 Doki, Doki, welcome everybody. It is now 11.30 so we shall get going just whilst the camera decides where it wants to point slightly. Both sessions in this hour are on the wildcard theme of the conference and for the first 30 minutes we have Huying Wong with the development of learners digital practice in a learning network. This will be a 25 minute presentation followed by around five minutes with some very quick and speedy questions. I will hand over now. It could be three hours if I end up talking theories and get too excited so but I'll try not to do that. So thanks very much. I'm Huying, I am a PhD student from the Education Research Department at Lancaster University. I'm also a digital learning producer at UAL and I trust you all. But today I'm talking to you as a researcher. I'm talking a research project I did about a year ago on exactly the title as our chair just told you. And for some reason my team wanted to have a meeting with me right now which is not going to happen. But before I go into the actual research, I just wanted to explain what I mean by digital practice. I mean digital practice by including digital capability, digital literacy, digital skills. The reason why I chose to use a more slightly more generic term is because I was inspired by a blog post written by Dr Donna Lankel. She's here today and tomorrow. So we disagree with what I'm about to say. Tick it up with her, not with me. We shouldn't be describing people with such binary terms because the opposite of capability is incapability, the opposite of literacy is illigacy. So we should really be looking at someone's development from a more holistic perspective, hence the term digital practice. But if I use digital practice capabilities and literacy interchangeably in this presentation is because I've forgotten some of the things I've just said. So, before I talk about the actual practice, there will be some tool into the presentation. It wouldn't be a research project without some theories. And this is where you're going to be locked in this room until five o'clock until I've explained to you what threshold concept is. If you don't understand what it is, you're not leaving this room. That is a guarantee. I'm joking. You'd be allowed to go for lunch at some point. So in this, how do I change the slide on the other one? Yeah, so I've tried to combine two theories in this study. The first one is threshold concept. To put it in a very simplistic way, threshold concept is about how we learn, how we realize the fact that we're learning, we're processing information, perhaps somehow subconsciously rather than sitting in the classroom being forced that information. So it's kind of like, it's meta-learning. If you know what that is, it's basically just how you process information and the end of it you realize, actually, I can accurately describe what I've learned in my own way rather than repeating what my teacher has taught me. So there are five distinctive characteristics. Some people argue there are six, there are eight, but I've gone for the classic root because I want to keep it simple and less than the explanation is always good for me. So just very quickly to go through them. Transformative is a change in our understanding of a subject. So as you go through learning a process or a subject, your views might change. And if you tell me change of view about something, that's a transformative threshold concept experience. Irreversible, very simply, once something's learned, your view of something's always going to change forever. So for example, learning how to ride a bike, once you've learned how to ride a bike, you're never going to forget. And you're always going to look at a bicycle differently. Integrative is pockets of isolated knowledge that you might have learned throughout your life. They make sense independently, but they don't quite make sense as a connected sort of piece. And if you go through the integrative threshold concept experience, this is where things begin to connect. Bounded or boundedness is where you start to understand the same word or terminology have different meanings in different contexts. So discipline specific knowledge terminology might mean something in engineering, but it might mean something else in everyday life. And I can't think of an example. I have one in my paper. I'm happy to share with you guys but I just can't remember what I actually wrote. At least I'm being honest, right. The last one is troublesome knowledge, new perspective, new knowledge of something you already know, maybe troublesome. But if you always thought, let's say an orange is sweet, but I'm telling you today an orange is sour, you might be like, well, actually it's not, I'm going to disagree with you, you might be troubled by it. But at the end of the day, you have to understand different views. And by the end of the process, you have to make up your own mind. It's either an orange sweet or sour or a bit of both. It's for you to decide, but it's a process of being troubled by different perspectives. That's kind of quite common experience people, people go through in the sort of threshold concept literature. All these experiences could be had independently or together, or in whichever order, through a liminal space or liminality, but basically it's a space where you enter, you get confused, you might get lost, but hopefully by the end of the process you come out going through that harm moment, which is quite common thing that people refer in any threshold concept literature. It's the right of passage you have to go through from not knowing something to knowing something. So that that's briefly what threshold concept is. I don't understand because after five years of learning this thing, I still don't fully understand what it is. But, you know, anyway, so the next theory is a little bit easier to explain. That's the networked learning theory that is not to be confused with community of practice or connected with some of connected learning is very different. It's very similar but very different with one distinctive feature of networked learning theory in networked learning community, the people have to be connected via some sort of technology. So the most famous example of a networked learning community is actually academic Twitter or what's left of it. Because people connect through a common technology. So your local meeting club is unlikely to be networked learning community that is a community of practice. So that's the difference. And I'm going to skip the pattern of relationship because that's obvious, you know, once you, you know, be in the group for a while you have sort of, you know, your preferred people you want to talk to that's just common human nature. A lot of networked learning scholars believe in social justice and in learning community. So there shouldn't be any leader there shouldn't be any followers everybody should be allowed to have the fair share of their participation and communication and whatever engagement in that group. So no one should take over. It should be everyone, you know, happy getting along. So that's what it is. And at this point in my wonder, well, how did the two theories connect. It is very simple. And I don't know why I put the next slide as my actual research question but if anyone seems interested, that's what it is. How can special concepts be realized in the peer mainly online learning environment. And how the individual learners digital practice don't ever have a research question this long to have one that you can say in one breath which I couldn't. But basically, my theoretical assumption of the two theories that if you are in a networked learning community I'm talking about online community. If you talk to your peers if you engage with them. So perhaps subconsciously, it's a better way of actually learning. And what I mean by learning is the definition of the threshold concept. So it's your engagement your discussion with your peers, maybe after class, maybe, you know, after seminar, the thing you've been taught, you might not understand fully what it is, but it's in the kind of group discussions afterward, the kind of casual discussion that goes on at the background. That's how you potentially realize you're actually learning that thing that is not being forced upon you. So that that's how I see the two theories connect. I'm hoping that by creating a network learning community and peers within the network could kind of inspire each other to experience the threshold concept character is that yes I described I've been told in the last conference. I'm not allowed to say threshold concept experiences because that's wrong. Don't ask me why I've just been told that. I agree. And that was a personal concept conference. So, they're right. I'm wrong. Whatever. And so in order to prove my assumption the two theories connect. I've gone for an experiment if you like and I've used the design based research tradition. Sorry, decide based design based research methodology. And with that is a very prescriptive methodology, you have to come up with an intervention and experiment and you have to come up with a set of intended outcomes. And you have to plan your intervention down to the T, and you have to prove yourself right or wrong or somewhere in between. So this is my conjunction. Sorry, two computers confusing. This is my conjunction map. So as you can see the purple bits are what my intervention is from the beginning that is a four weeks online testing course which I explain in more detail in a minute. The intended outcome is that people who have experienced that four weeks course should develop the digital practice and the green bits are the kind of nitty gritty details down to the, you know, the technology and the interaction and how I predicted that people would interact with each other. I don't control how people interact in the intervention on the course but I predict some of the behavior. So this is the complicated version, the actual full version. And this is the simplified version. As I said, there's a four weeks online course. So this is simple and flexible. It's mostly asynchronous discussion because you think about our daily communication now online. It's a lot asynchronous communication DMs and Twitter and what's having what have you more so than verbal communications I try and kind of replicate that. And that has been researched saying that students sometimes prefer to kind of asynchronous communication because it's less here now so it gives them time to think and reflect before they have to respond. So I'm trying to mimic that and also the flexibility is important for my participants as much as it is in real life. And so the first column is basically just a summary of the weekly activities, the middle columns is what I expected behavior the interaction would be and the third columns are the four areas digital practice I expected everyone to develop at the end of the course. And those are taken from the just digital capability framework. I'm not so interested in the some of the thing about a framework talking about you know, learning different digital skills, etc, etc. I'm more interested in the kind of as a holistic elements of how someone developed as a person I suppose in some ways. I'm just going to quickly tell you show you what the actual practice isn't we're going to quickly look at the results. And four weeks courses I set I opened a university online that's based on a platform called tell us elevate but I need to declare that the research has no commercial relationship with tell us that basically just gave me a whole bunch of license and say have fun. There's no string attached so I'm not sponsored by them any way such from. And so this is just basically hop for the participant to like a VLE like a Moodle site people somewhere to get the links. Just a bit nicer than emailing people back and forth. This is what interface look like. Basically, it's a bit like a like a like a more colorful version than a of a Google document you highlight bits of things that you want to discuss of another article or video, and then you have a discussion. That's that's basically what it is. It's just a more kind of interactive way to discuss things than using a Google dot or using a forum, and everything is in the same space. So, what I haven't talked about is the sample size so important in any research if I told you to people talk about in this course you might think well, you result is a load of nonsense because of two people's opinions, but if I told you I had 23 people. The project that becomes more believable because it's a bigger sample size. So Tony's really high education professional either working the digital world or who has an investor interest in digital talk part. It was a deliberate decision to not to ask actual students because I needed people who has already have the foundation of understanding digital in a to be able to go through a very concentrated version of what a real life course might be a real live kind of experience because four weeks is no time. So I needed people to be able to just get in there and scrutinize the activities very quickly. And so the data I got were obviously the interactions with people, the discussion that they had throughout the weeks. So, there were a certain points the four weeks there were focus group questions I asked them again asynchronous question discussion, where they respond, they responded and then there were also interviews with a selected participants with more focused people to ask them more details about the responses because I acknowledge that there's only so much you can write in a message so sometime you do have to refer back to the kind of verbal one to one conversation so that's why there's a multiple layers of different data collection. So we're running out of time. So quickly, look at the findings. You see this graph again, I've now tried to connect the activity to the interaction TV, what I predicted to be the improved digital practice. Communication and participation, pretty much happened throughout the week as expected, with the exception of week for which was more just self reflection and people just reflecting on the experiences till they kind of as a post operated more in silence than as a group. Communication and participation is proven to be transformative for a lot of people, because only through discussion they realize, actually, I haven't thought about something in a different way you're right, or I'm wrong or you're wrong I'm right so this discussion really help people to kind of develop multiple areas of the digital practice, assuming different roles, maybe this means I'm a teacher the next minute I'm a learner in the same conversation, but they are teaching people, they're teaching each other different things. And through that obviously develop your critical voice because, you know, it takes a certain courage to speak up which is why sometime in group discussions people don't speak is not because they're stupid just because they haven't got the courage. So, moving on to collaboration and knowledge contribution mainly happened during the main bit of the course the actual discussions. I should probably mention which I forgot the discussion will mainly around various topics in higher education because I had to fans that come in ground for all the participants. So, in a real life situation it could be discussion of some other topics I just had to find something for them to discuss that they both could understand. So in your respective discipline it could be microbiology it could be pet and cats it could be whatever that yeah. So collaboration knowledge contribution mainly happened in the middle of the course is so set. The troublesome knowledge the troublesome experience with particularly apparent because as you get into discussion you realize, again the conflicting views started to emerge particularly at the later part of the course. When people kind of got to know each other a little bit better. They realize that actually I can be very brave I can voice my opinion stronger. For example, one participant categorically refused to engage in one particular discussion of an article written by Xbox because they really don't get on. There's nothing there's nothing more to it other than they just don't get on. And she made her feelings very clear, highlighting her name to say I hate this person I'm not going to take part this week or something like that. And it got other people interested thinking well, am I going to take you reset as face value that this person is a bad writer, what she's written it's not valid or am I going to actually scrutinize that content, even more to make my own judgment. So there was kind of discussion about whether or not they should read the article I prescribe rather than the actual article which was quite interesting. If you're going to trouble some knowledge of troublesome experience comes in, you have to make your own mind, new views that come into your, your view, are you going to accept them or not. And that that you know that happened quite a lot in online spaces where there's so much noises, you know, but I for example there's so many people, you know, saying things, which one are you going to believe you have to make up your own mind. Hello. Very, very quickly running out time. I do apologize. So with the next interaction I expect would was the challenging challenge previously understood knowledge. What happened again throughout the course, except for week one where there was ice breaking exercise was just completely just have fun. I think I did what did I did choose to pokemons and just tell people why you think you're Pikachu or one of the other 50 pokemons I've no idea if I just, you know, not found a Pokemon I just thought there's enough characters for people to choose from. And one thing that really stands out is how people as they got comfortable how people kind of like bringing additional resources to support the view. So they're not just saying, Oh, I agree with this article I agree with this resource. But they're not just saying about their view they're also bringing in other evidence to support themselves, which is quite interesting because then the knowledge bank becomes big and big guys not just what I prescribe is other people bringing in other knowledge so you become each other's teachers and this is where I think the learning network becomes very interesting when you are measuring people fresh or concept experience because you just don't know what people end up learning, because they end up they end up learning far more than what me perhaps as a teacher in this in this regard would expect. And so that's that. And then, last but not least and then I promise I'll shut up support relationship building. As I mentioned, you know pattern relationship happened in any network. This is no exception. I think one of the most obvious thing that happened and perhaps no surprise to you guys is that there were a lot of people as it were a participant really really clear to say well I actually ended up only wanting to talk to these people but not those people because their views agree with mine more so than those people. And it's a problem but I think I think that the one thing that stood out in this experiment is that the people are aware of that they're aware of the fact that they are kind of leaning towards particular people. And I think it's awareness that makes it interesting they're aware of this is a problem. This is a double X so and they're willing to kind of adapt their attitude, accordingly, which is why I linked it to the develop different identities and also the new interpretation of knowledge because it's the awareness that that that matters if you know where that you only want to listen to one set of opinions then that's what that's where the problem is but but it wasn't the case in particular case. So, just to conclude this is the overall map of the four individual matches and you can see it's messy it's meant to be over the place. And that's what make learning interesting and that's what make developing digital practice shouldn't be capability thing we shouldn't say have you learned a BNC we should really look at the overall thing. Have you developed as a whole and often when you look back, not in four weeks when you know when you look back in the last few years realize actually I've come a long way, develop all these things. I don't know how, but I have, and this is why I wanted this project to kind of potentially at the beginning of a development of some sort of framework to offer people something to measure how they learn. This is just the beginning so maybe I'll come back next year and version two I don't know. And, but I'll stop because, you know, we're severely out of time but thanks very much and if you want to in the slide and the references are in that link. If anybody wants to read the actual paper. Just, just, just let me know it's not published so I can't, you know, because I want to publish so I can't post online because once I've done it. It becomes a bit tricky so if anybody wants to read I can privately send it to you. So, thank you. So, thank you for that very interesting talk, we now have a short eight minutes or so for any questions. Should there be any in the room please just raise your hand, or we can stay awkwardly at each other for just a small moment. I can keep talking. Yeah, thanks for that I was cracking. That was crap. Now James and I know each other, James and I know each other so it's fine. So, coming back to your, the people that you had in the study you said that they were effectively like professionals or used to using these types of technologies rather than students which I'm assuming you're talking about like undergrad or any students so if you are a lecturer then your experience for a student for me my student would be academic so it, you know, it depends. Okay, so if you had more than a month. Maybe like three months with that change your view on who you would have selected. Yes, if I have three months or six months ideally a year to run a module. If you don't want to keep it applied to any modules anybody run you just have to apply. You just have to kind of almost like engineer the kind of network learning community and really measure the federal concept experience quite artificially. But because you know I didn't have a lecture at the time I had to do the whole project from planning to finish the writing in about five months time. I didn't have a luxury of actually running an actual course and that would be ideal if anyone wants to let me run this on their program please just let me know, I'll do it for free and we can share the credits. You know, so yes, yes I would, because then I will have time to explain to the people what digital practice is and you know just just I have more time to do the prep work with the people. So yeah. Any other questions in the room. Yes, of course. And that was really good. Thank you. I really enjoyed that. Thank you. I was just wondering, you mentioned about it would be good if you'd had longer. So have you got any plans for kind of further research to kind of go but I was just thinking about going back to maybe looking at relationships that be informed or or because you've got everything in there and you I mean it could be such a big project if you've been. I do I do I do have the plan is like I said, you know, the this this thing here is really a stage one of what I want my ambition will be in 20 years time I'll be the famous researcher connected to theories together sorry to shout but I do get excited about trying to connect the two theories together, because one is about individual learning one is about how we learn from each other. There's an obvious connection, and it doesn't even have to be digital you can apply it to any any subject. It doesn't matter. And so I do want to do further work but it's a case of. I think the difficulty with doing educational research is that your job doesn't really allow you to the time with the agency or the resource because I'm a learning designer I just don't run any courses I don't have students I could naturally say, guys, this year, we're pitching as normal but you know I have to kind of almost beg my academic colleague to say, can I and most of the time they don't want you to play with their students this kind of thing what you've been told you will know, but so so yes. I would like to but whether or not I can, I don't know. I can only keep trying so. The keynote that we just had with the student panel, you know, on it and a lot of the things you were saying picks up on the work that you're doing. Some of the stuff that they were saying is not new, we've got kind of all kind of wrongful about these things. Yeah, so you don't have to get the opportunity to embed it. No. Yeah, so as I said if anyone wants to let me have a you know have a partnership with their on their courses please just let me know. I mean it'd be really good to apply this in a real life situation. Because the whole thing about a network learning theory is the invent some sort of experiment and you almost like a lab experiment and then you apply that to real life situation in fact the PhD I'm doing a Lancaster. And it comes 1516 years ago when the network learning theory was created co-op one was the experiment and 16 years later the course is still running so it works. So, yeah. Just for the people at home that last comment was about linking this session to the keynote and developing that going forward. You probably have time for like the most speediest question. Let me just answer about your data. Tell us, tell us about your data collection. Did you use really what you know, how did you use your data. I wasn't expecting such transformative presentation. I just read the title so I was expecting something boring but thank you really interesting really. So, as I said, as I said, the whole experiment experiment was done and tell us elevate just social annotation platform. The data collection was pretty manual I had to basically copy and paste all the messages and put them on LST at LST I which is a coding software. So I kind of did it quite manually because I wasn't working on behalf of an institution I was doing it as a student and tell us this is really generous to keep me a bunch of licenses, I think 50 they gave me to play with. And so I just thought, you know, I'll suck it up and just do it manually. I'd like some automator sort of like data analysis software to help but, you know, I did it. No budget. So, you know, I'm also asking for budget I rather be independent than you know which is why I said to tell us quite clearly, you give me the licenses, I will not promote you I will not even put your logo I don't even have to mention them all they asked for was can you give us an hour of your time afterwards to tell us how we can improve the platform. That was the only condition so yeah. Thank you for that I think one more last round of applause for those wonderful artists.