Synergy is unpredictable



DQ is the digital intelligence quotient

Week 3 of #ONL162 Digital literacies

It is only week 3 and I am already proud of being a group member of PBL9! Abstraction level is high. Thinking level is high.

I miss some entrepreneurial and personal questions of the participants, it is very academic. The synergy in this group is different from my first PBL. That is remarkable.

Now I am starting to get aware of this phenomena: the results of every PBL group will be different because of the group members. I would like to know more about the results of the different PBL groups in this project. What is happening when participants are more different or less different? Is this influencing the results?

Some personal notes about the topic “Digital literacy”: We have seen great models of where digital literacy is about, but what about the digital literacy to learn to rest, to relax, to wait, to meditate and to process all you’ve seen and learned on the internet? And what about the digital literacy how to do financial activities and organise your private live? Is it in the scheme’s?

The scenario of Topic 1

 “I have just signed up to do an online course and I am excited to be there. But I have little experience of online courses and it feels really challenging to get started to connect and find my way with all these new sites and tools. I guess that other participants will be more experienced than me and I feel stupid asking about things. We are asked to create a Learning blog on the web; it feels a bit scary to do this. I do share things on Facebook with friends, but here in the open? I want to keep my private life separate from my professional life. But on the other hand, my students seem to share and discuss in social media and use all kinds of tools and resources. I think I need some guidance in how to become more digitally literate and what competencies I need to develop to keep up with what is expected of me”.


One of seven group members of PBL9 has signed out the ONL162 course. Six group members, facilitator and co-facilitator will be online in the third week.

Group members seems really do enjoy the Fish document – the a-synchronous collaborative working document on Google Drive where the group is doing inquiry on the scenario witch was given for the first topic. There is a lot of  notes there, a lot of questions, a lot of additional sources.

The questions

  1. What are the resources for digital literacy? Where do we find them?
  2. Where are ideas to inspire strategic development of digital literacies of professional educators
  3. Where are ideas to inspire Strategic perspectives across the organization on digital literacies – approaches institutions can take to help drive forward digital literacies  in a consistent, holistic and sustainable way.
  4. How to develop a strategic vision underpinned by institutional values and effective leadership
  5. How does our institutional mission recognise the importance of digital capability?
  6. How to work with online tools?
  7. How to collaborate with peers / other teachers?
  8. How to enable service and support for diverse digital practices in a flexible way for students and teachers.

(Academic staff and students are best placed to know what they require in terms of their practices and what they are trying to achieve but know less about what is available to support tem in terms of technologies and service. Professional services are responsible for support staff and students in terms of texhnologies and services but know less about what staff and students actually wants and what they are trying to achieve. These knowledge gaps between those two we need to work with.)

  1. How to promote culture of innovation and change where staff and students at all levels are involved in strategic conversations around pedagogic development
  2. How to prioritize areas for development in digital literacies and support?

The collaborative work

Groupmembers did the following in week 3:

Working out the scenario on the Fish-document; inquiry, a-synchronous discussion, inspiration, motivation, sharing knowledge, constructing knowledge, making knowledge more explicit

Discussing tools to present: inquiry of online tools,…

Choose a model for understanding the topic: (Beetham and Sharpe ‘pyramid model’ of digital literacy development model (2010) ) everyone can place themselves on the model: translate the personal story about digital literacies in the context of the model.

Make or choose a group-definition of Digital literacies: ‘Digital literacies are the capabilities which support living, learning and working in a digital society (Jisc)’

Make a list of shared resources:

  • David White: Visitors and residents (part 1)
  • David White: Visitors and residents – Credibility (part 2)
  • Kek, M.  & Huijser, H. (2015). 21st century skills: problem based learning and the University of the Future. Paper Third 21st Century Academic Forum Conference, Harvard, Boston, USA.
  • Developing digital literacies (2014) JISC guide.
  • Savin-Baden, M., (2014) Problem-based learning: New constellations for the 21stCentury. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching  25 (3/4)  197-219  Preprint Savin-Baden JECT (3).
  • Savin-Baden, M. & Wilkie, K. (2006) The challenge of using problem-based learning online. In: Problem-based learning online. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
  • White, D. & Le Cornu, A. (2011) Visitors and residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9).
  • Belshaw, D. (various dates):
  • Slideshare on Competencies:
  • Doug Belshaw and Mozilla Firefox Partnership:
  • TeDX talk with Doug Belshaw:
  • Bates, A.W. (2015) Teaching in a Digital Age.  Available from:
  • Goode, J.  “The Digital Identity Divide: How Technology Knowledge Impacts College Students.New Media & Society. May 2010, Vol. 12 Issue 3: 497-513. Print.

Digital literacy: Cu=cultural, Cg=Cognitive, Cn=constructive, Co=communicative, Cf=confident, Cr=creative, Ct=critical and Ci=civic    and Financial? Legal?… to be continued/


The online & synchronous meeting week 3

It was so nice to see each other. Even Raphael could join with a webcam. We were all happy. Miriam was leading the session in a great and professional way ant the others worked hard. 

We talked about:

    • The great SWAY (tool), which the group made as the sharing-production of Topic 1. 
    • The collaboration process; 
    • The quality of the discussion in Fish-form was very profound. Additional sources were added. There was discussion on the form.
    • There was discussion about the quality or quantity when exploring different kind of online tools
    • Collaboration with other PBL group, pro’s & con’s, what is ideal nummer of group members? What fears do we have concerning students behaviour in these kind of groups? Do we have to focus on future concerns? 
    • Infrastructural thresholds for DL. Our South African group members have still problems with internet. It is infrastructural. This is a great threshold for developing digital literacies.
    • Digital literacy for students and teachers. Yes. But how about children and parents?The discussing was personal and engaging. Gizeh says: “My attitude towards my children about the use of internet has changed the last two weeks.” 
    • I added a digital literacy to the ones we already collected: “How to stay in balance with online and offline activities in live. When you are too much online your way of thinking is changing.





Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s