This course has been an interesting experience. Most of the content and the proper format turned – if not upside down – at least out of regular place and order some of my perspectives on learning possibilities. It has certainly been a process to pass through the course:

I started as a lonely frozen sausage in a too small pott, with a tsunami of e-mails rushing towards and over me during those first chaotic weeks.


I kept telling myself to hang in, it just had to be a temporary situation, and surely lots of other sausages out there groping for something to hold on to. I continued struggling with a few peers in the PBL group, and gradually I managed to understand some logic and pattern. The beauty in all this was to end up with the comfort and safety of the group, PBL group 2. I hope we all felt (as I did) that we could rely on each other, and that we found that rhythm to communicate and collaborate in the end. It was nice to be reborn from a frozen sausage to a partaker of a small community (although we´ve never met)!

I still don´t think a very intense ”resident” digital mode is my private melody in this world, referring to White´s and Cornu´s (2011) definition of online engagement, but it is good to learn more about the conditions guiding it. It is really necessary to understand what motivates people and how we can meet in the most favorable and effective ways in the digital landscape, not least as it comes to educational situations.

I will remember different aspects with emphasis from this course. Some details and underlying functions to better understand digital literacy. Such as how part of the geniality of networking lays in the potential of trust and convenience for the participants (Jisc guide, 2016).

I will also note the staggering (sometimes scary but at once fantastic) possibility of openly sharing and using educational resources and knowledge sources, and how such a perspective transform the viewing on collaboration and networking as something possible and even necessary over organizational boundaries and interests (Wellers, 2014).

The fact that diversity is a sign of strength, and that we need to blend and meet, collaborate and mix our competences to achieve innovation and thinking beyond the already known was well described by Wenger (2010), while Vaughan, Cleveland-Innes & Garrison (2013) added further inspiration of how to actually make use of the time and space dimensions of blended learning to make these meetings happen.

To my work at the Academic primary health center I bring this deeper understanding of the possibilities and functioning of digital learning and collaboration, and the experience of meeting other professionals over time and space, building ties and connections, creating and learning together.
During the course I had the opportunity to look upon our educational mission from different perspectives. I have discovered possibilities with it and also questioned my understanding of it, which might change my way of developing it in the future.


White, D. & Le Cornu, A. (2011) Visitors and residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9).

Jisc guide ”Evaluating digital services: a visitors and residents approach” (2016).

Weller, M. (2014). Battle for Open: How openness won and why it doesn’t feel like victory. London: Ubiquity Press.

Wenger, E. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: the career of a concept. In Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179-198). Springer London.

Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Edmonton: AU Press. Chapter 1 “Conceptual framework”.