The Digital Media and Learning Competition has reached the stage for authors to revise. I’ve been seeking out projects that fit with our thoughts for Reimagining Learning and saving them here. Now we have a couple interesting comments left by other entrants.
The question in my mind is how to better show what we are proposing to those commentators and perhaps use the demo to self-reflect and make our entry better.
First Attempt – Diigo
Following a brainstorming session with Theron, I created a Diigo.com group “DML Competition” so that I could begin exploring how to give Back@U type feedback (or at least an approximation of it) to myself and other DML competitors, using the criteria of the competition itself. I wanted to do my exploration in a public way that could become understood by the judges and the audience as well.
I found four criteria in the DML call for submissions and highlighted them in 4 colors with Diigo’s tools. After you install Diigo, check out the Digital Media and Learning/reimagining_learning.php entry in the DML Competition or see screenshot below.
Based on what I found in their call for proposals, here are four suggested categories for structuring feedback:
Yellow=Rich problems. Diverse, multi-faceted problems. New and emerging problems requiring a collaboration among different disciplines and skills to address.
Blue=habits of mind, including critical thinking, but extending to dispositions leading to innovation: creativity, persistance, curiosity, storytelling, tinkering, improvision, collaboration
Green=Social and collaborative learning; new learning resources, approaches and skills that augment traditional ones
Pink=Learning setting/activity: tangible, creative activities, that are open and discovery-based, involve tinkering and play and are not highly prescriptive.
Next I went to our Back@U entry and attempted to place the 4 colored highlights and some comment about how the criteria is met into our entry. This exercise was very instructive for thinking about our revisions…
Why do this in Diigo rather than as comments?
1) I’ve found that comments in the DML system have a limited length.
2) The color highlight allows me to point at the relevant place for my comment.
Get a Diigo account. Join DML Competition. Use the colors codes above and begin highlighting and commenting.
Steve Spaeth has jumped on the Diigo idea and is trying it in a project he has going.
Second Attempt – Google Sidewiki
My second attempt was with Google’s Sidewiki. Its an IE and FF plugin. Go to Google to get it. Sidewiki allows comments by multiple authors for the whole page and/or for selections on the page. Sidewiki does not support color coding.
What’s still missing?
Each of these tools captures some of our thinking, and perhaps enough to help us provide critiques for improvement.
Community agreed dimensions. I started by pointing to (conjectured) dimensions for assessing this work. The tools (Diigo ans Sidewiki) don’t support the posting of the dimensions.
Rating scale. While the tools let us point at parts of a text, we can’t use rubric criteria in the tool to provide a measure.
User control. It would be nice for the author to be able to embed a rating widget, preset with the dimensions and rating scale and invite feedback in more explicit ways.
Here is a hypothetical screen shot with widget embedded.