that whilst printed materials are not going to go away for quite some time (for reasons I'm sure we all know), I think they probably should in many situations - and certainly, were I to sit down and learn another language, I wouldn't want a teacher who used a book.
It's an interesting debate, this one - I sincerely believe many people don't like/want/need printed materials - but the system in most countries and especiallyin public education does not allow for great digression.
Best,
Gavin
Hi Gavin,
Nice to be debating these ideas with you again this year :-)
I believe there are indeed materials writers and teachers who over-generalise and provide inadequate overviews but I believe also that as I have spent the last 18 years of my life thinking hard about how to teach (in my case) English for academic purposes, then I do have something to contribute to the quality of my students' learning.
Students don't always know what they don't know. In my specific, targeted context, students don't always know what is exepcted of them by the HE institution they are trying to enter. Having worked in said institution for 18 years, I have perhaps a better idea about those expectations and can make them explicit to students.
Of course I agree, if students are learning English just so they can communicate on the web using Web 2.0 tools, then they are probably better off on their own without my guidance. But I don't know if that is the main motivation for most learners of English.
Olwyn,
I certainly wasn't referring to people communicating on the Web, but rather to learners of 'general' English...
Gavin
Ah... general English - also referred to as Teaching English for No Obvious Reason. I agree that when there is no extrinsic motivation for learning English, e.g. getting a degree (as for EAP) or functioning in the workplace (as for ESP) then it is important to motivate learners intrinsically and I definitely agree that Web 2.0 tools are a good way to do this.
However, sooner or later I expect that the learners will actually find an extrinsic purpose for learning English - to communicate in a specific context - and then Web 2.0 might just become a distraction from the main goals?
hi olwyn
i'm doing an MA in Online and Distance Education (mix of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation) and I find that web 2.0 tools are at the centre of my formal as well as informal studies. To be honest, I think the idea that technology can be added to traditional courses as a motivational factor is a bit old hat, or soon will be. many web 2.0 tools are now at the heart of the learning experience and it's difficult to separate the 'medium from the message' (imagine what marshall mcluhan would make of today's tech tools) For example, see Terry Freedman's 2 collections of web 2.0 projects at www.ictineducation.org/free-stuff.
So, although I can see your point, I guess what i'm trying to say is that the debate on whether technology should be used for learning has changed rapidly in the last few years. this doesn't mean it is not used badly at times. it's just that we can't really avoid it anymore:
'the machine is using us' www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLlGopyXT_g
'pay attention' www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEFKfXiCbLw
great discussion btw.
stephen
Hi Stephen,
Given the topic of your MA I can certainly see why Web 2.0 tools are at its heart. I recently saw a nice presentation from the computer science dept in my university showing how students were assigned projects to programme a virtual pet in 2nd Life and to create an App for an i-phone. These seem enitrely appropriate uses because the Web 2.0 tools fit the purpose of their courses.
I've got to teach students to write research reports (dissertations) for a specific audience - their academic community - which has quite strict rules about how these reports should be put together and the type of language that should be used. Computer science is one of the communites but others include Interpreting/translating and Logistics.
How can Web 2.0 tools help those students with the conventions of research reports?
Hi Olwyn
A good question! What I found to be useful when I was studying was to use these tools to build and maintain communities of professionals within my field. Twitter and Delicious are good tools to build communities and find/share resources specific to your area of interest. Joining Twitter immediately connected me with my student group and people I know from the ELT community. From reading their tweets I found new people in both worlds and learnt a lot from them. This is the 'network' effect that web 2.0 tools create so well. I used Delicious to build up a bank of web resources, which I could organise in my own personal online library. Tags, links and updates are three features that make finding and sharing resources quicker and more effective than trawling through a library catalogue. Also, because my communities were based on people I knew and chose, and respected, I felt I could trust the sources.
Stephen
Hi all
Another ELT author here...there's some wonderful materials out there - seems rather perverse not to use appropriate stuff. The web is full of dross.
By the same token, there are some awful ELT materials, and there's some wonderful stuff on the web. It all depends on how you use materials in the classroom - or not, when appropriate. OK - back to writing...
Great discussion BTW
Pete
yes i agree, but i think the difference with the web is that the materials used can be rated/edited/challenged, etc. using other materials. you can't do this with a printed course book in the same way.
stephen
Why can't you rate, edit and challenge your coursebook materials? I do!!! according to the students I've got in front of me. And yes, Pete, totally agree with "It all depends on how you use materials in the classroom - or not, when appropriate."
Web 2.0 doen't make course materials obsolete, they add another dimension and greater choice for the teacher and student, extending on means and ways of language learning and broadening the audience and its modes of communication. For me it's all about more choice must be better, not throwing the baby out in the bathtub and banning books or prescribed courses, everything has a place and a use, except perhaps tape recorders these days!
"professionally designed materials" can act as a springboard, something to hold on to, to refer back to, whether it's a posting in a forum or a text from the book, somebody still has to, on many occasions come up with the content, not all students want to be in class learning English, and may not be relied on to generate their own stimulating content.
While a lot of our adult students might be "just 'getting on' with taking care of learning what they want to know ..." that might not be the case in day to day reality for those teaching in schools.
As long as teachers have the freedom and the skills to adapt, extend upon AND edit out parts of coursebooks, I still think they're valid course materials.
Hi Skywalker and all of you,
I am an intruder here as I am moderating the Teacher Development SIG.
However I started my career as a textbook writer and ended up writing three coursebooks and it ain´t been easy.
You have to fight with your publisher over whether you can keep this or that in, etc.
As I think I said above in another post, i had people taking the EDUCATIONAL USE OF ICT from EDI and they produced fantastic work.
On the other hand, I had to fight to get them to stop treating the Internet as a book. Very interesting process.
I´m game for everything you want to experiment with.
María Sara
Learner Autonomy SIG
I agree with everything you've said. You can rate/edit/challenge/(create) your own materials on and off line. But as you say, online tools enhance this experience.
I want to move on a bit from the debate on Web 2.0 tools taking over from materials writers.
Personally I think we need to get away from being materials writers (nice text with some questions to check comprehension etc) as it seems far too passive receptive on the part of students and move towards producing 'instructional activities' that are active, productive, creative, collaborative and students led. This is where I feel Web 2.0 (hate that term actually) tools really come in.
I think it must be really difficult though for people in Olwyn position where you are preparing and feeding into a system that seems very slow and reluctant to change.
I'm wondering to what extent exams like IELTS and people teaching EAP are taking into account the development of digital literacies and digital study skills. Is this being addressed??
Best
Nik
Hi Nik,
Have to take you to task on a number of issues here. First IELTS is NOT EAP. IELTS is a General English exam (as Cambridge ESOL say on their website) which tests skills. It has led, in my view, to many teachers assuming that EAP is just skills, whereas it is about functional language and study competence, including critical thinking and student autonomy. I am also not 'feeding into a system that is reluctant to change'. In fact the EAP community is very dynmaic, is reserch-led and is, therefore, interested in taking on board insights from applied linguistics (in a way that many ELT teachers are not or cannot).
Writing at university is not a personal product in the way that it is in ELT. At university you either write from sources or write from data, in both cases in order to add to the sum of knowledge building in your discipline. You put your indivudual slant on the data or sources but you do need to acknowledge that you owe a debt to those who came before you and you are being watched (and reviewed) by your peers.
So, I can see that wikis would definitely lend themselves to collaborative, peer reviewed writing but that blogs are probably too personal to fit well within academic practices. Most academics do not like students to use wikipedia as a resource precisely because the ownership of ideas is not open to scrutiny in the way a published paper in a peer-reviewed journal is.
Hi Olwyn
Interesting post. You're right about EAP. During my MA we were encouraged to use material from a wide range of sources, including blogs, wikis and even tweets. Of course, if we used these kinds of sources exclusively we would not have gained many marks, and rightly so. But I really don't believe that blog sources have any less validity simply because they are blog posts. Many well respected academics maintain blogs, after all. I think it's all about balance. I also think you're right to identify 'adding to the sum of knowledge' as a key aim of higher ed study. For me, the great thing about web 2.0 is that now everyone can access, and contribute to, that body of knowledge. This was the point Wenger was making with communities of practice.
Stephen
Stephen,
Thanks for introducing the idea of communities of practice and of course you're right to say that many respected academics maintain blogs - but - how are we to know who is respected? The only way is if we are in the community of practice, perhaps as novices being given 'legitimate peripheral participation' while we learn the practices of the community.
Otherwise we have no idea whether we should trust the ideas in a blog because anyone can and does blog and the ideas can be particularly crazy - or not - but there is no accepted practice which requires bloggers to either identify themselves or justify what they are saying by referring to the work of others.
you're right - blogs don't follow the conventions of traditional, and accepted, academic works, in 2 ways: as you mention, the practice of referencing, and also that they have not stood the test of time. this is what often gives an academic work validity i feel. how many blog posts will still be read in 20 years i wonder.
however, i think these are also challenges laid down by these new tools that we have to deal with. if people accept blog content without questioning it, this is the fault of the reader really not the medium itself. it is the way we use tools that counts. a tool in itself is just that - a tool. in 2 years of masters study with the OU i was part of a wide-ranging discussion on how the net gen is using the web for academic studies, how they approach sources compared to previous generations, etc. there's lots of good research out there. in the end, if we want to see good academic skills in our learners we need to teach them. we won't get there by taking their PDA's away from them!
i hope we get a chance to debate this further in harrogate (rail strike permitting)!
Not many will be surprised to hear that I'm with Gavin and Nik on this one. I think printed materials design is anchored in a past world where the textbook was, in essence, the unique "portal" to another language for any learner not living in the L2 country. That world is gone now -- for anyone under the age of 30, really, really gone -- so the textbook needs to evolve, in my view, from a learner guide to a teacher guide.
Many if not most teachers still require, as far as I can see, a lot of theoretical grounding, practical tips, and even hand-holding when it comes to many areas of ELT pedagogy, and to some extent that's natural: someone who is very gifted at teaching structure and usage may be less expert at promoting the effective learning of pronunciation.
For learners, the "portal" to the world of English today is the mobile phone they have in their pocket and the laptop they have in their bag. They still need a teacher to help them learn strategies, to encourage them, to provide feedback and careful correction, but in terms of trying to package up the "world of English" for them in a single 237-page book (even with interactive CD-Rom included in flap!!!), I'm afraid the bell has tolled.
'For learners, the "portal" to the world of English today is the mobile phone they have in their pocket and the laptop they have in their bag.'
Of course they are still reading text, even if not printed-on-paper text. I know that the 'text' online is presented and linked in different ways and this changes the way it is read but it is still text and so text processes are an important tool for learners to master. For example, if they are going to read critically, they need to recognise when an argument is well-supported or just a rant.
I don't disagree at all Olywn, if anything with the plethora of information available via the web today critical evaluation of if anything more important than it has ever been.
But I think it's very hard for a traditional textbook to convey the importance of a skill, as the format itself will, in my opinion, be increasingly rejected by younger learners. Far better to use authentic materials -- perhaps a comparison of two same-subject online news articles, one by a left-of-center publisher and one by a right-of center outlet, to show how language can be used to influence meaning and perceptions.
Yes, a textbook might be able to propose the same side-by-side comparison, but the source material would be so dated by the time it got into learners' hands that the impact of the exercise would be greatly diminished.
Hi Olwyn,
What I have found, having run a course called EDUCATIONAL USE OF ICT was not the students but the teachers. They found it extremely difficult to work with e.g. websites ( to use something simple). They tended to treat the different bits of the website as they would treat the page of a book. It was difficult to wean them out of that and I am still not sure I succeeded.
Of course, you are all light years ahead from Uruguay ( a tiny country between Argentina and Brazil) but having come back after 18 years of living abroad I have found it quite frustrating.
Another thing I find quite frustrating, is that people can just about handle Word, send Emails and in most cases they have no idea of Excel but they feel they don´t need to learn.
Sad situation that of Uruguay, ( where I live at the moment) There´s nothing worse than not being aware that you need to learn and keep updating.
But I shall keep going.
María Sara
Dear all,
I have been following this thread with interest. I work in a UK university (in EAP) with a specific remit to manage innovations in technology and learning. The issue of materials and technology is a tricky one for my colleagues.
Often, I think the issues around this topic are not framed correctly. I find myself in discussions with colleagues about the efficiency of producing electronic materials, problems of storage, access, control, assessment, quality of materials, and so on. These are important issues but seem to miss the point somehow. Students in universities will come across a range of web 2.0 initiatives undertaken by subject specialists, will be required to participate in (online) learning communities, access information from a very wide range of sources, produce e-portfolios, collaborative documents and so on. In order for students to become active and successful members of academic communities they need to appropriate a wide range of skills and technologies - many involving web 2.0 technologies and tools. I think that EAP tutors are often reluctant to change existing programmes, materials and tasks to help students meet the challenges of web 2.0 in academia. We need to help students develop their e-academic literacy much more systematically.
I also believe that students in a number of areas are required to produce (assessed) reflective journals, logs etc - nursing, education, social policy, business studies - are just some that come to mind. I have noticed that more and more students are being encouraged (or required) to use web 2.0 tools collaboratively or individually as part of their studies. I am not entirely convinced that EAP tutors are always aware of this and EAP programmes do not always help students enough in this respect - to become active and successful members of academic communities.
Apologies - I've probably missed the point in this thread regarding materials and web 2.0 but this thread got me thinking somewhat tangentially to the discussion.
Alex
Very interesting debate on materials development, as it was last year. Two ideas to throw into the debate, from the point of view of a materials developer: (1) I think much of the boredom and frustration with some published courses stems from a lack of innovation in syllabus development. Much more experimentation should be encouraged here. (2) Books are already interactive in the sense that the digital versions of the text can link users directly to a website with new material regularly available, or a choice of content on offer. So I don't think we should think of the books of the near future as being as static as those of the past.
Hi Chris,
I absolutely agree with your first point. It seems that most coursebooks these days are still following a structural syllabus, i.e. teaching the language system rather than its use, and that they dart about from topic to discrete topic like butterflies in a cabbage patch so there is very little progression and development through the book - apart from the march through the verb tenses.
Together with my colleague Sue Argent, I have written a book for low level learners who want to study at university, Access EAP, published by Garnet. The driver in our syllabus is the rhetorical functions that help students to do things with words, e.g. compare, define, discuss problems, because this is the way their lecturers will use language. This syllabus develops through a series of linked units which follow three students as they study in the first semester at a university, finding their way round, going to lectures, lab sessions and tutorials and writing essays. Skills are integrated and determined by the situation.
Hi Nik,
As a materials writer myself I'm obviously not going to agree with this :-)
However, I object to the idea from another perspective as well. Learners are situated (we could say mired) in the particular. They do not necessarily understand general ideas like different types of syllabus design (it isn't just about grammar and skills) or different approaches to learning (it's healthy not to stick to your own 'learning style' but to experiment with other ways of learning). Materials writers' job is to understand these more abstract ideas and to create materials that instantiate them in particular learning situations.
By analogy we might well say who needs Shakespeare (or any other great writer or poet) when we can all publish our own blogs?