[p2pu-dev] Lernanta architecture

zuzel.vp zuzel.vp at gmail.com
Sun Mar 13 13:43:54 UTC 2011

I don't have a strong opinion about what to prioritize here (i.e.,
unless someone says the contrary i will give them equal priority), but
it's good to hear about our objectives for lernanta since that is
highly important in the design process. Even if we don't split both
objectives in our mind it is likely that some features will respond to
use cases from both (i.e., support both peer learning and research),
and others from one of them (either peer learning or research to
identify how to do peer learning well). Having these use cases in mind
helps a lot to design and re-design.


On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Stian Håklev <shaklev at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Zuzel,
> it's an interesting split between "tool to support peer learning" and "tool
> to support research about peer learning", but I am not sure I agree. Now,
> obviously you could argue that I am biased - I'm in a PhD program, and plan
> to do research on peer-learning, and indeed would like to do that research
> on P2PU (although I am not tied to it). However, I believe that from the
> beginning when we created P2PU, our idea was not just to create a very
> successful product (although that would be great!), but to push the field of
> open education forwards - by innovating, experimenting, learning, and
> sharing everything we did.
> The point is that nobody today knows how to do peer learning well. There are
> examples out there - David Wiley's courses inspired us at first, the MOOCs
> are interesting, and now we have lot's of case studies from P2PU. We can
> also learn a lot from social interactions that are not directly similar -
> collaborative communities like Wikipedia, OSQA, etc. But we're really just
> beginning to understand what makes one P2PU course successful, and another
> not.
> And this research cannot really be separated from practice - there are too
> many variables. So the best we can do is to keep running courses, document
> how we do it and the decisions we make, gather as much data as possible to
> evaluate how it went, experiment systematically and creatively, and iterate.
> And in addition to all the internal research we do - invite in external
> researchers who can both add new theoretical perspectives and rigour, and
> also get our name into peer-reviewed journals etc (we're already working
> with several).
> Our recent Hewlett application (which we should find out about in a few days
> - very exciting!) has a very heavy research focus, looking at measuring
> success at a number of levels.
> So I see this data collection as crucial to improve the main purpose of
> P2PU, which is to enable more people to learn. But I am looking forward to
> discussing this further.
> Stian
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 08:52, zuzel.vp <zuzel.vp at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I just read it and I will add a ticket (or maybe more to split the
>> ideas) to lighthouse. We will probably talk about this early this week
>> when we meet in person. A few things that crossed my mind after
>> reading that wiki page.
>> Lernanta can be seen from different angles (e.g., a tool to support
>> peer learning, a tool to support research about peer learning).
>> Depending in how we want to use Lernanta the design could be
>> different. Independently of how you use Lernanta we will probably
>> interact with many external services (as Etherpad, wiki, chat, Big
>> Blue Button, blogs, ...), but the interaction with this services will
>> vary if the objective is to support peer learning or support research
>> about peer learning. In order to support peer learning having a course
>> with links and the necessary status updates (so people visit this
>> links only when necessary) could be sufficient for many of the
>> external services. However, from a research perspective having all the
>> data (or as much data as possible) in the same place is highly useful.
>> One thing I will like to know is how much weight to put (in terms of
>> priorities) to this two use cases.
>> --
>> Thanks,
>>    Zuzel
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Stian Håklev <shaklev at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi guys, I just posted some ideas about the lernanta architecture that
>> > I've
>> > been thinking about for quite a while,
>> >
>> > here: https://github.com/p2pu/lernanta/wiki/Stian's-ideas-about-lernanta-functionality
>> > The main thrust is extendibility - because we have to recognize that we
>> > simply do not know what an effective learning environment looks like.
>> > (We
>> > know a little bit more today than a year and a half ago, but we're still
>> > in
>> > the very beginning). And of course, different course organizers will
>> > need
>> > different tools. It should be very clean, easy to manage, and provide
>> > the
>> > basic tools well documented - but it should also be easy to experiment
>> > with
>> > adding new ways of interacting.
>> > And interaction with external services is really key - both for the
>> > experience of taking the course, and getting data on learner
>> > interaction, so
>> > that we can do research on learning at P2PU.
>> > I believe these two aspects will make the P2PU platform very compelling
>> > for
>> > course organizers, students and researchers.
>> > Looking forward to discuss these ideas further.
>> > Stian
>> >
>> > --
>> > http://reganmian.net/blog -- Random Stuff that Matters
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > p2pu-dev mailing list
>> > p2pu-dev at lists.p2pu.org
>> > http://lists.p2pu.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pu-dev
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2pu-dev mailing list
>> p2pu-dev at lists.p2pu.org
>> http://lists.p2pu.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pu-dev
> --
> http://reganmian.net/blog -- Random Stuff that Matters

More information about the p2pu-dev mailing list