When I started this course I had got some expectations on the content from reading on the course web. Among other things I somewhat had the expectations (misconceptions) to listening to lectures, analyze research papers, and disseminate results in a global team. When I look back on the previous two topics, I must say that I was somewhat wrong in my initial idea about the course:) Even if reading research papers is good, I believe that a really good thing about this course is that it starts from the other end.

Instead of putting up a list of papers, etc. to read we are given a scenario. We then start talking and discussing our opinions around the scenario, and at first this confuses us and makes us start thinking about different scientific methods for solving the “problem” and eventually worries us because of the scientific level on the end deliverable. What I have realized after two weeks is that what the course format actually is about, is making us talk and trigger each other which makes us engaged in a topic from our own perspective so that we get motivated to learn more about it. Pretty clever:) Reading about “the course IS the course” makes me think about the story of the Wright brothers that realized that “the problem IS the problem”. Wrights spent their time on figuring out tests to learn more about flying while most others, at that time, spent their time on building something they believed could fly but that they seldom tested. Even if I knew all about this, I fell into the trap:)

I believe that our team, even if we sometimes have been a little bit confused, are doing good and that the course format actually pays off. We are learning about ONL by ONLJ We could of course improve our way of interacting and communicating but that is also part of a natural social process which will become better with time. If I look at myself, I will try to feel more confident and focus on getting influenced by everyone’s opinion instead of worrying about scientific level on deliverables:)

I will try to incorporate ONL in my own education somehow. I like the arrangement and don’t have anything negative to say about it. One thing though that I have been thinking on is the time we students spend in each phase of the FISH-process. I like the idea of cyclic/iterative processes and maybe it could be good to have more dedicated time slots for each phase, for example having a reflection period after every topic? One the other hand, such manipulation, to an otherwise quite flexible approach, could be experienced as too controlling or difficult to grasp. Time will tell:)