Mashup. Vs Framework

I may be taking liberties and using the term 'Mashup' a little liberaly here but below is an e-mail I sent to a colleague 'Chris' after a discussion around the concepts of 'Frameworks'.

Hi Chris,

I still have trouble with the concept of frameworks.

I think what you've been working towards looks real good. I've kind of got a bind but am working through it.

It's almost retrospective to be discussing "Frameworks" when the new order is more of a 'mashup'

Using WWW wherever whenever whatever. Frameworks determine parameters. I recognise that what they are after is a pedagogical construct that they can point at

as evidence that we know what we are doing but....

The following quote from (J.Harding,2004) "Using safety nets: flexible learning and operational change"

one of her references is:

Cairns notes:

Change is the only constant, knowledge and information is open, plentiful and incomplete. The reality of the new-style organisation is characterised by chaos, complexity, uncertainty and paradox. 

The rate of change is such that we can no longer even pretend that we can know what is going to happen next. (1998:26)

(Cairns.M. 1998) "Approaching the Corporate Heart" Simon and Schuster, Australia.

So.... mashup indeed.

I think the real tenet we must incorporate in our teaching/learning framework is to be learner-centred, this avails a huge and mixed range of recognisable framweworks. Personally I prefer to look at process then try to fit which framework this might be called/ aligned to.

To try to do otherwise may be missing the point and leave untried possibilities unexplored.

Regards

Merf