¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Lesson Overview. Open educational resources usually target a community of interacting users. The patterns of communication and exchange depend in part on the definition of the community of practice. The language used sets the limits of the potential audience and the profile of the participants involved. The institutional context, professional profile, as well as the reference region also determine the socio-technological design of MOOCs, educational forums and other open educational resources. This module examines how to define and manage meaningful communities of practice.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Open educational resources are often made operative through groups of heterogeneous composition (in terms of region of origin, language or values). Teams composed of members from different cultures are innovative and contribute to new approaches to problem solving. However, there is a challenge in getting cohesion and integration in the group, and diversity may contribute to conflict or misunderstanding. In this module, we present the implications of “super-diversity”, majority-minority interaction and other forms of intergroup contact.
- ¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0
- A German university uses Moodle to coordinate the End-of-Grade Work of all final-year students.
- A private foundation from Jordan launches a chemical engineering course in Arabic, implemented in Sakai.
- The European Union designs an online course in English, French, German, Spanish and Italian to prepare for the international travel of Erasmus students of different nationalities and languages, taught through Blackboard.
- A consortium of North American universities offers a course in social network analysis conducted by one of the leaders of the area, open to participants from around the world.
- A Chilean university conducts a course in Spanish on the application of social intervention projects in marginalised communities in Latin America.
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 Each of these courses varies in the learning management system, the language, the conditions of access and the group to which it is potentially directed. They not only use different software, but also have a different “social design”. Beyond the intention that the course be more or less open, they differ in the community of practice that they have defined and, consequently, the audience to which they are potentially directed.
- ¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0
- Language is one of the elements that contributes to the establishment of boundaries, since it implies a specific community of speakers.
- Second, there are institutional or group membership requirements that also delimit the community of practice. In the previous examples, one of the courses requires being a student of a specific university, another requires being a student of the Erasmus program and another one implicitly requires being part of the stakeholders in the community development in Latin America.
¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 On the other hand, regardless of the a priori definition of the target audience, the implementation of the course entails specific social dynamics that determine the accessibility and the final use of the resource. For example, the course of chemical engineering in Arabic can be addressed generally to students from the Maghreb and the Middle East region. However, in practice the type of Arabic used can make students in Jordan or Palestine feel more comfortable with the language used than students in Morocco or Tunisia. The examples of industrial chemistry may be more relevant in one country than in another. Furthermore, the degree of heterogeneity of the participants in the region can influence the type of interaction and the degree of participation that occurs in the forums.
¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 In sum, even with the objective of promoting open education, a set of social and institutional factors condition the effective community of practice that finally accesses and takes advantage of learning resources.
¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 Cultural diversity influences the performance of work groups. Cultural heterogeneity affects group cohesion and increases the likelihood of conflict. However, it also increases the creativity and satisfaction of the participants (Stahl, Maznevski, Voigt & Jonsen, 2010). These effects occur both between groups with a different national culture, and internally, for example with the diversity introduced by ethnic minorities within a national culture. Logically, there may be differences depending on the size of the group, the geographic dispersion of the group, or the type of management strategies that are developed.
- ¶ 13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0
- Members who have a poorer command of the language have more difficulty in participating, and the group has more difficulty recognising their competences. This not only affects the communication, but also the motivation of the participants.
- The communication style of each of the participants can be more or less direct depending on their cultural background. For example, an American usually says things more openly compared to a Chinese, which is more likely to use an indirect style of communication.
- Members vary in the pace of work, the time they invest in debating, or the more or less consensual style of decision-making. This forces participants to adjust the pace and expectations of group work.
¶ 14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 Imagine the following example: in a MOOC taught by a North American university, groups of students are formed to carry out the tasks of each module. The work is done in a group through a chat tool. In one of the groups, there are 2 Japanese students and 6 North American students. During the meeting of the group, several Americans take the lead and make a proposal that is accepted by the majority. When the activity is to be concluded, one of the Japanese students says that they do not agree with the result and reopen the debate. The Japanese have had less opportunity to participate because they have less English proficiency. When they are building their ideas in English, the group is already addressing the next topic. In addition, they assume that it is important that the group reach a consensus, even if this means more time for debate or a slower pace in the discussion. Therefore, the group faces the dilemma of terminating the task (with the discomfort of two members) or restarting a debate that they thought had ended.
¶ 15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 In order to effectively manage multicultural groups, it has been proposed, among other strategies, (a) to recognise differences and face them directly, (b) to modify the composition of the group, (c) to establish certain norms of operation, or even (d) to remove group members, when other options have not worked (Brett, Behfar & Kern, 2006).
|Promoting cultural awareness so that the members of the group adapt to work with the differences existing between the members.||A MOOC “for the Arab world” decides to incorporate a module for preparation for intercultural contact, which promotes awareness of the cultural differences in the region and provides training in intercultural communication skills.|
|Designing composition of the groups to prevent conflict, communication problems or mutual stereotypes.||A teacher sets the following norm for the organisation of student task groups: “Erasmus exchange students cannot form a single group among them, but must be distributed among local student groups.” That way Erasmus are not segregated in the classroom and the local students have intercultural contact opportunities.|
|Reorganising teams when participants have been divided into defined subgroups and problems have begun to emerge.||In a course with students of four nationalities, managers decide to organise small groups with 25 percent of each nationality. This way the groups are integrated with each other (they are not segregated) and the majority-minority situation is prevented.|
|Mediation with direct intervention of a supervisor or coordinator.||Students who have previously worked in multicultural groups are mentors for students who have this experience for the first time.|
¶ 18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 A Latin American educational network programs video-conferences with several secondary schools. It is a “classroom virtual collaboration” project. Students from Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Ecuador participate in the exchanges, and make presentations about nature in their respective countries and then open a debate on ecology. To facilitate discussion, everyone uses an educational material about the environment in Latin America that they have previously selected among the resources with a Creative Commons license available at Curriki. In addition, through forums in the same community of educators, teachers have selected those parts of the material that coincide in different educational centers and that can allow a shared reflection between participants from the different countries involved. All students participating in the videoconferences are from urban extraction, except the representatives of Ecuador, who live in a rural area and are from the Saraguro minority. Finally, this group hardly participates in the debate, feel excluded and make a negative assessment of the experience.
¶ 19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0 This could be an example of a majority-minority situation, in which the minority group has a secondary status in the interaction. It is a case of intergroup relation, in which the characteristics of (a) differentiation between groups, (b) favoritism towards the group of belonging, and (c) social comparison, sometimes resulting in competition or conflict between groups, are observed.
¶ 20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 Intergroup relations are usually influenced by the social identity perceived by the individuals in contact. Accordingly, in order to prevent prejudice and discrimination between groups, several strategies have been proposed that are based on manipulating social categories:
- ¶ 21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0
- Personalisation. It consists of promoting personal relationships, so that membership in the group loses weight in interaction. In the previous case, informal conversations could be developed among the students before starting the scheduled academic activity. For example, students in Buenos Aires can enter into prior contact via Skype with Saraguro students. Personal exchanges help to break the stereotype that defines them as a homogeneous collective, giving rise to a process of “de-categorization”. This result depends largely on having a prolonged and positive contact.
- Re-categorisation. It consists of creating and promoting inclusive categories. For example, the category “Latin American” includes the different national categories, and these in turn are subdivided into ethnic categories (as is the case of the Saraguro minority). This is an element that can be handled institutionally in the dissemination of the activity, in the selection of students and in the implementation of the course.
- Crosscutting categories. It is also possible to use multiple categories, to find common spaces. For example, it may happen that several groups of students differ in ethnicity, but coincide in nationality, religion, associations in which they participate, or in sportive and political interests. Finding cross-sectional categories between Saraguro students and the rest could also improve relationships between groups.