1. Group Reflection Members
1.1. Mark Bradshaw
1.2. Howard Browes
1.3. Tom Franklin
1.4. Kathy-ann Daniel-Gittens
1.5. Jonathan Griffiths
1.6. Andy Wilson
2. ■What can we tell about the range of experiences and preferences among ocTEL participants?
2.1. Too early to tell?
2.1.1. MOOCers?
2.1.1.1. Started
2.1.1.2. Finished
2.1.1.3. What's a MOOC!
2.2. Seems a wide range
2.2.1. Social Media preferences
2.2.1.1. Twitter
2.2.1.1.1. Slow so far
2.2.1.1.2. Lots of re-tweeting of ocTEL tweets
2.2.1.2. Google+
2.2.1.3. many options - yes. could be very confusing and daunting to keep up with too many. think i prefer twitter and possibly Google+
2.2.2. Bloggers
2.2.2.1. 'only' 44 posts in first few days
2.2.2.1.1. need to have something meaningful and constructive to say?
2.3. really like the wide range of participants
2.3.1. So do I. So why then, am I looking for people like me, from close to my geographical base?
2.4. even here we have lots of people wanting to be told what to do
2.5. I'm sure it will be hugely variable and that people's expertise will be very patchy.
3. ■What challenges does this present for the course?
3.1. the reliability of the technology is always going to be an issue; it is more of an issue for the technology sceptics who love technical glitches. we are perhaps more understanding
3.2. The very openness of the thing, if it can't cater perfectly for everyone is it good enough for anyone?
3.2.1. But if it is big enough, and open enough, surely anyone could find something that suits their aims?
3.2.2. Good enough is good enough, nothing caters perfectly for everyone.
4. ■In what ways is a MOOC like this one well or poorly suited to these challenges?
4.1. Well
4.1.1. Self-selecting group
4.1.1.1. Everyone's a volunteer
4.1.1.2. not sure this works? is this inclusive?
4.2. Poorly
4.2.1. Can't cater for everyone
4.2.1.1. Despite being open!
4.2.1.2. Some prefer rigid structure
4.3. think there needs to be a way of replicating better the face2face benefits of learning online through a MOOC?
4.3.1. i think we need to try and replicate what we would normally do in a f2f learning session' notionally assign to groups at the start and then move after induction? the approach sheffield college used for LETTOL worked really well for me
4.3.1.1. Or have a selection of pre-defined groups ready for people to self-select into.
4.3.1.1.1. I've seen something somewhat similar fail disastrously though, but that was course design, probably would have failed just as badly if it was more traditional too.
4.4. My sense is that its strengths are also its weaknesses (very common in SWOTs). What I mean is that the huge range of possibilities should be able to meet people's needs, but that this very range can make it hard for people to navigate their way to what they want.
4.4.1. 'like'
4.4.1.1. and we are the ones most likely to make the effort to find the good stuff!