The most prominent impression is, of course, being overwhelmed by the huge amount of stuff. My way of approaching the confusing landscape of countless tools, sites, and resources, was to try and get a visual overview of the salient ones.
I tried to practice the new required CMAP tool but miserably failed and for now resorted to Powerpoint. (I need to find out how I can draw boxes and arrows that are not “propositions“, i. e. don’t require labelling the connectors).
I soon realized how impossible it is to process all postings, so I tried to select a sample as randomized and representative as possible. Then I realized that the selection will probably be biased towards participants who use similar tools as I do.
On occasion of this course, I finally registered with facebook and Google groups, and improved my digital literacy by encountering new kinds of spam that were previously unknown to me.
When I finally started to read the assigned papers, I noticed that I will probably be a bit uncomfortable with the total openness and public-ness of the course: If I am annoyed by some text and would like to vehemently and unpolitely oppose it, but my critique is still immature and unqualified, I cannot publicly do it. (So I understand that the closed sandbox environment of our elearning platform does not only serve the requirements of our §52a UrhG (the fair use clause of our IP law) but is also actually useful for something.)