Padlet

 

I have not used Padlet in my supervision activities or teaching yet, but I have used it in collaboration with other researchers and participants in workshops. I enjoy the simplicity of the interface and how we can view each other's entries like on flip charts when workshops are held in person. Padlet brings some further advances – it can be used asynchronously – and later still easily viewed or added to it. It takes away worries about any spelling or illegible handwriting as the entries are all digital and can be easily corrected. One disadvantage is that the discussions around the entries cannot be as easily facilitated due to the asynchronous nature of digital media. Even if the Padlet activity is carefully planned, and participants are asked to explain their contributions but because it’s not in person it is harder to gauge the reactions by participants or collaborative develop an entry. 

Below is an example where we collaborated using Padlet in the social enterprise consultation, which involved educators, students, researchers and members of social enterprises.

Using the RAT model by Hughes, Thomas & Scharber 2006, which considers technology to be replicating, amplifying or transforming pedagogical practices, I would say that Padlet is one of the technologies that transforms pedagogical practices as it allows anyone who has access to the Padlet to be involved by contributing or reviewing it, thus allows participants (from any part in the world) to learn from each other. Or in Corrington’s pedagogy wheel, I would see Padlet being placed in the ‘Create section’ of the wheel as it allows participants to create a visual canvas with links and other media together.

go back to introduction

jump to conclusion