Student-generated content

Learners' roles

There is agreement in the literature that students, in the 21^st century, need a shift in mindset, and must change their roles from passive to active learners. They should no longer ‘act’ as empty receptacles ready to be filled with knowledge. They should be, through dialogic and collective learning efforts, the be ‘creators rather than consumers of knowledge’ (Papert, 1993: 13). In this new educational scenario, the learning content must therefore not be solely identified and, then, delivered by the teacher. The students must be engaged in the creation of content, through, or aided by technology.

Theoretical underpinning

This is the thrust of the argument of the contemporary advocates of the three most relevant learning theories – constructivism (in its various faces and forms, i.e. social, radical and critical), constructionism (Papert, 1993) and connectivism (Siemens, 2004; Downes, 2007). The constructivists, banking on the ideas of Jean Piaget, view learners as actively engaged in making meaning. The constructivist educator looks for what students can analyse, investigate, collaborate, share, build and generate based on what they already know, rather than what facts, skills, and processes they can parrot. To do this effectively, Freire (1971) argues, a teacher needs to be also a learner and a researcher, to strive for greater awareness of the environments and the participants in a given teaching situation in order to continually adjust their actions to engage students in learning, using constructivism as a referent.

Constructionism asserts that constructivism occurs especially well when the learner is engaged in the construction of a physical, intellectual or virtual artifact/s:

Constructionism shares constructivism’s connotation of learning as ‘building knowledge structures’ irrespective of the circumstances of the learning. It then adds that this happens especially felicitously in a context where the learner is consciously engaged in constructing a public entity, whether it’s a sandcastle on the beach or a theory of the universe. (Papert, 1991)

Papert (1993) also strongly argues that

Children are the builders of their own cognitive tools, as well as of their external realities. In other words, knowledge and the world are both construed and interpreted through action, and mediated through symbol use. Each gains existence and form through the construction of the other.

Thus, in constructionism the focus is on learning through making. This process, if done within a group, can create a ‘community of inquiry’, which, through dialogue, can engage all learners reflexively and socially, thereby enhancing the educational process. 

Finally, in connectivism, learning is defined as

the process that occurs within the nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialised information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important that our current state of knowing. (Siemens, 2004)

In a nutshell, and pertinent to the discussion question, this theory suggests pivotal roles for dialogue and collaboration between students in ‘maintaining connections and developing knowledge through them’ (Ravenscroft, 2011: 140). Downes’ (2007: 1), another advocate for connectivism, argues that learning which must therefore be based ‘on conversation and interaction, on sharing, creation and participation, on learning not as a separate activity, but rather, as embedded in meaningful activity’.

Potential student roles

In this theoretical scenario, dialogue, collaboration, experiential learning and the creation of new knowledge through artifacts, are more important pedagogic strategies than the delivery of knowledge. The creation and incorporation of student-generated content is a pedagogical necessity. This creation and integration of content into a course is also important because many students are today (i) already immersed in a digital culture, and (ii) already have some experience, albeit very limited, of content production (Lippincott, 2007).

As Dougiamas (1998), the guy who started Moodle, notes, involving students in the creation of websites, computer software, robots, and ‘public entities’ (Papert, 1993) that other people can see and evaluate, is, therefore, an important pedagogic process. ‘Public entities’, in contemporary discourse include websites, blogs, wikis, pages on Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest (and similar), presentations on PowerPoint, SlideBean and Prezi, podcasts and videos. The latter, Vest (2009) [from this module’s readings] argues, are so important in contemporary society, that ‘YouTube accounts to 25% of all Google searches’.

A Google search with the parameters ‘students creating content’ produced a very long list of interesting sites, blogs and wikis (curated by theorists, practitioners and students), podcasts, videos and scientifically rigorous papers.  There were 378million results!

In one of these sites, LaMartina (2012) describes a digital marketing class at Meredith University and notes that:

the MBA students don’t simply learn the best practices for online salesmanship – they actually use them on real-world brands and businesses. They lead blog discussions, critique each other’s responses, and create full-fledged marketing plans for themselves or the companies they work for. Though the course begins with six instructor-led meetings, the students co-create the vast majority of their own materials.

LaMartina (2012) also notes that cloud-based learning has made it far easier for students to not only create their own educational materials (including videos, podcasts, blogs and wikis), but to quickly and effectively share them with peers.  He argues also that one of the greatest advantages of student-created content is that it allows learners ‘to engage dry subjects in creative ways’.  

Warning: Possible challenges

Despite the pedagogical strengths of engaging students in creating content some important considerations need to be made.  These include

1. Creating digital, audio or video artifacts, students need a wide range of skills, including multimedia literacies.  If the students do not have these skills, producing content, such as podcasts or videos, may involve a steep learning curve.
2. Software and hardware should be chosen wisely.
3. Student content-production tasks should be directly linked to the learning objectives of the course.

Therefore, educators must provide effective guidance, motivation and support throughout the whole process.

Concluding comment

McLoughlin and Lee (2008) argue that ‘the key benefit of learner-generated content lies in the processes of creating, knowledge construction, and sharing as opposed to the end product itself’.

References

Dougiamas, M. (1998) ‘A Journey into Constructivism’, available at http://dougiamas.com/writing/constructivism.html, accessed on 24 February 2015.

Downes, S. (2007) 'An Introduction to Connective Knowledge', Media, Knowledge & Education - Exploring new Spaces, Relations and Dynamics in Digital Media Ecologies, Proceedings of the International Conference held on June 25 - 26, Innsbruck, available from  http://www.downes.ca/post/33034, accessed on 24 February 2015.

LaMartina, D. (2012) ‘5 Tips for Adding Student-Generated Content to Your Curriculum’, in edcetra, available at http://edcetera.rafter.com/5-tips-for-adding-student-generated-content-to-your-curriculum/, accessed on 24 February 2015.

Lippincott, J. K. (2007) ‘Student Content Creators: Convergence of Literacies’ in EDUCAUSE Review, vol. 42, no. 6 (November/December 2007), pp. 16–17, available at https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM07610.pdf, accessed on 24 February 2015.

McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. (2008) Future learning landscapes: Transforming pedagogy through social software. Innovate 4(5). http://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=539, accessed on 24 February 2015.

Papert, S. (1991) ‘Preface’, in Harel, I. & Papert, S. (Eds.) Constructionism, Norwood, N. J., Ablex, pp. 1.

Papert, S. (1993) The children's machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer, NY, BasicBooks.

Ravenscroft, A. (2011) 'Dialogue and Connectivism: A New Approach to Understanding and Promoting Dialogue-Rich Networked Learning', in International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 139-160.

Siemens, G. (2004) 'Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age', available from  http://www.elearnspace.org/Articiles/connectivism.htm, accessed on 24 February 2015.

Siemens, G. (2008) 'Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing roles for Educators and Designers', in ITFORUM for Discussion, available from  http://itforum.coe.uga.edu/Paper105/Siemens.pdf, accessed on 24 February 2015.

Vest, J. (2009) ‘Six Steps to Creating High Quality Video Training’, Learning Solutions Magazine, available at http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/185/six-steps-to-creating-high-quality-video-training, accessed on 24 February 2015.