Jane Hart’s Top Ten Tools for 2014

Jane Hart has once again asked for people to vote on the top ten tools that they use when working online. She has been doing this annually since 2007. This is a helpful prompt for reflection on whether my use of technology has changed over the past year and if so why, and if not why. I am not very adventurous in adopting new tools. Technology doesn’t interest me enough to want to experiment with tools I am unlikely to find useful in my every day work. I can remember clearly being shown Second Life a few years ago and knowing that I would never want to spend time trying to learn how to use it, and now it isn’t mentioned very often, or not in my circles, so I don’t regret not engaging with it. I am not afraid of technology, even of Second Life, although I was in the very early days, when I remember that I even resisted having a computer at home. All that struggling to use BBC computers in primary school classrooms, way back in the 80s, really put me off to begin with. At that time I would never have thought I would end up working as an education consultant mostly online.

These days, these are the tools I use and what I use them for.

Personal, private communication

Email: I still use this a lot and for many things it is still my preferred mode of communication, although I recognize that this has become easier since I have been independent and no longer receive hundreds of institutional emails, which have been copied to everyone, like I used to in the old days. Email does not work though for discussion about research, because it’s difficult to keep track of the ongoing conversation and edits.

Pbworks Wiki: I use this a lot for collaborative research. I find it a fantastic tool for this. Not only can we keep all the resources and data in one place, but we can also discuss papers and ideas. I also use it for shared reading, e.g. to discuss a book. I spend a lot of time in my wikis and see that I now have 34 wikis in my list (not all currently active), most of them set up by me.

Skype: This is a great tool for personal communication and team meetings. And it’s free! I use Skype quite a lot. I prefer it for meetings. I have never liked the phone, so I don’t particularly want to Skype for ‘chat’.

iPhone: I am not of fan of phones and only use them when no other form of communication will do the trick. In the past few weeks I have spent what I consider to be an unreasonable number of hours changing my phone provider. I hate how difficult they make this.

Personal Resource Curation

Mendeley: This is where I collect all the research papers that I am interested in, read them and make notes on them. I really like that it is so easy to cite references from Mendeley. There are public groups in Mendeley and although I am a member of some, I do not really engage with them.

Evernote: I use this for making a note of interesting websites and online sources. It is easy to use and organise and complements the PDF/Word documents that I collect in Mendeley.

Feedly: This is where I gather RSS feeds to all the blogs I am interested in, but I am a slow reader (not good at skimming), so I don’t get to read as many as I would like to keep up with. I am more likely to read blog posts if they come into my email.

Flickr: This is semi public/private. I store nearly all my photos on Flickr, but I only allow some contacts to see photos of my family. I don’t like seeing photos of myself online, so I can empathise with others who might feel the same and don’t assume that everyone is happy to have their photo posted online. I tend to take photos as memories of places I have visited and found visually stimulating.

Kindle: I have just bought a Kindle PaperWhite. I love it. I already have a collection of books that I want to read – all in the palm of my hand – and it is sympathetic to my ever failing eyesight!

Public communication

WordPress: My blog is very important to me. It is a place where I publicly reflect on what I am thinking about in relation to my work. It helps me to do this reflection. I don’t very often use my blog for reflecting on more personal issues.

Facebook: I don’t really like Facebook very much, and as such don’t post there very often, but a lot of people that I like use it, so I tend to look at it most days to see what they are up to. I am a member of a few Facebook groups.

Twitter/Tweetdeck: I am also not a huge fan of Twitter, although I can see its advantages for sharing ideas. I find I have to trawl through a lot of ‘dross’ to find the gems. I like Tweetdeck for conferences. I find I can follow a conference very well online, at a distance, by creating a conference column in Tweetdeck.

Google+: I have an account, and I share my blog posts there, but it has never really resonated with me and I don’t really use it for anything else or follow it.

LinkedIn: I also share my blog posts on LinkedIn. My profile is actually a bit of a mess and I should do something about it, but I’m not sure what the benefits of LinkedIn are.

Blackboard Collaborate: This is not free for large numbers but it’s great for webinars, although Adobe Connect is also not bad these days. I have tried Big Blue Button in the past – but not recently. I could definitely find use for a reliable free tool that could host large numbers of participants for a webinar.

Presentations

Powerpoint: I’m not really a fan of this from the receiver point of view, but I haven’t yet really worked out why. I think it’s because presentations are necessarily more didactic than would be my choice. I still use it, but try to have as little text on slides as possible, although I know that this doesn’t help people who are listening to recordings.

Prezi: I have used this twice. For me it needs to be used judiciously for specific purposes.

Word: I use Word every day. I am now questioning whether Word is always used for presentation. I think it is – even if that presentation is only to myself. I am working in Word now, to write this post.

Camtasia: I use this for recording online presentations. I also use it for research purposes and when I am working on projects which require interviewing people.

Research

Survey Monkey: I have used this quite a lot. Going back to check, I see that to date I have created 23 surveys in Survey Monkey. I used to have a paid account (unlimited questions), but now I use the free account (up to 10 questions). I find it a really useful tool to get started on gathering empirical data. Email and Skype can be used for follow up.

Sharing

Dropbox: Apart from the tools I have mentioned above, I use Dropbox – for sharing large files, such as videos.

Excel: This remains a very good tool for gathering large amounts of data for analysis. For example, I used it extensively in a project where I was working with 21 Universities and synthesizing their work on a variety of funded projects.

Searching for information

Browser: I use Google Chrome. Before moving to Chrome, I used Internet Explorer and Firefox. I have had fewer problems with Chrome. But sometimes Chrome fails me and then I use Safari.

I also search for information through Google Search, Wikipedia, YouTube, Google Scholar and Google Translate.

I know I should use a variety of search engines. Perhaps this is what I need to work on for next year.

TOP TEN TOOLS

So which are my top ten tools? I know I use other tools as well as the ones I have mentioned here, such as Diigo, ScoopIt, JustGiving, Moodle and so on. This makes me wonder why I have focused on the tools above. On her site Jane Hart tells us ‘how’ to vote – but as far as I can see she doesn’t stipulate what ‘Top Ten’ means. Does it mean the number of times, or how often you use a tool? Does it mean how useful you find the tool? Does it mean how easy you find it to use the tool? Does it mean that it is free? And so on.

I’m going to select 10 based on the frequency with which I use them, either every day or at a minimum every week – and as such there are some important ones (to me) missing from this list. Here is my Top Ten, created according to this criterion.

  1. Google Chrome (that’s where I start each day)
  2. Email – Yahoo (that’s my next stop at the beginning of each day. I reply to emails as necessary and save them to my folders)
  3. WordPress (I check comments and stats every day and might write a post, if I have something to say)
  4. Facebook (I check what my friends/connections are doing, but find myself constantly asking why I am doing this. It feels a bit like voyeurism, since I rarely post in Facebook myself)
  5. Tweetdeck (I scan the different columns for new posts which contain information which is relevant to my work. Occasionally I find something. I am very grateful to those who retweet my tweets)
  6. Word (then I get down to it and start writing. Usually the writing gets copied into another site, e.g. PbWorks, or WordPress, or an email etc.)
  7. Flickr (I usually have a backlog of photos that I want to edit and upload. I like to see what other Flickr contacts and users have posted. I am always so impressed by the openness and creativity of others)
  8. Kindle (This is very recent. I read something every day on my Kindle PaperWhite. I can upload PDFs and comment on them and also upload a whole wishlist of books I hope to read. I read every night before sleeping. It used to be tangible hard copy books, but I find the Kindle easier. Will I be missing the hard copy books by this time next year?)
  9. PbWorks (I don’t think a week goes by without adding to or commenting on text which has been uploaded to one of the wikis that I collaborate in. This is where I experience the most in depth discussions in my working life).
  10. Evernote (This helps me to remember and store those weblinks that I often come across serendipitously and which I don’t have time to read in the moment).

I realize that this post is a bit like our work on Footprints of Emergence in which we (Roy Williams and I) create a visualization of an emergent learning experience in an open learning environment (See this open wiki for details).

In drawing these footprints we realize that the reflective process is dynamic and can change from instance to instance, so maybe if I were to list my top ten tools tomorrow they would be different. But this is my list for today and now.

Theory-informed TEL and Connectivism

This week I met Seb Schmoller  who recommended that I have a look at the ocTEL MOOC , a 10 week open course in technology enhanced learning which is being run by ALT (Association for Learning Technology) here in the UK.

Seb is a former Chief Executive of ALT. I was vaguely aware of this MOOC, but had put it to the back of my mind, because for me there are just too many MOOCs about at the moment – it’s difficult to know where to focus.

But Seb’s prompt made me have another look and ‘Yes’ ocTEL does seem well organized with some interesting discussions and useful resources. However, I don’t think I will be getting fully engaged as I am already committed in part to FSLT13  due to start on May 8th 2013 – and Growing Old Around the Globe   due to start on June 10th 2013.  More of them later in other posts.

So far in the ocTEL MOOC I have checked out the Week 1 resources and listened to the recorded presentations .  One slide from Liz Masterman’s presentation has stuck in my mind.

Liz Masterman

Liz Masterman interviewed academics in Higher Ed and asked them which theories informed their use of technology in their teaching. This Wordle is the result. The two tiny words are ‘constructionism’ and ‘behaviourism’. This slide resonates with me because I was recently asked to create a presentation about learning theories for Lisa Lane’s Pedagogy First Online Teaching course. Whilst I am familiar with everything that is on Liz Masterman’s slide (although there are some models in there as well as theories), I only mentioned a few of these in my own presentation. Maybe I should have tried to take a broader brush, but at the time less seemed more.

For me an omission from Liz’s slide and therefore from the interviewees’ thinking and experience of technology enhanced learning in Higher Ed is ‘Connectivism’ or anything to do with networked learning – although communities of practice can be thought of in terms of networked learning.

In terms of the slide I don’t think it matters whether or not we think of Connectivism as a theory, since some of the other items listed on the slide are not theories – but could its omission be a ‘telling’ statement on where academics are in Higher Education in relation to their understanding of learning in new landscapes of practice?

Technologies of Cooperation

This is the topic for Week 5 of Howard Rheingold’s course – Towards a Literacy of Cooperation

This topic has been discussed in relation to:

  1. Affordances
  2. The role of social media in political events
  3. Sharing economies, social production and collaborative consumption

1. Affordances

Affordances       Slide from Howard Rheingold’s Week 5 presentation.

A number of affordances were suggested in the discussion, some related to the Slide and others not. Click on the image to enlarge it.

  • An understanding of the pedagogies which support cooperation, e.g. a formal hierarchically managed community of practice might not be as effective in encouraging cooperation as a community managed Facebook page.
  • The ability for users of a platform to see the activities, patterns and network relationships of all others using that platform – such as depicted by social graphs, biomapping, system maps etc.)

This enables users to create and adjust their expectations about others.

  • The ability to see the big picture and handle complexity (longbroading and emergensight). I’m not sure about this because the work I have been doing with Roy Williams and Simone Gumtau on emergent learning suggests that in complex environments it is not possible for one person to see the whole picture. For me this is why cooperation might be important.
  • The importance of timely feedback. In order to cooperate we need to know what the other person thinks. Trust is important in this process and reputation and social capital scoring devices were thought to be helpful, such as the system on which eBay works. Brand Yourself is a tool which was mentioned.
  • Open source tools e.g. PLOTs – which is a community which develops such tools to apply to environmental exploration and investigation. This also reminds me of sites such as iSpot – a website which is aimed at helping anyone identify anything in nature and in so doing supports wildlife conservation.
  • Collective disaster response through sites such as CrisisCommons –   which provides a platform for people to self-organise. There are many more of this type of site
  • InnoCentive – which crowdsources innovation problems to the world’s smartest people who compete to provide ideas and solutions to important business, social, policy, scientific, and technical challenges.

A question raised in this discussion was whether we can adapt to the pace of technological change. There is not space here to report on this discussion in depth, but the work of Ray Kurzweil and Bill Joy  was mentioned and thought to be rather depressing.

2. The role of social media in political events

Whilst some of us might only recently have become aware of the power of social media to influence political events, Howard has been thinking and writing about it for more than 10 years.

He talked to us about how he had first thought about this in Tokyo 13 years ago when observed how people were using their mobile phones; about the organized demonstrations in the Philippines, Korea, Spain, the Ukraine, Los Angeles, Chile and Egypt. However he said that a Smart Mob is not necessarily a wise mob and not necessarily non-violent. We continued to discuss this in relation to the events in Cairo and the idea that ‘the new tools of social media have reinvented activism’ – but we also noted the doubts expressed here – and that

‘ The power to gather round like-minded people can lead to false impressions of hearing all voices’.

YouTube, Facebook and Twitter all play a role in world events but the importance of that role is being debated and it was suggested that we ‘Beware the online ‘filter’ bubble’ – where personalized searches might be narrowing our world view.

3. Sharing economies, social production and collaborative consumption

Howard asked us

‘In what ways are technologies of cooperation enabling new forms of economic production, transaction and consumption.’

It was pointed out that forms of economic production are not new (think carpools, car boot sales, community organizations etc.) but that they have been made easier by new technologies. There are many examples

  • Large capitalistic companies (e.g. IBM) are open sourcing their software. This benefits both the company and to a lesser extent others. It is not an altruistic act.
  • Educational leaders now network and interact on a daily basis.
  • Crowdsourcing computation is an example. SETI@home –  is a scientific experiment that uses Internet-connected computers in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI). You can participate by running a free program that downloads and analyzes radio telescope data. Literate populations can now do new things together and science has become a collective enterprise.

Perhaps one way to think further about all this would be to read Howard Rheingold’s book Net Smart –  in which he thinks discusses how to use social media humanely, intelligently and mindfully.

Cooperation has shaped our species and our species is shaping cooperation.

‘A new narrative is emerging in a large number of disciplines – competition is shrinking – cooperative arrangements are expanding’

Pedagogy First gets going again

Pedagogy First is a Programme for Online Teaching Certificate Class run by Lisa Lane and her colleagues at Miracosta College.

 The class is free, offered by the Program for Online Teaching (not an accredited institution), run by volunteer faculty and participants, and open to everyone. We offer a certificate for those who fulfill the syllabus requirements, and open participation for anyone not interested in the certificate.

The course started in September – broke for Christmas and started again a couple of weeks ago. It will continue to run until the end of April. Participants are very enthusiastic and many seem to be ‘flying’ in the development of their ability to use technology to enhance their teaching.

It is great to see participants experimenting with different technologies and being confident enough to share these with others. Last week the focus was on images and screenshots  and explored the use of FlickrMbedr and the annotation of photos. There were a number of great blog posts this week, but Norm Wright’s introduction   to a 3D rotating image cube caught my attention.

This week the focus has been on Audio and Video with equally successful results. For example, Trisha Hanada Rogers was on the course last year and this year has come back to demonstrate how she uses what she has learned in her teaching.

For more examples of how participants are experimenting with new tools see the Pedagogy First site.

I have been invited to talk about learning theory later on in the course. I know now, having seen the work produced by participants in the last two weeks, that I cannot match their technical skills, but hopefully I will be able to contribute some ideas from my past teaching and learning experience.

I’m looking forward to seeing what’s on offer in the next weeks of Pedagogy First.

The beauty of endless distractions in discussion forums

Diversity and distraction is what I am experiencing in Howard Rheingold’s Towards a Cooperation of Literacy course. One participant described it as ‘the beauty of endless distractions’.  I think there are 31 participants in this course – its difficult to be sure, since there is no participant list and maybe some are just observing – but those who are there are very active.

In all there are 16 forums in this first week, with 5 of these devoted to the subject matter of the literacy of cooperation and containing 183 posts. Some of the remaining 11 forums also contain posts related to the subject matter; in all there are 349 posts in these eleven forums (probably going up as I write) and we are not yet at the end of the first week.

I have tried to capture some of the ideas from two of the forums to illustrate how wide ranging the discussion is. Discussion is so intense and fast moving that inevitably I will have missed some. I do not have the time nor space here to explain the ideas, but they can all easily be followed up on the web. Nor do I have time to attribute them to individual participants – rather I will say that their range and diversity exemplify cooperative and co-learning in this course.

Forum 1: Philosophize about cooperation — looking at the big picture while examining the details

The following ideas have been mentioned and/or discussed:

  • Dancing as an example of human synergy and cooperation, with particular reference to Chicago Step and Swing
  • Morphic Resonance and the work of Rupert Shelldrake in relation to flocking birds. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH-groCeKbE (I had to copy and paste the URL into my browser to view the video.
  • Ambiverts as written about by Daniel Pink in his book ‘Drive’. Ambiverts are both extrovert and introvert. The question raised was ‘Do ambiverts best understand their partner’s thinking?’
  • The role of rewards in cooperative activity
  • Risk and failure in collaboration
  • ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ – Daniel Kahneman’s book
  • ‘Why plans fail: Cognitive bias, decision making and your business’. Jim Benson’s book

So in this forum there has been limited discussion about cooperation in biology. Most of the discussion has been about the conditions which enable us as humans to cooperate, what motivates us and how and why we might decide to cooperate.

Forum 2: Cooperative arrangements in ecosystems

There has been extensive discussion in this forum covering wide ranging topics with, again, a tendency to move away from biological cooperation (as in plants and animals) to human cooperation – but as one participant pointed out, we are a product of biology too (not her exact words).

Biological cooperative arrangements

Gaia Hypothesis – if the evolution of life and its environment affect each otherr, is it in our self-interest to cooperate?

Self-interest and collective action – how do we make choices? Stickleback fish exhibit Prisoner’s Dilemma strategies.

Plants know their relatives and like them, but is this in their best interest?

Identity and membership in communities was related to mustard shoots recognizing their genetic partners.

Mapping biological concepts onto human consciousness

  • One participant cautioned ‘Don’t press the metaphor of biological evolution too hard’. Consider the

– noosphere (which emerges through, and is constituted by, the interaction of human minds – net-based consciousness)

– Global Consciousness Project

The same participant thinks ‘there is more going on than science and pragmatism can uncover’.

  • Tielhard de Chardin described evolution as a 3-fold process
  1. diversification
  2. individuation
  3. communion when the diversified and individuated entities begin to cooperate

His thinking was thought to be both pantheistic and teleological.

  • Ervin Laszlo has written in his book ‘Quantum Shift in the Global Brain’ about the brain as a quantum computer, connecting to the mind of God.
  • The Institute of HeartMath researches thinking with the heart and heart intelligence; and a participant quoted Pascal ‘The heart has its reasons which reasons knows nothing of… We know the truth, not only by the reason, but by the heart.’
  • Links between the body and environmental cues have been discussed in relation to Dr Shepard Siegel’s work on performance, emotion and environment
  • David Bohm’s ‘Thought as a System’ was mentioned as was Henry Markram’s work on a unified model of the brain.
  • ‘Evolution’s Arrow: the direction of evolution and the future of humanity’ by John Stewart was another book mentioned and of course  Richard Dawkins’ – ‘The Selfish Gene’

But one participant writes:

‘There are not individuals, just interacting systems at all different levels. And we call some sorts of interaction cooperation and other sorts competition.’

The discussion then moved on to the question of…

Where is technology leading us?

Here are some of the ideas that were thrown into the pot:

  • Self–replicating machines
  • Autopoietic and allopoietic systems
  • Conway’s ‘Game of Life’
  • Eric Drexler’s ‘Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology’
  • George Dyson’s – ‘Turing’s Cathedral: The Origins of the Digital Universe’
  • Game theory’
  • Cybernetics, information theory, network theory and chaos theory are all thought to be important in attempting to understand cooperation.
  • ‘Evolutionary Ecology of Technology’ (an article)

Finally a question from a participant: ‘What are we talking about – semantic cartography?’

Despite the discussion being all over the place the patterns of interest are emerging.

ETMOOC Orientation Week

ETMOOC which is being offered by Alec Couros and his conspirators has just come to the end of its first week – which focused on Orientation.

ETMOOC is described as a MOOC with a ‘weak centre’ which marks it out as being very different to OLDSMOOC, which I have been ‘observing’. OLDSMOOC feels as though it has a strong centre, even though it is distributed across a variety of platforms.

This week I attended ETMOOC’s live Orientation session and an Introduction to Twitter session and from these sessions ETMOOC does feel very different to OLDSMOOC. For a start it has a very different audience who this week have been asked to introduce themselves in the ETMOOC Google Community. My email inbox became so inundated with posts that I had to set up a filter.

At the beginning of the week I was very struck by Tomas Lorincz’s introduction and that together with many of the other introductions has made me realize that I will have to do something more creative with my text-based introduction on this blog – but that is going on my ‘to do’ list, for sometime in the future.

And now at the end of this week, I go to my filtered folder and right at the top is this post by Glenn Hervieux which describes participation in a MOOC like working on a jigsaw puzzle. I think this is a great analogy.

Evidently ETMOOC has almost 1500 participants from over 60 countries,  355 blogs have subscribed to the blog hub  (and as an aside, sorry but I really do not like the idea of featured blog posts -feels a bit competitive and not quite in the spirit of community) – 200 people attended the first Orientation session in Blackboard Collaborate and 71 were in the second session that I attended.

Participants have been invited to run a session if they are interested. Nice touch!

An interesting point is that ETMOOC is being run on a ‘zero budget’. Evidently ‘not one dollar has exchanged hands’.

Some principles of participation were strongly emphasized:

  • Collaborative and cooperative working on shared problems of education and society
  • Collaborative creation of experience
  • Trust (much was made of this)
  • This is a connectivist MOOC  (cMOOC) which relies on its members to connect and co-create knowledge. cMOOCs are discursive communities creating knowledge together (Cormier 2012)
  •  There is no assessment, but badges will be awarded
  • Topics will be crowdsourced
  • Participants will control their own learning spaces, but key questions are 1) How are you making your learning visible? 2) How are you contributing to the learning of others?

Many of the particpants in ETMOOC appear to be new to online learning and were reminded that many people are afraid when first posting online or joining a MOOC. This video was used to excellent effect to illustrate how that might feel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebtGRvP3ILg

There is lots of advice on how to participate in this MOOC including a Dynamic Guide to Participation

And recordings of the live sessions are in the Archive

The topic for next week is Connected Learning.

Finding my voice in Academic BEtreat

The Academic BEtreat is on a roll.

Academic BEtreat learning environment

The technology issues have been largely sorted – yesterday my sound scarcely dropped at all, and if it did it was only for a minute or two – so I now feel like I have more of a chance of learning. (I say ‘my’ sound, but the problems have been at the California end, not at mine here in North West England).

I enjoyed yesterday very much, and I realize, not for the first time that I much prefer learning online than face-to-face, i.e. if there is something deep and substantial to discuss and learn. Face-to-face can be great for networking and socializing, and both these enrich the relationships and the learning, but for me online allows for more ‘filtering’ of ideas, more reflective space and more control over the learning process. I can more easily distance myself and switch off what I don’t want to listen to, I can be more selective about who to interact with, and I have more time (although still nowhere near enough) to process the ideas and new learning. I already feel that my time spent working on this year’s BEtreat online has been far more productive than when I was in California last year.

It has taken me a while to work out how best to organize myself for working online on this BEtreat. Before the start, I set myself up with a large second computer monitor, so that I would have more space to keep open different sites and documents. But despite this I have still reverted to taking hand-written notes. There was just too much switching between Skype, Adobe Connect, video on/off, microphone on/off, open word documents, open PowerPoint presentations, open BEtreat wiki site, open blog posts, and email – to be able to write into a Word document at the same time. But my hand written notes are a terrible scrawl. I am out of the habit of handwriting fast – so will I ever be able to decipher my notes?

What I have found extremely interesting so far is that, despite the distance between me and my Californian and online BEtreat colleagues, I feel that I have much more ‘voice’ this year, than I did last year when I attended the BEtreat face-to-face. We have discussed identity in the BEtreat (I hope to come back to issues of identity in another post), and I realise that I have had much more opportunity to project my identity into the learning community this year. I think I have used my physical voice more in the synchronous sessions than I did last year, but I have also been able to type into the chat, which means I can ‘talk’ without interrupting the speaker. I don’t have to ‘wait my turn’. I also have my own personal wiki page where I can express myself to my heart’s content – and ‘talk’/write about what interests me (a bit like my blog). I’m not sure that anyone is ‘listening’/reading these thoughts, but to me that doesn’t matter. It is another opportunity to project my ‘voice’ and not be interrupted 🙂 And what is more, on reflection, I realise that these depictions of my ‘voice’ are less fleeting than in a face-to-face setting. This can be both positive and negative, but for me the positive usually outweighs the negative.

At least twice in the BEtreat I have felt my identity to be on shaky ground – it has been challenged. I am still reflecting on this, but need time to process my thinking about identity, from what we have heard and learned on this BEtreat.

Finally, there is one other BEtreater who is blogging – my online colleague Jutta Pauschenwein. Jutta has written a great series of blog posts about the BEtreat. This is her latest post – http://zmldidaktik.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/did-i-reach-my-objectives-in-the-betreat/

Much of what Jutta writes reflects my own thinking, but what I realize is that my extensive participation in MOOCs over the past five years has helped me to cope with the uncertainty and information overload in this BEtreat.