Conclusion                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Is difficult to say how much freedom should have an online student. If, on the one hand, freedom is essential in an education system that promotes autonomy and independence, like distance learning, on the other it seems to me that the amount of freedom will depend on the type of course that the student take. It depends on If he choose a self-pace progression or grup-pace progression.

In activity 4 of Unit 1, Professor Morten promoted the following discussion:

I want 6-8 volunteers to form two teams for a debate on self-paced versus group-paced progression. There are of course pros and cons for both solutions, but next week the volunteer women should argue in favor of self-paced progression the volunteer and the men should argue in favor of group-paced progression.

At the end of the discussion, I could not choose which group had the best argument.
As mentioned by colleagues who made a summary of the discussion (Wednesday, 18 November 2009, 10:14 PM, Eduarda Rondão, José Carlos Figueiredo and Teixeira),
(...) Women's group presented the main characteristics of self-paced, some of which are:

• The student controls the pace of learning, he's not dependent on the structure or rhythm imposed by someone. The use of the Internet is a great advantage as the students can both download the materials for their activities and have access to them at anytime, as they are available 24 hours a day.

• In self-paced, the teacher has a very important role, for it is he who guides the student in their learning process.

But the men's group, who defended the group-paced progression also had valid arguments, such as:
The group of men, defending of the group-paced, chose to oppose the points made by the group of women. They highlighted the lack of interaction and isolation that can lead to situations of lack of motivation. On the other hand, they presented some of its strengths, including working in groups, as they contribute greatly to learning through the sharing of ideas and mutual assistance which is almost constant, thus strengthening the motivation of the students. (Wednesday, 18 November 2009, 10:14 PM, Eduarda Rondão, José Carlos Figueiredo and Teixeira).
In addition to these, there was an argument made by Paulo Simões (Wednesday, 11 November 2009, 11:42 PM) which seems to me very relevant, when he counter-argues for the first time:
(...) Second. How can you defend self-paced learning when we are doing a great and typical group paced learning activity? If this discussion was self-paced how many days could last this activity. Would it be as effective as we are doing? We do not believe it could work as well ...(...)
In fact, there seems to be a contradiction, since the group that advocates self-pace presents an argument based on group work.
Moreover, the activity of the first unit is a good example of how online collaboration is not a waste of time. The arguments presented in the discussion were made through collaboration between the various elements of the two groups, using tools available online. It would have been very difficult, in a face to face course, for example, participate in a discussion of that type, because of geographic distance and deadline.
In final reflection of my annotated bibliography of the first unit, I highlight the importance of quotes from Terry Anderson (2008): "Networks afford opportunities for learners to associate, negotiate, plan and execute projects, on a global scale with other learners."
And I think that is the opportunities offered by networking that may facilitate cooperation in paced and unpaced learning environments. How? Promoting discussion forum, as we did in the fourth unit of each unit and reviewing learning objects published by colleagues, as we were asked in the third activity of each unit.