Taking its philosophy from the original punk movement, edupunk , a term coined by Stephen Downes, resists the use of what it considers corporate technology, such as Blackboard, in favour of a do-it-yourself approach to wikis, blogs, and social networking in the classroom and beyond. Of course, as Hands points out, Web 2.0 has its ‘commercial’ aspect (2011, 85), but, in terms of commodification, Blogher (2008) references Jim Groom on the struggle ‘over the future of technology’ where there is a ‘corporate mandate to compete’. Edupunk advocates, for instance, approve of the use of the open source VLE, Moodle, over other costly alternatives. Groom insists that the future use of technology in education should not be about the technology but about ‘a group of people, who argue, disagree, and bicker, but also believe that education is fundamentally about the exchange of ideas and possibilities of thinking the world anew again and again’ (Groom 2008).
Of course, it could be argued that the use of Web 2.0 collaborative projects in education are not the preserve of edupunk, however, what marks out edupunk’s philosophy is that it is politically, as well as pedagogically, motivated – ‘for every instance of technology as a means to consolidate power for capital, there is another instance in which that same technology can be used to undermine the fallacious logic of capital’s vision of progress’ (Groom, 2008). Pedagogy and politics are brought together in a vision of education in which academics and students collaborate, with Groom recommending a course from the University of British Columbia, called Murder, Madness and Mayhem, a project in conjunction with Wikipedia for students on a Latin American Literature course, to produce articles to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of the subject. Edupunk, then, is one way in which academics and students might address issues of the commodification of education and provide real choice in what is learnt and how learning is carried out. As a movement, and one which only recently has been referenced in the UK in the Times Higher Education (Nov 2011), Edupunk seeks to open up discussion over how technology might be used by an online community and within the classroom to empower academics and students, perhaps suggesting something of Habermas’s public sphere and discourse ethics as envisioned for digital culture by Hands (2011). Online collaboration suggests the possibility for some democratization of learning, with edupunk envisioning itself as activist in resisting the commodification of learning. Of course, online collaboration within formal education raises its own problems, not least the question of assessment, an issue I hope to address in my next MSc module at Edinburgh University, on online assessment.
(Continue to bibliography....)
Of course, it could be argued that the use of Web 2.0 collaborative projects in education are not the preserve of edupunk, however, what marks out edupunk’s philosophy is that it is politically, as well as pedagogically, motivated – ‘for every instance of technology as a means to consolidate power for capital, there is another instance in which that same technology can be used to undermine the fallacious logic of capital’s vision of progress’ (Groom, 2008). Pedagogy and politics are brought together in a vision of education in which academics and students collaborate, with Groom recommending a course from the University of British Columbia, called Murder, Madness and Mayhem, a project in conjunction with Wikipedia for students on a Latin American Literature course, to produce articles to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of the subject. Edupunk, then, is one way in which academics and students might address issues of the commodification of education and provide real choice in what is learnt and how learning is carried out. As a movement, and one which only recently has been referenced in the UK in the Times Higher Education (Nov 2011), Edupunk seeks to open up discussion over how technology might be used by an online community and within the classroom to empower academics and students, perhaps suggesting something of Habermas’s public sphere and discourse ethics as envisioned for digital culture by Hands (2011). Online collaboration suggests the possibility for some democratization of learning, with edupunk envisioning itself as activist in resisting the commodification of learning. Of course, online collaboration within formal education raises its own problems, not least the question of assessment, an issue I hope to address in my next MSc module at Edinburgh University, on online assessment.
(Continue to bibliography....)