Skip to main content
Wikispaces Classroom is now free, social, and easier than ever.
Try it today.
Pages and Files
The Resonance Project ...
Process Page about the Project
Questions about resonance
bout resonant knowledge
Content Pages of the Project
Taxonomies of Knowledge/s
The New Addictions
The Resonant Knowledge Field
General Wiki Posts ...
The new 'artesan' culture
Speaking of Fructose
Speaking of Openness
Speaking of intrinsic learning
Order and fundamentalism
Low knowledge life-styles
Speaking of sugar
Like & not-like, cats ...
Silences of War
Water as text ...
Synaesthesia and Learning
Speaking of Agency (and presence)
Ecologies of Knowledge
Live MOOCs Talking (ii)
Speaking of Thresholds
Speaking of Sex Crimes
Reflection and Data
Speaking of Footprints
Speaking of Openness
Speaking of Taxes ...
Speaking of Jews ...
Bitcoins of Learning
MOOCs, Assessment, Fragile Zones
Zero Growth ?
A Probe is a probe ...
Meaning, consensus, language?
Space for new affordances
Genocide and genetics
Designing for Open Affordances
Open Sesame - understanding Open MOOCs
A Live MOOC talking
Active Learning MOOCs?
Learning or Training
A story of a boy
Popes and Chairs
Next Learning Architectures
Hybrid Flipped Spaces
Knowledge Ecologies .2
Ecologies of Identity
Lines of Desire
Social software (not!)
Footprints of Emergence
Designing Emergent Curricula
Emergent granny cloud +
MOOC is as MOOC does
Complex 3D Footprints
A JAM of Tweets
Seductive Social Software
Hats versus Vampires
From online- to e-journals
Paradoxes of Virtual Choirs
Benchmarking and Mastery
Berlin as Palimpsest
Emergent and Instrumental Learning
CoP and Small Planets
Perfomative or Analytic?
Schulmeisters and hegemony
Integrity and Utilities
The Soft Machine
Designing for Complexity
Top Brain - Bottom Brain
Instrumental and Ontological Reflection
Medium is the Massage
Narrative and Complexity
Conferences and Publications and Events
SCoPE Webinar Series on Emergence: Nov. 2013
Eifel ePortfolio Conference, July 2009.
HEA, July 2009
Greenwich, July 2008
Affordances and Political Ecology
Discourse and Text
Attending a conference on digital storytelling at Cheltenham, and a session on its application in Sport, particularly community sport, we were shown a great digital story on football. It was a personal account of a student's journey through yobbo (football) behaviour to higher education.
Asked how this (excellent) presentation was assessed, the presented said: "We though it was great, but didnt know what to do with it, so we just gave it (inaudible, but it sounded remarkably like 80%)".
So... how do we assess digital story telling? Well, clearly a lot of unexpected things emerged from the process, which were new, of obvious value (of some sort) and which communicated at an important level. Sounds like complexity to me.
Here's a stab at assessing complexity:
(I have tried my hand at 'designing for complexity' elsewhere (see:
wiki for starters)).
1. Let the process happen, with minimal interference: set it up with useful constraints (define what shouldn't happen), let the process and product emerge, and let the story get told.
This is an inherently messy process, and should remain so. It needs support: technical, advice on story, sounding board for ideas, etc, but not too much direction. This seems to be in line with the
2. Let the digital story lie for two weeks.
3. Ask the student to revisit the story, and think about what value it has, and for whom. In other words get the story teller to explore, set, apply, and evaluate the usefulness of benchmarks. The student should determine how this gets done, but it could for instance include a series of questions, like:
3.1 What audience/s is this for ?
3.2 For what purpose/s?
3.3 What criteria would the audience apply to assess its value (go and ask a few real people to do this)?
3.4 Considerning all this, what would you, the student, do with it?:
3..4.1 Write it down to experience, and bin it?.
3.4.2 Redo it, as there is value in there someplace?
3.4.3 Load it onto Youtube, etc
3.4.4 Lock it away, it's actually far too personal - maybe revisit it in 12 months time?
3.4.5 Use it as a resource in your professional work: If so, specify how you would do so, try it in practice, and report back.
etc, etc ...
4. Issues for the Staff to consider:
4.1 Take this as sufficient material to assess the students' ability to reflect on the process, product and value in a real community that they have specified.
4.2 You might do something more formal, and ask the student to comment on the alignment, or lack of alignment, between:
Their own benchmarks for the value of the story, for the specified audience and context, and
The benchmarks for the story set by members of the specified audience.
4.2 Or you might do your own, quick, exercise and ask people in the professional field concerned for their benchmarks and their assessment of the digital story (for the purpose that the student specified); compare it to the student's assessment (see 3, above); discuss all of this with the student, and give them a mark for their contribution to the discussion (or a written report on the discussion if necessary).
The details of these proposed procedures are not important. What is important are the principles:
The story telling is complex: so set up constraints and limits, not prerequisites or prescriptions or even specific outcomes.
Let the story emerge.
Leave it to incubate for a few days/weeks
Involve the story teller in benchmarking the story
as it has emerged,
and welcome, and even seek out, the unexpected and unintended.
Involve the story teller in defining the audience for the
Involve members of this audience in benchmarking the story, against their own criteria, and/or the story teller's criteria.
Focus your assessment of the student,not on their product, or even on the process of the construction and creation of the story, but rather on their ability to manage a creative process, and create and apply benchmarks in communities of inquiry, and/or communities of practice.
If your time is limited, invent a short version (no more than 5%) of this process, and apply it instead, preferably with your own version of these principles, after all, you are the academic.
If you get the student to participate in generating benchmarks (e.g. self, peer, staff, client) and comment on them, you can assess what they have learned about a whole range of things, independent of the technical quality of the digital story that they produced.
[ Cross posted in k-m-etaphors wiki ]
help on how to format text
Turn off "Getting Started"