The COVID-19 pandemic forces millions of teachers worldwide to engage in online teaching. Teachers are exploring and experimenting with various digital forms to deliver learning content, keep communicating with students and colleagues, and assess learning outcomes. A digital knowledge-building community gradually emerges and becomes more vivid. This note reports results from a study among honors teachers and administrators from 18 schools of a large Dutch university who all shared their problems and recommendations after the first five weeks of remote teaching, Spring 2020.
LINK
This paper will discuss the process of the MA program ePedagogy / Visual Knowledge Building during the first semester of the academic year 2005 – 2006. This MA program is a joint venture between the Universities of Helsinki, Hamburg and INHOLLAND. This publication will discuss and evaluate the concrete steps (in terms of learning process) during this first semester. In particular the role of the eTutor will get special attention. This publication is based on the principle of action research. Hart & Bond defines action research as “it is a form of reflective inquiry which enables practitioners to better realise such qualities in their practice. The tests for good action research are very pragmatic ones. Does it improve the professional quality of the transactions between practitioners and clients/colleagues? This action research approach is being realised upon three main sources. As an eTutor and member of the staff of this program I weekly filled in an “Evaluation Log” in which the following questions are centralized: 1. What happened (this week) 2. Significant experience 3. Reflection 4. Actions Secondly I used a little survey which was being used by the staff to evaluate the first semester. All the three Universities filled in a form with the following questions concerning the education and organisation: Education 1. What do you consider most hindering in your teaching? 2. What do you consider most beneficial in your teaching? 3. What kind of teaching methods do you prefer in this program? 4. Do you think the course offers are attractive for the target group? 5. How do you evaluate student’s engagements and motivation in your courses? 6. What can / should be improved in terms of collaborative learning activities and processes? Organisation 1. In what specific context do you spot organisational constraints? 2. Does your organisation recognise and support the MA program? 3. What is your short-, mid- and long term vision on this program? Thirdly an important source for this action research approach was the International Seminar which was hold in the middle of February 2006. In this seminar the changes based on the questions of the questionnaire were discussed and implemented. The theoretical framework in this publication is based on the dissertation of Karel Kreijns (Sociable CSCL Environments). In this dissertation he discussed the collaborative cognitiveand epistemic performance in a CSCLE. The social presence theory takes a central position in this dissertation. In this paper the pitfalls and barriers concerning a sociable CSCLE are being discussed and evaluated. This paper describes, the interventions the staff took, in order to improve the educational context of the program. From this perspective we looked very carefully to the barriers and pitfalls in our Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). We found evidence for the fact that a good CSCLE consists at least a good balance between Content, Community and Pedagogy. In the program we emphasised our focus (too much) on content and (too) little on community and pedagogy. The community was poor because of the fact that we used three content learning systems, which didn’t stimulate the group processes. Pedagogy was too much based on individual eTutor behaviour. In January 2006, after the courses were ended, the Universities organised a little survey. In this survey was shown that we have to some interventions to improve the learning process. At the International Seminar in February 2006 eTutors and students discussed the problems. The following interventions are being considered and implemented: 1. The use of three Virtual Learning Environments should be decreased. Especially the INHOLLAND / Blackboard system doesn’t reflect the open source philosophy. Besides this the accessibility of this system is not very easy for foreign students 2. The collaborative aspect should be increased, by emphasising the interdisciplinaryand international co-operation. The formation of international subgroups is implemented.
DOCUMENT
In the knowledge economy knowledge productivity is the main source of competitive advantage and thus the biggest management challenge. Based on a review of the concept from two distinct perspectives, knowledge productivity is defined as the process of knowledge-creation that leads to incremental and radical innovation. The two main elements in this definition are „the process of knowledge creation‟ and „incremental and radical innovation‟. The main aim of this chapter is to contribute to a better understanding of the concept of knowledge productivity in order to support management in designing policies for knowledge productivity enhancement. After elaborating on the concept of knowledge productivity, the two main elements are combined in a conceptual framework – the knowledge productivity flywheel. This framework appeared to be an effective model for supporting initiatives that aim for enhancing knowledge productivity.
DOCUMENT
Metaphors are at the basis of our understanding of reality. Using the theory of metaphor developed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 1999) this paper analyses common metaphors used in the intellectual capital and knowledge management literatures. An analysis of key works by Davenport & Prusak (2000), Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995), and Stewart (1991) suggests that at least 95 percent of all statements about either knowledge or intellectual capital are based on metaphors. The paper analyses the two metaphors that form the basis for the concept of intellectual capital: ‘Knowledge as a Resource’ and ‘Knowledge as Capital’, both of which derive their foundations from the industrial age. The paper goes into some of the implications of these findings for the theory and practice of intellectual capital. Common metaphors used in conceptualising abstract phenomena in traditional management practices unconsciously reinforce the established social order. The paper concludes by asking whether we need new metaphors to better understand the mechanisms of the knowledge economy, hence allowing us to potentially change some of the more negative structural features of contemporary society.
DOCUMENT
This paper presents the results of an exercise to assess the effects of metaphors on knowledge management. Knowledge is an abstract phenomenon with no direct referent in the real world. To think and talk about knowledge we use conceptual metaphors. The exercise shows that these metaphors greatly influence the problems we identify related to knowledge in organizations and the type of knowledge management solutions we propose. The knowledge as water metaphor used in this exercise – which reflects the dominant way of thinking in Western knowledge management literature – leads to the thingification of knowledge, resulting in a discourse about ways to formalize, manage and control knowledge. This discourse primarily serves the interests of management. In contrast, the knowledge as love metaphor used in this exercise – which reflects more an Asian way of thinking about knowledge – shifts the discourse from the topic of knowledge as a thing to the underlying preconditions for good knowledge work. These conditions include the facilitation of knowledge professionals, the quality of the relationships in the organization, and the quality of the organizational culture. This discourse is aimed at humanizing the organization instead of formalizing it and is more in the interest of employees.
DOCUMENT
It has become a topic at Dutch educational institutes to feel not only responsible for improvement of theoretical and practical skills, but also of 'competences' in a wider sense. The curriculum of the Fontys University of Applied Sciences (32.000 students) and especially the Electrical and Electronic (E&E) Department has changed enormously in the past decade. At the E&E department we introduced two different ways of working on competences. In the first years of their study students choose different roles in several projects. We have described all the roles and the related tasks for each specific role. While working on a role, the students indirectly work on different competences. This method of working enforces a higher educational level (a student shouldn't work on things he already knows or is able to handle) and the passenger behaviour is reduced. Students now do take responsibility while contributing to the project teams. Inquiries amongst the students confirm these results. Due to a clear role description and individual assessments The second method is working on the specific engineering competences in their traineeship and thesis work in the last part of their study. This was first introduced in the Autumn of 2005 in the E&E department of Fontys.
MULTIFILE
Motor learning is particularly challenging in neurological rehabilitation: patients who suffer from neurological diseases experience both physical limitations and difficulties of cognition and communication that affect and/or complicate the motor learning process. Therapists (e.g.,, physiotherapists and occupational therapists) who work in neurorehabilitation are therefore continuously searching for the best way to facilitate patients during these intensive learning processes. To support therapists in the application of motor learning, a framework was developed, integrating knowledge from the literature and the opinions and experiences of international experts. This article presents the framework, illustrated by cases from daily practice. The framework may assist therapists working in neurorehabilitation in making choices, implementing motor learning in routine practice, and supporting communication of knowledge and experiences about motor learning with colleagues and students. The article discusses the framework and offers suggestions and conditions given for its use in daily practice.
DOCUMENT
Movement is an essential part of our lives. Throughout our lifetime, we acquire many different motor skills that are necessary to take care of ourselves (e.g., eating, dressing), to work (e.g., typing, using tools, care for others) and to pursue our hobbies (e.g., running, dancing, painting). However, as a consequence of aging, trauma or chronic disease, motor skills may deteriorate or become “lost”. Learning, relearning, and improving motor skills may then be essential to maintain or regain independence. There are many different ways in which the process of learning a motor skill can be shaped in practice. The conceptual basis for this thesis was the broad distinction between implicit and explicit forms of motor learning. Physiotherapists and occupational therapists are specialized to provide therapy that is tailored to facilitate the process of motor learning of patients with a wide range of pathologies. In addition to motor impairments, patients suffering from neurological disorders often also experience problems with cognition and communication. These problems may hinder the process of learning at a didactic level, and make motor learning especially challenging for those with neurological disorders. This thesis focused on the theory and application of motor learning during rehabilitation of patients with neurological disorders. The overall aim of this thesis was to provide therapists in neurological rehabilitation with knowledge and tools to support the justified and tailored use of motor learning in daily clinical practice. The thesis is divided into two parts. The aim of the first part (Chapters 2‐5) was to develop a theoretical basis to apply motor learning in clinical practice, using the implicit‐explicit distinction as a conceptual basis. Results of this first part were used to develop a framework for the application of motor learning within neurological rehabilitation (Chapter 6). Afterwards, in the second part, strategies identified in first part were tested for feasibility and potential effects in people with stroke (Chapters 7 and 8). Chapters 5-8 are non-final versions of an article published in final form in: Chapter 5: Kleynen M, Moser A, Haarsma FA, Beurskens AJ, Braun SM. Physiotherapists use a great variety of motor learning options in neurological rehabilitation, from which they choose through an iterative process: a retrospective think-aloud study. Disabil Rehabil. 2017 Aug;39(17):1729-1737. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2016.1207111. Chapter 6: Kleynen M, Beurskens A, Olijve H, Kamphuis J, Braun S. Application of motor learning in neurorehabilitation: a framework for health-care professionals. Physiother Theory Pract. 2018 Jun 19:1-20. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2018.1483987 Chapter 7: Kleynen M, Wilson MR, Jie LJ, te Lintel Hekkert F, Goodwin VA, Braun SM. Exploring the utility of analogies in motor learning after stroke: a feasibility study. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014 Sep;37(3):277-80. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000058. Chapter 8: Kleynen M, Jie LJ, Theunissen K, Rasquin SM, Masters RS, Meijer K, Beurskens AJ, Braun SM. The immediate influence of implicit motor learning strategies on spatiotemporal gait parameters in stroke patients: a randomized within-subjects design. Clin Rehabil. 2019 Apr;33(4):619-630. doi: 10.1177/0269215518816359.
DOCUMENT
