Thanks for your response. “What is the desired outcome of Connectivism?” Great question!
I think each of us has our own answer, especially when it comes to informal learning. What are your passions? What interests you most? What makes you feel more confident, more competent, and more rewarding when learning in the network(s)? Could Connectivism help you in fulfilling your goals?
Most of us have been involved in our formal education for decades, and at times after graduation, we often found the skills that we have acquired are often not be good enough in tackling the challenges at work or in our daily life, especially at this time of great changes. So this new era of informal learning could stimulate us to be more connected to the networks, through our PLE/N or the Virtual Learning Environment, and the tools and media, that would help us to learn more effectively and efficiently as an individual or as a network, through sensemaking, wayfinding, skills building, and mutual sharing.
We could harvest our fruits of learning through such navigation, recognising of patterns of “knowledge” and thus develop a diverse area of interests that fulfill our curiosity to learn, and learning to be “a life long learner”- as part of our vision. We could also engage more deeply with the weak ties in this network, and broaden our perspectives as we reflect personally and together in the network in an open, autonomous manner.
We could also be inspired by each other’s enthusiasm in networking, tobecome our leaders of the future, to solve problems both individually and in the network, to support each other with the use of tools and media, and to be more connected in this world of networks. This will also help us in adding value to ourselves, our network(s), community and the social capital. A win-win to all.
“It doesn’t matter if people leave the course, and go off and study on their own. That would be their option, and the connections will re-form and the networks will form elsewhere, if the ‘course’ is not serving the needs of the people. Otherwise, are we forcing people to take and remain in the course?”
Would this be of great interests from an educational authority or administration point of view? What are the roles of educators and learners in a course? What happens if the course is not serving the needs of the people in an education institution? What happens if the network is not serving the people it is supposed to serve? Yes, people have a choice. We can’t force people to remain in a course. So, what are we going to do?
What should we do as an educator? How could we improve our support to our learners? How could we ensure the course is run more effectively and efficiently (on a learning and cost basis)? How could we achieve the institution goals and individual goals? These are the sort of questions typically asked by educational leaders and educators.
In a corporate world of education, there are intense competition between different education providers, so which is more important for surviving or thriving? Teaching? Learning? Education? or Customers (learners) first?
Ulop says “That said, there is no troll in CCK09 and people have left the forums. For what reason(s), this time?” I would like to know too!
People have left the forums for various reasons. Some participants (especially new to CCK09) have already indicated the reasons at the start (introduction): they felt overwhelmed with information, and have since then moved to other media such as cck2009 Ning. But was that the only reason? And why didn’t they join back to the forum?
Some (especially the new CCK09 participants) might have expected the instructors (George and Stephen) to facilitate or moderate the forum discussion, as in a typical on-line course. However, they might have noticed that George and Stephen would more likely meet them in the Elluminate session instead. Others might have used other media such as twitters, facebook, their own blogs, their own PLE/N to interact, learn and reflect, rather than using the forum. Many might still like to lurk though.
Does this fall into a similar pattern to CCK08? May be in a much smaller scale in the forum, but their involvement or interaction may be spreaded all over with a much wider arrays of networks, media and tools.
This time, a lot of past CCK08 participants rejoining CCK09 might have already experienced “enough” forum discussion, and so they would like to consider other “new” or emergent personalised learning network or media. This leaves a few CCK08 participants remaining active in the forum. Roy, Frances, Ailsa, Ulop, Ken, Dolores, Geoff, Roel, Mary, Nicola, Edgar together with other CCK09 (new?) participants – Gus, Luz, Leila, Maijann, Dean, James and Roland, and some others.
Another possible reason is that: Connectivism is about new and emergent learning, not just (online) teaching. A lot of educators might be expecting to learn “how to teach or moderate” or the teaching or net pedagogy in an online course using forum or virtual learning Environment (i.e. using Moodle etc.). However, as Stephen (and George) has mentioned in the past forum, connectivism is a theory about learning at this digital age, and so the emphasis is on learning. For some of the educators/learners who might have used to instructivism, constructivism or social constructivism as a teaching/learning theory or pedagogy, they might have expected a similar approach to be adopted under connectivism in online teaching/learning. What are their reactions? Are they convinced of the connectivist approach? Does connectivism as a learning theory resonate with their teaching practice?
Are these educators/learners joining the course for their own reasons which we have all assumed? That they would join the forum to discuss, to interact, to teach or to learn? Or they would set up their PLN/E? Or they would just like to lurk?
In summary, it all comes back to the choice of learning amongst participants (with learners and some educators). And whether they would resonate with the theory of Connectivism as espoused by Stephen and George.
Again this leaves us with more questions.
1. If you are coming from CCK08, what would you expect from CCK09? What are your needs? How are your needs fulfilled? Are these needs fulfilled in the forum? What sort of “new and emergent concepts, knowledge, connections” would you expect from the forum?
2. If you are new to CCK09, what would you expect from CCK09? What are your needs? How are your needs fulfilled? Are these needs fulfilled in the forum? What sort of “new and emergent concepts, knowledge, connections” would you expect from the forum?
Do the concepts and theory of Connectivism resonate with you? Why/Why not?
May be the research question is: Why would you like to join/not join the forum?
In the words of H.G. Wells: The future is a race: A race between education and catastrophe
We Are The People We’ve Been Waiting For is a full-length feature film on education which was inspired and guided by Oscar-winning producer Lord Puttnam. The film is supported by various sponsors including independent education foundation, Edge. The film follows the experiences of five Swindon-based teenagers. What unfolds during the course of the film is a very inconvenient truth about education. It concludes that, while there are signs of spring, a transformation of the education system is vital if the UK is to continue to compete effectively in an era of globalization the world has changed enormously but our education system has not kept pace. We need to recognise that there are many paths to success for young people and provide the right support and opportunities for them to develop their individual talents.
Globalization has exploded the Information Age. Yet our education system isn’t preparing our children for how to compete in the Global Economy. America is a nation in crisis. Did you know how little media attention this very real crisis receives?
Instead of teaching information that’s quickly obsolete, teaching students how to take standardized IQ tests and achievement tests, labeling our children with learning disabilities and prescribing ADHD, ADD and Dyslexia medications, we should be celebrating and building the brainpower of each individual child.
Back to school is a nightmare for many parents – watching their child fall further behind – when we can identify learning weaknesses and FIX learning problems at the brain level. Brain fitness is the #1 competitive edge in the 21st century and our children’s brainpower is America’s future.
This new brain development science is both effective and affordable. Join the Learn To Learn Revolution – a Parents Revolution today. http://www.LearnToLearn.com
Wonderful post on Effective Virtual Facilitation by Ryan. I suppose these 5 stages are best practice of “teacher-centred structured session” and to some extent what has to be mastered by a competent online teacher or facilitator. This is obviously one of the most welcomed approach from both educational authority and learners as the learning outcomes are well defined, and could likely be achieved.
Here is the model presented by Gilly Salmon, Professor of E-Learning and Learning Technologies
Using Salmon’s 5-stage model of e-moderation as a framework, SMEs can transform from sage on the stage to guide on the side.
And isn’t that what adult learning is all about?
What happens in our virtual world of networks? How far could we be able to achieve all these?
Have you considered the connectivist approach where the stages are structured a bit differently? With the complexity of learning and a manic society with “busy” learners who have to commit themselves to their personal and family needs at various times, not every learner is ready for the learning or available in those sessions (especially due to the difference in the time zones, for learners from different parts of the world), and so such planned stages would be difficult to be “implemented” without consideration of chaos, complexity and disorder that are inherent in a complex learning ecology.
Ideal and reality has become a separate one especially in the online environment or ecology. Would too much emphasis on learning outcomes be viewed as too pragmatic in nature? We all want different learning outcomes, based on our needs, and our various stages of learning development, and this really requires a flexible curriculum rather than a set one, if we want to succeed in nurturing ourselves and our learners in this changing learning ecology. One size doesn’t suit all!
At the end, facilitation is still a great strategy in “teaching”, only in that some learners prefer to self organise or direct their learning, with networks and technology as mediators, rather than being “facilitated”. This is most often cited as PLN/E.
Roy says: There are a variety of design and management options, but there is actually no such thing as a non-designed, non-managed network.
So the options are:
Mode 0. Build it and leave
And hope they ‘come’. If it forks (as in OS software) into multiple split networks, OK. If the nodes and networks cross-connect, OK. If not, also OK. Also known as ‘the network is the network is the network’ approach(apologies to roses).
Mode 1. Backchannel aggregator
The current structure of CCK09 has a backchannnel aggregator, (Stephen) who does a link-threading thing (much like the way early computers processed cards in card readers?). Very innovative way, for instance, of threading blogs back into the weave of forums and other media – see:
“The proportion of respondents in CCK08 who used blogs primarily or exclusively was unusually high for an online course, particularly one that emphasised openness and learner autonomy. In CCK08 the instructors encouraged, created and supported what was in effect an aggregated network of blogs” (Forums and Blogs … in cck08 paper – in General Forums)
Mode 2. Threading and Weaving
More conventional facilitating or moderating, which can be combined with option 1. This typically probes, asks further questions, draws out emergent lines of inquiry.
Mode 3. Complexity facilitating
This is a more explicitly complex approach to facilitating or moderating, and generally does a lot of complexity-facilitating stuff. (See:
“Openness and connectivity per se need to be tempered by constraints and moderation, to prevent the paradoxes of autonomy, scale, transparency/trust and openness from becoming contradictions. It is possible to do this within a framework of complexity, but there are a number of requirements that must be in place. These include: 1) light touch ‘probing’ and ‘steering’ and, where necessary, firm intervention, both as early as possible in the course; 2) setting out not what should happen (as in traditional learning outcomes) but rather setting the boundaries of what should not happen …”
(See: Ideals and Reality of participating in MOOC paper – In General Forums for more details).
Mode 4. Revert to Classroom/ Conference Delivery mode
This is a variant on mode 0, in the network/s are cut free to do what they do, and the designers revert to an online version of classroom/conference mode, with the delivery of set pieces.
Mode 5. Open Conference /unconference mode
This is a variant on mode 4, taking into account the innovations in ‘un-conferences’. It does, ironically, require a lot more design, time and energy, as I found out in setting up the Visitors and Residents conference, which was great, but which slipped back from what might have been a Mode 5 event into something much more like Mode 4.
Wow Roy, a great summary. I could see Mode 4 still a popular one in most online versions of classroom/conferences. May be people still like it. What is the role of the “teacher” in such online classroom/conference mode? Facilitator? Teacher? Broadcaster? Curator?As we move towards maturing in networked learning, would mode 5 be a preferred mode? Or would mode 3 or 4 still be the preferred mode?Which mode appeals to you most?
Roy responds: John, thanks. There will always be a role for a teacher, although the role surely changes with context. I think the point is that you learn by doing, and you learn by formulating your own views, perspectives, trying them out, and getting feedback. There are brilliant mode 4 teachers, but they are few and far between. At Oxford, lecturers are required to give one (!) public lecture per term (or year, I forget which), which means lecturing is something special. If they want to disseminate information, they dont have to do it through a lecture. The trick is to find ways to interact with your learners, in a peer group, in which the teacher is one of the peers (albeit better informed, generally), and to get them to interact with each other, and to monitor that interaction. It is quite possible (see the video on physics teaching, linked elsewhere in the forums) to get students to respond to ideas even in a large class, and in the physics video, students had to come to a mini-consensus on issues during class (in groups of three). Very few of us can sustain an interesting monologue for long.Interaction requires planning, design, and thinking on your feet, as I’m sure you already know. So the ‘classroom’ (virtual or material) is not the issue, the issue is how you design it so that it’s a wonderful range of affordances for interaction – as in the multi-platform approach to MOOCs, with, hopefully, an affordance for everyone. My own preference is for mode 3, and if I’m stuck in a classroom, I just have to work that much harder to achieve it.
@ Ailsa Here is my view on learning principles. We are humans, not “non-human”, so I would like to see more than just firing of neurons, in the connections, but the establishment of human relationship in networks, in the history of learning. At the end, I like to learn with humans, though often technology is part of that mediation (is it part of ANT??). Agents, actors mean differently to different people. At the other end of the network, it is more than a node, it has feelings, “it” is breathing air and taking water (knowledge), and it lives..and is engaging, interacting. That makes human more than just human, beyond behaviorism.
I remember that when I conducted my last class with my learners, especially in my early years of teaching, I always have an emotional response. We have once upon met here together as a learning group or network, and our identities are inscribed in the history of learning. Ten years later, we might still be able to remember each other, as once upon we have been with the same network and learn together.
Would networks be forever? Like diamonds are forever, when it comes to collaboration in the networks.
Roy: Replicator, host, and everyone of us will become history, but the learning and relationship stay forever in networks.
Would you like to be able to learn a new language like you could when you were a child? It will be possible in the future, but you might forget who your spouse is.
Below is an invitation posted on behalf of Roy Williams, Dave White, Gus Goncalves, Sui Fai John Mak and Jenny Mackness.
Please join us
You are invited to join us in the Elluminate conference on Wednesday 4th November at 20:00 GMT to discuss the title question with Dave White from Oxford University.
We will be holding a conversation about Dave White’s vandr (visitors and residents) model. We are all trying to understand the new networked learning media, as users, but also as academics, teachers, trainers, and researchers. So we need frameworks to describe what’s going on, and that’s what this conference is all about: none of us has the final answers, and I guess most of us find networked learning is so interesting precisely because there are no final answers.
We have asked Dave to take us through an overview of some of the key points of his model. Then we will get some feedback on how you see yourself, in terms of his model. After that we will ask Dave to take us into more of the detail. Interruptions are welcome.
Networking
We have set up a twitter site (vandrcck09) where you can add additional comments, outside the chat channel in Elluminate. We are trying to make space for more substantial responses to the conversation in Elluminate, and it looks like the only way to do so is to write a longer comment in a forum post, or blog, and then post a tweet in ‘vandrcc09′, which includes a link to your blog or the forum. We’ll see if it works.
Models and Resources
Please feel free to use the vandr twitter site, from now on, to post ideas and links to aspects of the vandr model, or any other models and research, that you find useful to describe what goes on in networked learning.
There seems to be a difference between Eastern and Western cultures when it relates to openness via questions and responses.
In the West, to ask a good question, in the East, to think and reflect about a good question – silence and meditate. In the West, to respond to a good question, in the East, to think and reflect about a good response – silence and meditate. Does it reflect what social networked learning is all about? Have I thought and reflected about questions and responses? Have I asked a question?
I am a teacher of Logistics and have been teaching warehousing and logistics for more than 9 years. I am a Certified Professional Logistician. I am passionate in sharing my knowledge, experience and skills with those who would like to achieve excellence as a goal of life.
Whichever mountain I choose to climb, the route may appear simple, but that does not mean it will be easy. And afterwards there will be another peak to climb in the Himalayas, Andes or Rockies. One day I may want to change my life and go sky diving.
I endeavour to embrace my vision and mission, climb the mountains, work out my paths and reach the summit. I may have to change my life and go sky diving – accepting new challenges and goals, if this could serve others and society in a more effective and efficient manner, especially in the area of learning.
When do I want to change my life? Today What is the greatest reward from learning? A sense of achievement and satisfaction.
How about you? What are your vision and mission? What is your learning journey?
Are we in a revolution? This important question has been raised and debated in the last 2 years, especially in the academic circle. See Background Reading: What is Web 2.0 Ideas technologies and implications in education.
If we are to trace back the source of change of these emergent technologies and the evolution of Internet, my next questions are
1. How can we define revolution at this digital age?
Is it any complete change of method or conditions? Is it a substituion of a new “system of government, especially by force” as defined traditionally? What is your definition of revolution?
2. Is Internet revolutionising how we communicate?
3. Are we in a revolution of communication?
4. Are we in a revolution of learning?
5. Is there a shift away from the mere “e-learning” and back to learning? Is learning complemented with on-learning technologies and enhanced with connectivism and connective knowledge?
Finally, I am starting to realise that each of us interpret the definition, concept of connectivism, connective knowledge differently. So, if we claim that we are in a revolution of learning, it may be interesting to see how all these have“revolutionised how we think?”Not just learning!!! LOL
6. Are we at the centre of “revolution”, “evolution” or “innovation” as a result of ALL OF THE ABOVE?
When the education is ready, the technology appears,
When the technology is ready, the network appears,
When the network is ready, the learner appears,
When the learner is ready, the purpose appears.
So what is the purpose for the learner? Learning and development…..
In adult learning, one of the most important assumption is that:
“Adult learns best when he or she is allowed to make his/her own learning decisions”. Everyone should be free to do this. And this is fundamental in adult’s education.
For K-12 learning, learning decisions depend on the readiness and skills level of the learner. Adults (include teachers, parents) are there as mentors, coaches, guides and support. They are there to empower the students to become independent learners eventually.
So that’s why metacognitive learning skills (learning how to learn) is important.
- global media coverage (TV news, newspapers, radio)
- government intervention, control and support
- local and global education
- networks – social, medical (medical research teams and networks), news, community, schools, industry & business
- information and communication technology (mobile, internet technology, Web tools etc.)
- disease control & effective infection control procedures
- World Health Organisation’s (WHO) involvement
- Charity support
- People’s involvement
2. Lessons learnt – Innovations/advancement and development of the following required:
- quick response
- advance planning (vision, mission)
- Network learning
- Collective wisdom – local and global
- Prevention & control, risk management
- Education (on health and disease control), and promotion
- Collaboration (local and global governments, networks)
- Policies, systems, procedures
- News and media,
- Medical research, government and business investment
- Communication technologies (internet access, support)
3. Transfer of learning of SARS to education
- a change in attitude towards education, training and learning (accomodate informal learning more extensively, promote the concept of knowledge people and nation)
I suppose motives, jargons, emotion and communication play an important part in any on-line communication.
Motives- I think one needs to understand why people are going on-line first. What are their goals? Or do they have a goal at all? For me, I am interested in knowing and learning more about connectivism. For others, some may just be “lurking” and they would remain silent most of the time and prefer reading rather than participation, and may “pop” in on a few occasions. For some others (less than 2%)who are more involved in the forum, that’s where the discussion and debate begins. I realised that there are some participants who have participated in the Elluminate session. I suppose they are passionate in learning more on connectivism. I noted that there are many other participants who have set up their blogs and would prefer to participate in a relatively passive manner instead. There are also others who join the facebook. As a result of these divergent motives amongst participants, it is very difficult to understand the group dynamics of the non-participating ones, bloggers etc.
Use of jargons- Another issue relating to this connectivism is the use of jargons throughout the sessions (forums, instructions etc.), and the assumption of participants having some pre-requisite knowledge on the different learning theories. I must admit that despite my completion of different education and training courses that I have attended in the past 20 years, I have never been exposed to concepts and knowledge at such an abstract level. I have at times found it difficult to comprehend.those nodes, entities etc. The explanation of complex concepts using metaphor sometimes may be difficult for the participants and I to understand, and so it has led to further confusion and clarification. I must admit that I am also responsible for my learning: to follow the instructions by reading through the suggested articles and watching the videos and listening to the podcast to reinforce my learning. And I have done so.
Emotions - After reading the numerous assigned articles and watching the recorded video and podcast session, I have gained a better understanding on what connectivism means. However, I am still reconciling what I have learnt in the past on behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism with this new concept on connectivism, as there are numerous conflicting views on the basics such as knowledge and learning. Emotions such as excitement, confusion, followed by AHA (surprise), and happy to know and understand it have been my natural reactions throughout those instruction sessions.
Also, there is an assumption that people will develop social network and that knowledge would be distributed amongst participants under the connectivism paradigm. However, what happens if people are getting too emotional (upset, defensive)? This is especially so when some participant(s) were perceived as a troll or aggressor. And such conversation is not conducive to learning and further constructive conversation.
Communication – As most of us are communicating using “language” (mainly in words) throughout the forum, we could hardly be able to “read” the others’ body language except the tone.
Further, as people are coming from different ethnic or cultural backgrounds, there are certain “rules” of communication which needs clarification in the first place.
In summary, a clear sharing and understanding of the goals and the use of clear and concise communication amongst the participants may be critical success factors to connectivism. Emotions also play an important part in effective communication and relationship building in networking.
It would be interesting to see how emotions and communication develop in the later part of the course. Your comments are welcome.
I didn’t intend to use knowledge to equate to virus. But it may be of interest to compare the distribution of knowledge in networks with the spread of virus in human. It may also be worthwhile to understand the process of transmission of such viral disease from a scientific standpoint. But again, I am not an expert in this area… and I think there are already some research done… see the references in SARS on internet.
Surely there are already Network Analysis done on SARS case. Network chains can be used to trace back the patients and the connections. But I am uncertain if it could explain the concept of ”transmission or distribution” of knowledge under the banner of connectivism or not. Are there any research done on this yet?
This also led me to reflect on an educational philosophy of Confucious:
I hear it, and I forgetI see it, and I remember
but it is only when I do it that I understand.
Some people just believe in the above statements, others will say, please prove it, using a scientific method. Has the above been proven? I am not sure….. It is yet a philosophy…
So when it comes to knowledge and learning, my experience is that I will truly understand connectivism when I do it… It works for me.. but how about you?
In SARS case, I believe that certain knowledge is distributed in the network. May I borrow George’s concept on knowledge under connectivism?
The development of specific skills and mindsets of medical practitioners, researchers, educators, patients and government officials (and evern everyone) becomes as critical as, or even more so, than the possession of existing knowledge. The ability to continue to learn and develop new knowledge replaces the importance of existing knowledge, or, what is known today is less important than the capacity to continue to know more….(George, 2008) (see http://elearnspace.org/Articles/systemic_impact.htm)
And so the emphasis is on the distribution of knowledge rather than the traditional acquisition of knowledge by individuals.
I hope we could see SARS as a learning lesson for us, rather than just a disaster or epidemic.
George’s paper cited above stimulated me to ask:
How to deal with the education dilemma? Online vs classroom learning.
Which is more important? “Quality teaching/instruction vs autonomous valued learning”
Are we in an educational cross road or a crisis?
Can we cater for all stakeholders’ interests? How?
What are the reactions of educators, administrators, communities, teachers, learners to the transformation?
I dare not touch on the politics, because I am afraid of the strong “ism” associated with it.
Here are my views:
1. I am passionate in embracing those transformation (big changes) in education and learning with communication, technology as enablers.
2. I believe that network learning (or connectivism) opens up new opportunities and widen our horizons in learning.
3. Throughout the past decades, we have the computer, internet, then the web tools, and I agree that we are in the midst of big changes. And that nothing is constant, but change is.
4. But my questions are: Have we really changed our way of thinking? Or have we changed our way of learning? Ask any educator, learner and adminstrator and I think you may have different answers.
5. Learning theories could be changed. But why? We need to have a new learning theory… for a purpose: I think it is to help us in understanding how we learn at this digital age, and learn better ways of learning, to explore all learning opportunities..and keep improving our learning experience…
Is that the purpose of Connectivism?
And George and Stephen have clearly explained their reasons in their papers and presentation…
So we may need to look at the impact and outcome of such transformation before we could judge whether we are in the midst of learning revolution. What is the impact on our society from a political, economical, social and religious… point of view? What are the changes in values and long term impact on our society? Are these changes sustainable? How does it affect this and next generation? ….
How do all these compare to first and second industrial revolutions?
Can we call ourselves having a third industrial revolutions?
Or a communication technology revolution?
Or an education or a learning revolution?
History will surely tell…. and these are our legacy.
I am thinking about the attitudes (likes/dislikes), and affective domains (emotions such as feelings of love, hatred, joy, fear etc.) that are distributed or communicated (through tones, words, images and emo-icons) in networks.
Another aspects of virus is that it may change its form and severity when transmitted or contracted, which seems to exhibit some similarities to the changes in knowledge, emotions and feelings amongst people in a social network….
Would a comparison study on the spread of virus and distribution of knowledge and emotions help us in understanding more about network learning?
I don’t think you could find a perfect learning model. By the time when you are convinced of a learning model, you may find another one which could explain it better, because of changing environment, technologies, and knowledge.
Most learning theories are based on the principles that are valid at that moment of history.
The application of each learning theory will depend on the context (circumstances in which something happens or in which something is to be considered). It explains some of the everyday happening, but not at all times, and for some situations only, due to everchanging environments, people’s and networks’ level of knowledge, and technologies etc.
So if there is such a theory, I will call it a situational learning theory: situational application of all learning theories.
Are we going into a similar pathway? Do you want to have a Theory of Every Learning?
So, what I like about connectivism is that it focuses on the continuous enrichment and improvement of knowledge and learning both for the individuals and networks, the collective wisdom, through network learning.
Such concepts are applied in organisations: they call it organisational learning using knowledge management system and networks.
Have your ever sat in an examination with multiple choices?
Here is one:
1. What would you like?
A. Formal education
B. Informal learning
C. On the job training
D. Off the job training
E. All of the above.
Answer:
What is your answer?
Here is another one:
2. What would you choose?
My academic education was not bad, just irrelevant.I participated, but I wasn’t inspired. My education prepared me to get through school, but not through life. (Holden, 2005, p48) Success Intelligence
My education is rich. I learn both formally and informally, and I am passionate in learning
I don’t like school, and I don’t know what learning is.I am just a failure
I want choice, a multiple pathway to learning.Are there any choices?Are there any connections I could make to make this happen?
I want fun in learning, I enjoy learning, and I have high emotional intelligence
Answer:
Have you chosen your answer?
3. For me to respond to connectivism and answer why it is a new theory.
Write a paper
Communicate with my readers in a clear concise manner – start with this draft
Communicate, collaborate and cooperate with stakeholders, participants, and negotiate
Connect with the networks
Explain a complex learning theory – connectivism in a simple way
about the distribution of knowledge in the network and oneself (including our brain – your and my brain), and that knowledge, learning and solutions lies in one’s network – the brain and the “brains”. All problems and solutions are there in the brain – your brain if you want to solve the problem, and my brain if it is my problem and solution. And what connectivism differs from other learning theories is that we could connect one’s brain to others’ “brains” that will lead to continuously improved and innovative knowledge, learning and solutions for me and the network in this digital age. Networks including yourself with collective wisdom with emergent knowledge.
This relates back to what connectivism is: Knowledge distributed, learning as networked process (i.e. forming connections), principles form base of all design. And the three levels: Neural, Conceptual and External (people, information sources etc. (Siemens, 2008)
about choices: The focus is on choice of connections and the network process throughout learning, rather than just the outcome of learning. A person could choose amongst the connections and networks to suit and improve his or her learning. See multiple choice in the other post in http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com.
about and around the learner: education, learning is now related back to the learner, with teaching and/or facilitating as a support and network, technology as enabler. You may even claim it as a wholely learner-centred approach to learning. And the best way to learn relates back to the learner – individualised learning based on learning styles, intelligences (the mulitiple intelligences one has) and connections – network associated with, and his/her choice of support and technology.
Unless you define what learning is (under ones “learning theory”) and what theory means, (under all definitions of “theories” as defined traditionally), otherwise, there would just be circle games, with people start claiming that this is not learning under my learning theory, or that is not a theory at all under a theory of theories. In psychology and education, a common definition of learningis a process that brings together cognitive, emotional, and influences and experiences for acquiring, enhancing, or making changes in one’s knowledge, skills, values, and world views (Illeris,2000; Ormorod, 1995). Learning as a process focuses in what happens when the learning takes place. Explanations of what happens are called learning theories. A learning theory is an attempt to describe how people and animals learn, thereby helping us understand the inherently complex process of learning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_theory_(education)
What is connectivism?
I see connectivism now in a much simpler way – in that it is learning (meaning and application of knowledge) as a result of connection of nodes – brain (my brain, my networks) with “brains” (your and other brains, information sources, networks).
Theory and application
When one is developing a theory, the researcher may not need to be concerned with the application first. Most theories are based on a scientific approach and that’s why the affective domains cannot be over-stressed in the formulation, especially in the case of network learning theory. Also, most learning theories fail when people found it difficult to tackle or resolve the affective shortfalls – and that’s why emotional intelligence is important in any learning situation.
Some shortfalls in connectivism
I think there is a lack of address to the affective domains in networks and one’s interaction with networks. This may have a significant impact on individual and network learning. The attitudes (likes/dislikes), and affective domains (emotions such as feelings of love, hatred, joy, fear etc.) that are distributed or communicated (through tones, words, images and emo-icons) in networks could affect individuals in the learning process. This is manifested in the forum discussion in CCK08 and various blogs posts and responses as discussed by my co-learner Jenny Mackness. http://jennymackness.wordpress.com/2008/09/29/emotion-and-networked-learning/
Connectivism is still an emergent learning theory, and requires further refinements in various areas such as the impact and implication of the affective domains to individual and network learning, and how these will affect one’s interaction with the networks. This is important to ensure that it reflects the learning practice and that it could be well applied in education and training.
A blend of learning theories
Perhaps, it is still worthwhile to make use of a blend of learning theories instead of just relying on one particular learning theory. This is vital to ensure that learners could choose their way of learning.
Wow, Jenny, that’s fantastic.
I like your explanation. That’s exactly what I mean by the use of blended learning theories.
I tried to use the word brain in the connection – instead of the connection of knowledge, information etc. to allow a complete flow of all emotions, perceptions, minds etc. because all of these are there in the brain (and they are abstract to define in words or even images) – your brain and my brain when we communicate or interact (or even just connect). And these are subject to perception, distortion, etc.
That’s how I see learning at this digital age both as an art and a science.
And your mention of the beauty of landscape and emotion in a piece of music is a deeper expression of the understanding of the nature, which worth more than thousand words. That also capture what is connected when we hear music on the internet, MP3. And that we learn how to enjoy music, to learn/echo the feelings and emotions that the author wishes to express etc. Aren’t these missing in the connectivism definition? When only knowledge is distributed.??
And I always like to think it outside the square to allow my imagination to flow, especially in learning.
And my learning philosophy is: every learner likes to learn with his/her “heart, mind, soul, strength” which is unique. And so do a teacher, when sharing his/her knowledge with the student.
That’s the power of our brain, beyond any learning theory, I suppose.
Renewed thanks for your insightful response.
What do you see might be the philosophy (learning and educational) that could be learnt in networks (or connectivism)?
Cheers.
John
Groups, Networks, Collectives: Are they the same or different?
Both George and Stephen are right. Here is the explanation.
You could be in a group, and/or a network, and/or collectives at the same or different times. It depends on where you are and how you see all these.
Networks
So, if you are participating in the forum, diversity, autonomy, openness and emergent knowledge are all emphasised and would also be encourgaed and/or valued.
Diversity - Views of participants are all “right” from the participant’s perspectives. One could use different theories, experience, applications or observations to back up your view, but this is your view only, it could be logical from your perspective, but not necessarily from other’s perspectives. That’s why some of our views are different and some are the same.
Autonomy - while you are in a network, you would be free to share, express your views and opinions freely. It is not important even if your views are irrational or illogical, as perceived by others, though this would soon be pointed out by others. You will also learn how to think and analyse before you share, and share and reflect what you have learnt. Everyone has a view. And in a network environment, some people are more than happy to share their views or knowledge because they find liberation of their views. And so if you are in the forum, you will value this autonomy as it gives you a freedom of “speech or views”. Provided that your speech or view is not dominating….and not condescending…
Openness - Being honest and open is important in a forum discussion, but you would also need to respect or value the others’ views, even if they are different from yours. This would also mean that you could be open to comment, criticisms, judgment and control. Is that a challenge to you in a forum? For some people (learners included) who don’t find it comfortable to share or contribute in a forum, they would prefer to share or contribute their views in a blog instead. Some others may however, find it easier to share in Facebook because that would be limited to their “group members” only, though the person is only trying to connect with others.
Emergent knowledge – After sharing, reflecting and possibly research, and then again sharing in the debates… you may find emergent (new and developing) knowledge to learn.
Groups
Let’s see what happens when you are in a ”group” and participating in a meeting or “a typical classroom discussion”, and are debating on a topic:
Sameness – Though you could raise your views, at the end, your group members would be expecting you to come to some consensus, because your group needs a decision, or needs to achieve a goal. So you may be expected to exhibit the same sort of behaviours of others: may be mutual respects, no finger pointing, following rules and regulations. And you may also be expected to share similar or same values with other group members. That’s why some people who are accustomed to network setting (social networks in particular) may find it pretty uncomfortable in a group setting.
Order and control – Your facilitator and co-learners and you may all agree to some order and control in the discussion. Such order and control is also important to avoid time wasting in endless or mere criticisms and debates without solutions or resolutions. Effectiveness and efficiency may also be emphasised in group discussion and decision making.
Borders and membership – In a group discussion, the members of the group are expected to join in, and there are clear guidelines on what is and what is not acceptable behaviour in such a group. Rules and regulations may be important. Also, members may be criticised if they are not observing some of the rules. Some discipline is therefore expected from the group members.
Additive, cumulative knowledge – in a classroom setting, learners are expected to acquire knowledge (additive and cumulative), both from facilitator’s and individual and group’s point of view. The individual would also find that through the participation in a group, he or she would “acquire or share” such knowledge cumulatively.
So, in the case of classroom discussion, the learner will experience a feeling of being in a group, as there is an objective to achieve.
But, in the case of a forum setting, the learner will experience a feeling of being in a network, as sharing of views is more important.
If the learner is in a classroom group discussion, but then all learners are encouraged to share views but not to arrive a decision within that group meeting, then that learner may feel more like to be in a network at that moment. But after a series of group meetings, the learner may gradually find that mere sharing, discussion and debates may not be productive, and thus lead to nowhere. The learner would think that the group will need to arrive to a conclusion to achieve a goal. So the learners would behave more like a group under a group setting.
If the learner doesn’t like the group setting, either because of personal reasons such as shyness, uncomfortable with the criticisms, comments, judgment or control from others, the learner may like to continue his/her discussion with others via networks, by setting up one’s blog, participating in facebook, and wikis etc, where his/her views are valued and that he or she could also contribute freely.
The learner may later on find that he or she would also like to participate in a group as he develops his or her knowledge further, so as to contribute to a group or team’s goals, then he or she would join a group and the network to group cycle will keep on going…
Collectives: Collectives aggregate, then filter, compare, contrast and recommend information. They will use a variety of algorithm and searching technology to try to distill the information and compare them to that within communities, groups, networks and individuals.
In summary, I think both George and Stephen are right, though their views are different.
It really depends on where you are and how you see the groups, networks, and collectives.
So, you could be in a group, a network and a collective all at the same or different times, even when you are just in a “network”. How does this sound?
I think you are right, that George’s approach differs from my own. I see networks as being of a continuum of types of knowledge (and therefore, organization):
quality ——— network ——— quantity
The types of organization are also on a continuum:
individual —— network ——— group
(atomism) (collectivism)
By contrast (and George is a better person to state this than I) George would depict all forms of knowledge, and all forms of organization, as types of networks.
From Stephen
‘Emotions vs Reason’ is not the ‘dividing line’, as you describe it. It is simply a characteristic I observed.The actual distinction between groups and networks, as described at length in my various writings, is based on four dimensions:
1. groups emphasize sameness, networks emphasize diversity
2. groups emphasize order and control, networks emphasize autonomy
3. groups emphasize borders and membership, networks emphasize openness
4. groups emphasize additive, cumulative knowledge, networks emphasize emergent knowledge
Now – given this characterization of the distinction between groups and networks, can you see the distinction?
Our challenges today are many. We are experiencing the “big bang” of information, and are left with vast traces of information and knowledge that grows astronomically in seconds.
As adults, we have become both educators (parents, mentors, trainers, teachers etc.) and learners, at work and at home. Our dual role throughout life challenges us to become more inquisitive. We are eager to adopt new concepts if they could be applied in our real life. We are willing to take reasonable risks to educate and learn from our present and next generation. We are more willing to change our views and attitudes when we are better informed. And we are willing to try new ways of learning in order to fulfil our changing needs. So is connectivism part of the solution?
Engagement of learners is important in learning. We are always engaging if we stay connected. And we are educating and learning at the same time through such connection.
And we could select what, when, where, how we like to learn and acquire knowledge and information when connected.
I would like to learn from you:
1. How could we keep up with the information changes?
2. How could we acquire and apply knowledge more effectively?
3. Can we achieve some of our goals such as improvement in our education system and learning through such connection?
Learning theory is a set of properly argued ideas intended to explain facts and process of learning.
A learning theory should be based on a set of principles. For instance in the case of adult learning theory, there are certain assumptions about adult learning. Based on those assumptions, one postulates learning strategies that could facilitate and reinforce learning. Such learning could include a change in knowledge, skills, attitudes and/or behavior. And if the goals and learning outcomes are achieved through the adoption of those learning strategies in real life applications, we would argue that such ideas and strategies have been tested to be valid and reliable in explaining how and why learning occurs. We can then develop a set of principles of adult learning which are universally “true” or “valid”.
In the case of collaborative learning in a “networked global learning environment”, I believe that there are some universal general principles that are essential: “everyone’s ideas are valued by each other”, “everyone in the network is willing to openly share their ideas”, “everyone appreciates feedback or responses from others”, ”everyone respects the ideas or views of others, even if there are conflicting views”, “the truth needs to be based on facts, not just opinions or beliefs”, “we are motivated in a connective world”, ”we treat each other with respect”, “we believe that we will build a better world through collective learning” etc. Though we may argue that some of the above “principles” or “assumptions” are really common sense. We still need to provide solid proof that they could stand the test of time and are true on all occasions.
I think we still need to explore the “elements and principles” which constitute a learning theory, in the case of connectivism and connective knowledge. Perhaps the sharing of learning amongst us through this course provides an excellent platform to build up those elements and principles.
As we grow in knowledge and understanding when connecting with others, we may argue that it is going beyond the traditional way of learning, i.e. the adoption of an unstrutured, dynamic and changing way of learning, through connecting with others, and sharing of views and understanding of complex themes and topics. This leads to “deep, real and dynamic learning of our world”, with a focus of understanding on both individual and collective views.
So my definition of learning theory in the context of connectivism and connective knowledge is that the facts and process of learning is based on the connection amongst members of the community, through a cycle of continual learning – reflection and observation, argument and analysis, understanding, and application of concepts, principles both individually and collectively.
I would like to learn from you on the following:
1. Is knowledge power?
2. In a connective learning community, can we share our knowledge without losing power?
3. Why do we want to connect with others?
4. What can we learn through connectivism and connective knowledge?
5. How can we learn more effectively in this connective community?
George’s perspective is focusing on “What type of network it is?” as you would consider groups, networks and collectives are all under the umbrella of networks.
While Stephen’s perspective is focusing on properties of groups and networks, and based on his observation and analysis, he could see the differences.
For some of our “group members” here at the forum, I think they have seen some of these differently:
Here are my observations:
1. We are in a “group” in this forum, but we seem to be practicing in an atmosphere of networking situation. We don’t have a formal group leader from amongst the participants except you and Stephen. We are encouraged to have peer moderation, an ideal of leaderless group, where everyone learns most freely. Sometimes this practice may not appear to be in congruence to the research findings: you could refer to the paper by Terry Anderson on Collectives, Groups and Networks, where forum is a tool typically used in group. May be we are practising a wholly new approach that are not typical in the conventional forum where a formal moderator is assigned to each group.
2. We have learnt about the merits and demerits of group and network, and it seems for me that networking provides far broader perspectives, as you could learn outside your group by networking with bloggers, using collectives, or be connected to the participants in the facebook, etc. So, participants in this forum would likely be in a group, (reading and listening/watching Elluminate/Ustream etc.) and networking and even using collectives at the ”same time”, because this is necessary to ensure we could get enough knowledge to come back and discuss.
3. Each of us has a view and perspective. Some of our perspectives may not match due partly to the angles we see things: that’s why I am saying that George and Stephen are right, because those are their perspectives, with a different angle of seeing groups/networks, based on observations and analysis.
My reflection
1. Learning to me means that I am connecting my brain to the information sources, or your brain, or the network (internet) and absorb such distributed knowledge – be it know “what” and “how”. Unless I could apply my knowledge learnt through such a process, it could remain just a shallow learning (know what by “knowing say the facts and information”). What is emphasised so far is to go for deep learning (know how) through both the group discussion (this forum), by critical questioning and reasoning (Socratic approach), reflection etc. and networking with other bloggers, outside sources.
2. Learning in the networks means the network may have the “know what”. The various sites in the internet could provide “facts, knowledge, and information”, but that these are stored and distributed throughout the web sites, blogs, wikis, etc. A group of people (a special type of network) can tap into the network to collect the information (say in a wiki), but learning in this case would only occur if the brains of these people of the group are connected to the sources of information. And again the deep learning will happen if the group have both the know what and know how as mentioned above in individual learning.
In summary that’s what we meant by emergent knowledge (new and developing). And that George, Stephen and your perspectives are all important. And that’s the main difference between connectivism and all other learning theories.
Hi Jenny,
I love your article, emotional, moving, and full of warmth. That’s why I prefer to talk to people, just like your mum, though I am much younger than her. Ommm.
May be that’s the “human element” lacking in the e-connectivism, that human touch, which I think is most important for human.
Remember that most of us love to learn – that passion is not derived from any technology, though technology is an enabler.
I am more inclined to connect with others who share that passion, just like your mum and you.
When I was young, at my early twenties, I worked with others as volunteers. We have about 60 plus volunteers, most of them in their late teens, high schools leavers eager to devote their efforts in contributing to society. I was the coordinator who coordinated 3-4 other volunteering associations. And we organised an event with 15 game stalls. I was even invited to the radio to talk about the event. It was a huge success. I also assisted the Community and Youth Office in running various programs for the poor (young kids). We conducted surveys on the family. Based on the information we collected, we ran cartoon show, visit to softdrink company, excursion and game stalls. Those were the days without computers.
And we were able to connect with others with that spirit of compassion, enthusiasm.
However, nowadays, we are using emails, blogs, and all the tools to commuicate, but we are pretty uncertain that we are even safe enough in this e-world.
That’s why we need to seriously consider the impact of this technology on our spiritual and emotional growth and development, and not to neglect that a sense of concern is more important than that professional touch.
That’s how I feel.
I really hope that this could be included in the course – the art of connectivism, how we could become a more compassionate person.
Hi Lisa, http://lisahistory.wordpress.com/2008/10/13/save-me-from-too-much-connectivity/
I like your post. You have always got something extra to share and contribute, and that’s wonderful. I echoed fully with your view, in that sometimes too much connections could become an addiction. And we have to ask: is it a healthy habit?
And we might have forgotten what we really need is to communicate with those people who are compassionate, with our hearts and minds with honesty, not just talking to another machine or a parrot.
I have illustrated that in facebook. May be I hope you don’t mind me repeating it here:
Computer: What is the opposite of right?
Student (key in): Left
Computer: Wrong
Student: (It can’t be wrong, let me try again, thinking) and then type.. Left
Computer: Wrong
Student: But I have checked with my teacher… that it’s left, silly computer… cried out loud and complained to her mum.
Is it happening all over the place, with computer. I am trying not to be sarcastic, but do think about how many times it appears in our real life…. Because we are just human. And in front of us is the fantasy world called internet, with all the Web 2.0 tools.
So, hope you can just have a laugh.
How about this: How could connectivism be done in a more “enjoyable” way? Funny stories?
Cheers.
Comment by suifaijohnmak — October 14, 2008 @ 12:39 pm
Hi Jenny,
I have the same view as yours, when I read the article. I don’t see how elegant it was a solution, by the use of complexity theory. Throughout my last 9 years of on-the-job training and assessment with few hundreds of trainees and supervisors here in Australia, I have been using a similar approach as that cited, only to add the human elements into the learning, without bordering too much about “computer networks”.
Rather, we don’t need to rely on the computers that much. We could rely on the job itself as the training ground and learning platform. In essence, the job is the training, and the learning takes place in an emergent manner. In this manner, connectivism is always built into the work, especially when people are using emails, websites, computer networks and various technology tools.
So, I don’t see anything that is amazing, even if they were quoting from great theories found.
Also, this was based on just one research finding.
One could conduct numerous research on all these case studies, only to find that the results of each case would be different, mainly because the learners are different and the context are different.
What I think is most important comes back to 3 main points:
1, Human element must be given the highest priority in any learning environment
2. A choice of education and learning must be offered to the learners.
3. A learning paradigm of letting the learners to learn what, when, where, how and who to learn with is of paramont importance.
I will continue my response later.. To be continued.
After reading the above paper on complexity and information overload in Society, I seemed to agree with the conclusions by the author. And I would like to thank the author for the great insights
Complexity and Information Overload in Society:
why increasing efficiency leads to decreasing control
Francis HEYLIGHEN
CLEA, Free University of Brussels, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
As a Chartered Professional Engineer with an engineering background, I thought it won’t be difficult at all for me to understand the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the Entropy, etc. as I still recalled those topics that were learnt some 30 years ago. Also, the concept of friction is easy for me to comprehend, and I think it would be of great interest to use those metaphors to explain those phenomena and analyse the system.
However, when I read further, I found it really difficult to understand what those metaphors mean. I understand the need of metaphors to explain some complicated concepts, but start to wonder why we are so used to the metaphors?
I am pondering on these:
1. Are metaphors helping me to understand the complexity of the subject?
My answer: No
2. Are metaphors being used appropriately?
My answer: I don’t know, because this is a judgment made that is unfair to the author, who has no way of explaining to me why he/she did it.
3. Why are people so used to metaphors? Is it a pop? Is it a myth? Or is it Ephemeralization?
My answer: I don’t know, but it seems people like it. But do people understand it?
4. Are there any simpler ways of explaining those complicated concepts in theories (learning theory in particular)?
My answer: I would like to know, if someone could explain them to me without any metaphors
5. Who are the readers of this paper?
My answer: Must be academia or researcher? But am I?
6. Who can help me?
My answer: the authors, and you??
Reflections:
1. When I read a blog, I hope to understand what the blogger is thinking, and of course it would be a gift to me if the blogger has synthesised all reflections in the readings. So many thanks to those bloggers who have inspired me with the excellent “collectives”. And I thank you very much for reading my blog.
2. I am used to communicate in simple plain English. So, I often need help when I read forum threads or blogs which are explained in a metaphorical way. However, I am hesitant in asking for an explanation of those metaphors…. simply because I don’t want to embarrass the writer or blogger. So, please help me.
Does it echo with you?
I sincerely hope that our learning is based on simple theory, though we are living in a complicated environment. And I think we need a simple learning theory that most of us could understand, even though if it is not perfect. Please see my previous post of Learning Theory.
Are we sure that we understand such complicated metaphors?
Are we sure that we understand the theories?
If we couldn’t understand it, how could we expect our coming generation understand it? I know it’s harsh to any researchers, but I think this is a reality, at least for me.
My friend, http://connecteded.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/cck08-networks-and-groups/#comment-33
My experience is that instructing four to five year olds is somewhat different from the adults.
For the young toddlers, they are full of imagination. Given the right environment and instruction, they could pick up new ideas quickly. Also, they still have a huge bank of memory (imagine when you re-configure a computer, you notice that there is a huge memory at the start). So learning is an adventure for kids, like Alice in Wonderland, where discovery is more important than reasoning, and fantasy is the dream of those kids. Dictating the learning process for the young ones may soon spoil their interests to learn, as they don’t feel that they could enjoy their freedom. However, it would also be important to be aware of the risks involved. Therefore most formal childhood education are based on experiential learning followed by instruction. This will ensure that kids could develop logical reasoning and rational thinking before they enter adulthood.
Adults learn differently from kids in that they normally would have acquired some experience in their early childhood, which significantly affect how they see the world. Perceptions and prejudices, motivation and attitudes, and values are readily set in an adult of mid twenty onwards. To educate adults require a totally different approach in that adults learner would ask the basic question of:”What’s in it for me (WIIFM)?” Unless an adult sees the value or benefits of changes, otherwise, they will ask: “Why changes?” or “Why learning in this way and not my way?” Also each adult learner has different learning experience, so it’s impossible to prescribe a solution that suits all. The connections of adults will therefore be different from one person to another. http://jennymackness.wordpress.com/2008/10/16/all-learning-begins-with-a-connection/
My experience in instructing senior adult (60 plus) learners and those with disabilites is that one has to be very patient in listening to the learner’s needs first. Once you have understood their needs. It is imperative to use a pragmatic and simple tool to start with. For those adult learner who are illiterate, or not having the pre-requisites, or having disabilities then guidance through clear explanation and demonstration is important. At times, some adult learners don’t even know how to use a mouse, or add favourites. So don’t assume, and don’t judge those adult learners. Empathy is the key.
Senior adult learners who haven’t been exposed to the use of computers would likely take a longer time to learn than the kids and young adults. This should be considered in any adult education program.
Treat any senior adult learners and those with disabilities with respect, even if they have made “silly mistakes”. Do not focus on their weakness, rather, focus on their wealth of experience. Allow more time for them to try. Provide them with clear instructions. If they don’t understand a step, show them the right step. Let them try, practice and practice. If possible, encourage them to seek peer support, so they won’t feel alienated.
Thanks to George for such clear definitions and his insights. It’s an enjoyable read.
It’s also time for my personal reflection on what it means to us in our daily life, and education and learning in particular.
I think most of us agreed that education and learning is complex and chaotic. At the moment, we have established institutions which provide an infrastructure in education and training. This ensures that education and training is streamlined and learning is structured. This is important to ensure the outcomes of learning and the mode of education is aligned with the best interests of the stakeholders and society at large. This is also important from a social, economical and political or religious point of view, since education is the foundation of a society. Without proper education, its citizens would easily loose their identities. And the citizens may fail to communicate or connect effectively. This would ultimately cause conflicts between communities and instability to society.
In order to survive and sustain identity in a community, the citizens would therefore seek out avenues towards better education, so as to make a living, to acquire a job, or vocation, and to live a meaningful life. That partly explained the migration of people of under-developed countries or developing countries to developed countries. These people may need to seek “refuge” or look for a better living due to different reasons. Such reasons could include a deprivation of their “basic human needs and rights” , especially if they haven’t been given the opportunities of education that most developed countries enjoy.
So, are we looking at these issues from a “developed country” point of view?
Would we be biased in suggesting solutions? That we are trying to solve issues that are complex and chaotic, without a clear understanding of the basic needs of these “global citizens”, “the net-users” and “non net-users”? Or do we need to think about what civilization means for our fellow “global - digital and non-digital citizens”?
How do these impact on those who are under-priviledged, those who have not been able to connect to the society due to poverty or disability, or those who are trying to connect but are suppressed to do so due to pressure from their groups, communities, religious or political parties?
Are there complex and chaos solutions to these clear, everyday phenomena? What are you going to do about it?
Given that we are living in a complex and chaotic society, how are we going to
(a) ensure that learners see things in simple, yet comprehensible term, though the learning process is in itself complex?
(b) ensure that learning is enjoyable for the learners, and that life-long learning is sustainable?
(c) ensure that society could achieve harmony given that there are conflicts of interests and power issues amongst individuals, networks and groups and society at large?
(d) ensure individual values and priviledges are not sacrificed at the expense of collective pressures to conform - Individual voices vs the voice of the crowd?
(e) ensure that people realise the importance of science and art of connection? That is it is not just about connection but who you are connected to as cited by Geoge and Stephen throughout the course.
And finally how can we leverage the power of networks and technology that could promote individual rights, inclusiveness, collective wisdom and tolerance? At the end, is education a means to a purpose?
So what do we mean by complexity, chaos in learning? Are we learning individually or in groups or in networks? Do our network learning add value to individuals? How and to what extent to the “global digital and non-digital” citizens?
Without a good understanding of learning from a complexity and chaotic perspective, we may go down the pathway of thinking that learning is linear and so could be “spoon fed” or “structured” for our learners. And so should curriculum be at the hands of educator or learner or a joint product of educators and learners? And should curriculum be negotiated between “educators” and “learners”, especially if it is for adult learners? What does it mean for open education?
But what is the purpose of re-structuring the education infrastruture.
Without purpose, does education mean anything?
And without education, does learning mean anything?
Education should be the means
And Learning should be the process
If both the means and processes are confusing, unnecessarily complex, chaotic, what will a novice learner think? Confusion? Frustration? Upset?
But if the means and processes are clear, simple and easy to follow, what will be the reaction of the learner? Enjoyable. Satisfying. Happy. May be a belief and practice of sustainable life-long learning.
How about the learning for expert learners/teachers? What are the reactions to these notions of education and learning? Formal vs informal education, On-line vs Institution, Blended vs traditional. Adhoc vs structured learning, Emergent vs specific outcomes etc….
So which pathway do you choose? It’s your choice. Is it? No, it’s too complex and chaotic, back to basic….. for me??
To this end: I would like to quote Stephen’s vision, which I also share:
This to me is a society where knowledge and learning are public goods, freely created and shared, not hoarded or withheld in order to extract wealth or influence. This is what I aspire toward, this is what I work toward.
And my belief that each of us has our potential that is still not yet released…as so
There was once a famous Chinese philosopher called Chon Chow. In his dream he saw a butterfly that could fly and he thought he was a butterfly too. When he woke up, he didn’t know whether he was actually a butterfly living in reality or was merely dreaming himself as a butterly with illusion or fantasy.
Imagine if each of us is a butterfly and flap our wings, what would be the outcome of such flapping? What are the impacts of such flapping on the environment, the weather?
The phrase refers to the idea that a butterfly’s wings might create tiny changes in the atmosphere that may ultimately alter the path of a tornado or delay, accelerate or even prevent the occurrence of a tornado in a certain location. The flapping wing represents a small change in the initial condition of the system, which causes a chain of events leading to large-scale alterations of events. Had the butterfly not flapped its wings, the trajectory of the system might have been vastly different. Of course the butterfly cannot literally cause a tornado. The kinetic energy in a tornado is enormously larger than the energy in the turbulence of a butterfly. The kinetic energy of a tornado is ultimately provided by the sun and the butterfly can only influence certain details of weather events in a chaotic manner.
Individual and Group Learning (when each of us is flapping our wings) could be chaotic due to the various sources of information and “shared knowledge” under a digital or virtual world.
Learning as a network (with many butterflies flapping our wings and interacting) could be complex. The flapping wing represents a small change in the initial condition of the system, which causes a chain of events leading to large-scale alterations of events. And when there are many butterflies flapping the wings, this may cause further changes in the initial condition of the system. So the sharing of such knowledge is also complex, unpredictable and emergent.
Have you flap your wings yet?
“A small change in the initial condition of the system, which causes a chain of events leading to large-scale alterations of events”, when applied in education could mean that if each individual is to connect and cooperate with others via networking, then this would cause a chain of connections and events leading to large scale alterations of learning events. Such emergence of shared knowledge is unpredictable. An adaptive curriculum may also be required to suit the individual’s changing needs.
This also explains why a fixed curriculum may sometimes be less effective than an adaptive curriculum in the education system due to the complexity and chaotic nature of “learning” and its poor responsiveness to emergent knowledge. This may be the reason why “an open and adaptive curriculum” is welcome in adult education.
How would you stage and participate in a networking environment?
Would a network (say in a forum) be staged as a
(a) peer review
(b) teacher vs learner vs co-learners (similar to the digital classroom/workshop where learners and teachers all interact, only that in this case we are all talking/responding at the “same time” or “same topic at different times”)
(c) question/response debates on different perspectives
(d) reinforcement of advanced concepts, applications development (for academics and teachers)
(e) cultivation of new ideas and development in teaching and learning under the umbrella of “connectivism” (not only for professionals and para-professionals, but also for any one who are involved in learning)
(f) some of the above or one that I haven’t mentioned here.
As each participant (especially in this forum) is playing a different role at different times and interacting with each other as we progress through the network, some of us may prefer just to reflect (and be a lurker) to see what may be gained out of this, while others would prefer to reflect/share via blogs.
This leads us to think again about learning as chaotic (mainly because we may be carrying different hats/roles as we interact and think the other parties are carrying such a hat/role as well).
So even in the forum like this, due to differences in the perspectives and roles, you will find un-ending debates (that’s healthy) as well as emotions (that’s part of network learning) that could be accounted for the complexity of digital network learning and connectivism (connections of all kinds).
I think there is always a blend of passion and reasons in groups and networks. And you wouldn’t be easy to distinguish them easily, as role of the participants (learners and teacher inclusive) often change. Also, the stage of development of networks are important (a complex and chaotic situation).
One thing is certain though, I think, we all wish to support and help each other in our forum or through blogs in our network development, irrespective of the roles, at least to move forward in our learning journey, even if participants (teachers and learners) have different perspectives and understanding of connectivism, and that the future outcomes/development of such networking or learning is unpredictable. And that networking (both digital and non-digital) is always part of the life journey of everyone, whether we like it or not.
And you could even agree with disagreement in forum or blogs…. But I think we all value our discussion here at the moment. Otherwise, we would have spent time elsewhere.
Are you looking for passion or reason or both?
Do you find some chaos, and complexity in this learning development?
Don’t miss the above paper. This paper is the best ever paper I have read. It was written in a simple, yet clear manner. It explains how chaos theory could be applied in education and learning.
I think my previous problem is totally solved if more writers are going to write in such a manner. Thank you so much to Bill.
And my request of simplicity to chaos is fully answered.
I hope Bill Harshbarger wouldn’t mind me quoting his paper below:
Emphasis on individual learning processes.Rather than imposing rigid and standardized one-size-fits-all pedagogy and materials, educators and educational programs will focus on providing an input-rich environment combined with varied, interesting and engaging activities that promote individual learning. Use of internet based resources in particular can be helpful in encouraging students to explore materials that are relevant to their unique interests and needs.
Teachers as resources and models.Rather than seeing teacher behavior as a direct causal element in students’ learning, we will see teachers as resources and models. We will also reject the traditional view of teaching as transmission of information that can be banked for some time in the future when it might be needed. Instead, we will have systems that encourage students to strengthen their own learning abilities by having learning modeled for them and by encouraging learning that has as much current meaning for the students as possible.
Holistic engagement levels and proficiency change over time as the basis for program, teacher and student assessment.Measurement of learning outcomes will be based on a relatively long-term scale with interim sampling that would provide indirect assessment of learning trends within groups of students rather than trying to determine that a sequence of discrete, fixed achievements has taken place in individual students.In addition, measurement of factors such as engagement and effort may be the best indicators of how likely it is that learning is taking place, and consequently the effectiveness of the educational system/environment. These could be in the form of activity parameters such as how much reading students do, how extensive their journal entries are, how much they participate in class, how many exercises they have completed, etc. They could also be in the form of self-report on how motivated students feel and how interesting the material is to them.
Conclusions
Changing any idea that has been generally accepted for centuries is never easy, as Copernicus and Galileo found out. The same will most likely be true with changing our fundamental concepts of learning and education. But perhaps it won’t be too difficult. I think the seeds of this transition are already planted. Concepts like student-centered education, the existence of multiple intelligences, different learning styles, and the value of content/task/problem-based instruction are not entirely foreign now and they appear to be better suited to a dynamic systems model of learning than the traditional linear one. Furthermore, the increased use of computers in education will allow greater exploration and incorporation of non-linear materials to support learning.
I am totally convinced by the writer’s views on those aspects.
I have pointed out some of these in my previous post, when I have no idea of the existence of this paper, especially on
student centred education
multiple intelligence
different learning styles
See post on What’s New in Connectivism.
about and around the learner: education, learning is now related back to the learner, with teaching and/or facilitating as a support and network, technology as enabler. You may even claim it as a wholely learner-centred approach to learning. And the best way to learn relates back to the learner – individualised learning based on learning styles, intelligences (the mulitiple intelligences one has) and connections – network associated with, and his/her choice of support and technology.
So, I am happy that some of my experiences and findings based on previous research have fully agreed with this paper’s finding. What a surprise!
I have been using on-the-job training and assessment since 2000 as a platform in achieving the ideals as shown above.
I have conducted a research on Distribution Centre Training: Delivered When, Where and How Customers Like It in 2003.
We have even achieved a Quality Award based on such a model.
Please contact me if you would like to know more about it.
I agree with your views in that most of the concepts involved in connectivism is not entirely new.I would consider some of those were addressed via different theories such as Complexity Theory and Chaos Theory.And so they were just an extension or integration of the latest scientific and learning theories, with the affordance of technologies “accelerating” and “enhancing” learning at neural, conceptual and external network level.
Have you considered some other aspects of this “learning theory”? These include: emergence of knowledge and learning process, a focus on process – authentic networked learning (via technology affordance and networking) rather than product (traditional institutional based teaching, lesson plans, assessment outcome, curriculum) and a nearly complete learner centred approach to learning?I have elaborated these 3 main points in my blog: http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com on “What’s new with connectivism?”
I reckoned that most previous learning theories did address some of the above points, but have not been able to explain why learning is exhibiting the chaotic and complex nature of learning – but that connectivism could attempt to explain the three main points shown.The assertions by George and Stephen provide further claims on connectivism as a learning theory.
Also, I would even say that there is a “NEW LEARNING THEORY” which could be in par with Connectivism called “Situated Learning” if learning is defined in an umbrella term. See situated learning http://otec.uoregon.edu/learning_theory.htm#Situated%20Learning
Again, your insights stimulated me to think again about the underlying concepts, principles and applications involved in connectivism.
Do you think human element need to be considered more highly in connectivism?Again you are invited to my blog to comment on the human elements…
I feel sorry for that failed connection you experienced.This is similar to the feeling that we have when our trusted friend failed to turn up in an appointment on time.
So, I think you have touched deeply on the human side of connectivism.That’s sometimes we experienced disappointments due to the failure of technology affordance.
I have also visited Ailsa’s blog, and have responded to hers’ in my blog.
I have always pondered on the psychological impacts of connectivism on people and networks (social and all other related community of practice) (but that is beyond behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, or even social constructivism etc. because they have not fully addressed the technology affordance at the time of their creation).
I am aware that “connectivists” may think that such psychological approach will temper the “new learning theory” but still think this is absolutely necessary to off set the side (or negative) effects due to connectivism.
Do you think such an “art” and “science” of human aspects in connectivism be useful?
Cheers.
Further question:
What’s the impact of connectivism on ecology? Educational reform, policies… Curriculum… Education….
I like your summary of the views. At times, I realise that learning itself is both complex and chaotic mainly because of the world we are living in, with that plenty of technology affordance, “attractions” and “distractions” that lead us to think in such a way. If I were to live 100 hundred years ago, would it be the same? So my view is that context, environment, learning ecology and the network that one and the network is involved in will all shape our perspectives on the complexity and chaotic “nature of learning”. Do we have the “chicken first or the egg first?” I would reckon the environment (or the learning ecology) will shape our thoughts, whereas our perspectives will also shape the “thinking” and “direction” of the network. There are impacts and influence both from individuals and networks – which shape the learning and social networks, learning ecology, and the world on education and learning.
To what extent do you think an understanding of complexity and chaos could help the teachers in the teaching and learning process?
It’s important to reflect on the role of educator and educational institutions such as universities and colleges.
I suppose that universities still play an important role in its accreditation of the courses and employment of professionals (professors, instructors, designers etc.) who would continue to serve the learners. I also think that there is a need to inverting the pyramid of hierarchical structure in that learners could be at the peak of the pyramid upon which all educational institutions and their infrastructure, professionals, technology and networks are means to support both education and learning of the individuals and the networks.
This could be a huge challenge to both the educational institutions, teaching and supporting professionals, networks and society. In this connection, both formal and informal education becomes the pillar of every individual and network, with the ultimate goal of serving the needs of the individuals and society.
However, is it possible some of this ties back to costs? I am pursuing my Master’s degree at a State University. Since the University is funded by the state, the institution has a responsibility to act in a responsible fiscal manner. Providing on on ramp to the Internet, creating the project spaces, and maintaining all of these things costs money. You have to pay for the servers, the cables, data storage arrays, software, and for the people to run and support all of this. Some of the “walling” must also come because there is a limit to what can be supported, and who can be allowed to access the tools.
Additionally, if someone is paying to go to that institution, they should be afforded priority access to University’s on ramp to the Superhighway. That doesn’t mean one person should get the biggest lane, which is way access to some tools such as Bit Torrent is restricted.
My question is: Are there any need of differentiated strategies in terms of customers’ contribution to the institutions as mentioned by Gina? How does it impact on the educational infrastructure? And what are the “costs” and “value” (the qualifications in particular) to both individuals and society?
Thanks for your response. I agree with your views that such change will only happen slowly. I have been a teacher since 1985, and have experienced a lot of changes in teaching and learning practices during the last 23 years. Since 2000, I have been doing on-the-job training whereas there are practically no physical classes as such as the Universities. I started with zero student (trainee) in 2000 to a few hundreds for the past years. What I found was a fundamental shift in the learning paradigm, where learning is the key to education, rather than teaching. I know my idealogy will be vehemently opposed by other instructivists, as well as other professional teachers, where they would feel threatened or might worry that they would lose their jobs. Imagine, if everyone is learning on their own, what is the role of the teacher? I shared such feelings in 2000, but has now been totally convinced that such thing would only happen if teachers are unwilling to accept and adapt to changes. That is there is still an important role for every teacher to play, only that teachers must be flexible and proactive in meeting the learner’s needs. In other words, I think best practice in teaching is based on a learner centred approach, where learner’s needs must come first. Without learners, why employ teachers? And without teachers, who would be guiding the learners (especially the kids and teenagers) the “right” values? So, in summary, teachers must share their experience and knowledge with learners by putting learners first. Remember, at some time, we were the learners, did we learn from our teachers? For me, I must admit that I learn best from those teachers who are empathetic, and willing to understand my needs. These are just my personal reflections, but I hope other teachers could understand why we are moving in such directions – towards a learner centred model of teaching and learning. Is teaching still a noble profession? What do you see will be the future of teachers?
Hi Jenny, http://jennymackness.wordpress.com/
Thanks for your insights. I agree with you that trainee teachers would find this very hard, since they might be pressured by their master teacher trainer to demonstrate competency in teaching rather than learning (i.e. just helping the learner to learn). I had been in that situation on a few occasions, when I took the teacher training programs. It was really stressful on those occasions, and could even be confusing if one is exposed to different learning theories and practices. But once a teacher has gained some confidence and practice in the basic teaching techniques, there is no reason why one could not proceed to the next stage, and develop more advanced skills in inspiring the learners in acquiring the metacognition skills. Besides, this would assist the learners to choose their learning options, and thus improve their learning progressively. This could be achieved if learners are proactive in the formal and informal learning through blogs, wikis, forum discussion etc. These could also augment the formal lesson (if the teaching is still institutionally based), whereas assessment could be done more effectively. I could see such changes happening in a number of institutions, when I browsed through the blogs and wikis. See http://construction10.wikispaces.com/Assignments
The process of moving the students forward from a group setting to a network will be required, so will an educator familiar with both. For this process to properly occur, curriculum will need to be specifically designed and implemented, taking into account, emerging technologies and student safety within an online environment.
Being able to differentiate amongst the three and insuring that learners have experience of learning in all three contexts is an important function of the teachers’ role in formal education.
So, an exposure of students to a networking environment is preparing them for a life based and life long education.
I have also found a trend in moving into online and distance education when learners are no longer satisfied with the traditional classroom delivery. See
Online and Distance Education, Serious Games, Simulations, Mobile Learning
So I think this is not only a shift in learning paradigm, it could even be a shift in teaching paradigm, in that both teachers and learners have their voices, in the teaching and learning process, especially in networking. This is already happening in this CCK08 course, and also in a number of University courses. See Michael Wesch’s class. http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2008/10/a-vision-of-students-today-what-teachers-must-do/
When I reflected on what has happened in our CCK08, http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=668&action=article, where interaction and contribution of readers and learners were encouraged, what I realised was a cautionary approach in the interaction between co-learners. Whenever someone is trying to adopt a teaching approach, there would be a “tension” developed mainly because the co-learner has not been prepared or able to accept the “teacher-learner” or “expert – learner” role. The learners might be preferring to adopt a “peer to peer” or “learner to co-learner” approach in learning on some occasions. This seems also is the case in blogs, when the readers or co-learners were responding or commenting on each others’ blogs. I have already noted numerous feedback from the blogs. See my discussion in the forum on the different roles one may have in a network: http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/moodle/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=956 Also, see Frances Bell’s comments on group and network discussion in http://eduspaces.net/francesbell/weblog/485692.html and the forum discussion on groups and networks posted by Ailsa Haxell on passion vs reason. http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/moodle/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=956, where there were interesting and heated debates on passion and reason amongst teachers, learners and co-learners. And the follow up discussion and debate via the blog by Terry Anderson: http://terrya.edublogs.org/2008/10/20/more-on-groups-versus-networks-and-collectives/
Is such role conflict an issue in your teaching or learning?
If there are such role conflicts in networking or web 2.0 applications, what do you think will be some better ways to resolve them?
Hi Mike, http://techticker.net/2008/10/22/the-role-of-the-educator-and-institution-in-a-changing-educational-landscape/
Thanks for your valuable insights. I agree with you that educators are still students and still learners. I have posted my full response on the role of learners on my blog:http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com
My concern is that due to occasional confusion and conflicts of roles for learners, co-learners or even the teachers, there could be “internal friction” generated amongst network learners upon interaction or connection. Such practice is apparent in our CCK08 course, especially in the forum. If we are to adopt this practice in our classroom situation, I am not sure if such role conflicts or confusion would appear or not. And I am interested in knowing how that could be resolved.
Also, I think this is one of the major areas of concerns in the practice of connectivism, when each of us defines our own boundary based on our needs and interest. Also, not everyone is sharing the same or similar “values” in the interaction or connection, mainly due to the autonomy and diversity of perspectives and opinions as promoted or inherent in networking. At times, I could see people arguing in those cases or posts in the forum, and not valuing each others’ opinions. And I wonder if this is viewed as a “best practice” when students in Universities or Colleges, or even K-12 classes are employing such practice. One could claim that debates are important, but I am really concerned about the emotional outbursts (or the passions) which could impact the learning and the ecology.
Do you see this an issue?
You are welcome to visit and comment on my blog.
Cheers.
John
I noted that some of our co-learners have new insights into connectivism. You are welcome to share them here.
For me, whether connectivism is a new learning theory is now of secondary importance. I don’t think it’s necessary to prove to anyone why it is a new learning theory, as this had already been done by George, Stephen and others on various occasions. And I think it is unwise to debate on the principles which are emergent, as have been said by George and Stephen, what is “correct” today may not be “correct” by tomorrow, due to changes in context, ecology and technology, and the chaotic and complexity nature of knowledge and learning.
And I think it’s equally not necessary to write another set of convincing papers to defend connectivism, because connectivism is about emergent knowledge, process and people’s thoughts.
If people still believe it, it’s their choice. If people don’t like it, it’s still their choice. So, if you like it, great to have a try! And see if it works
What’s most important I think, is rather to
(a) practise and reflect (as a learner) and model and demonstrate (as a teacher) (as shared by Stephen), and then share our findings, observations and understanding, as a feedback to this theory and its application
(b) share our distributed knowledge and experience amongst participants (Stephen and George, and various bloggers, forum participants), and continue with this journey on network learning (as shared by George and Stephen throughout their presentations)
(c) try the skills at local level (Stephen), with pilots if you want to (views shared by various bloggers), and remember the butterfly effect (Stephen and George), everyone’s contribution throughout the network could make a big difference (everyone – networkers, lurkers, not only those in this course)
(d) connect, connect and connect, grow and develop the networks and ecology (at neural, conceptual and external – social levels) and find your ways – patterning, wayfinding and sensemaking (George, Stephen, and you)
Finally, this theory on connectivism is different from all other theories in that everyones’ voices and connections are welcome, because it is all emergent (what I think). Though I think there are still a lot of refinements needed - such as the pschological aspects, the social, economical and educational implications. Overall, I still think it’s a very useful theory to base on.
“By high school and college I learned that while I could not be popular, I could be useful. Being useful by doing all the work earned me a certain level of leadership potential because I became visible to the kids who cared about a certain club. My new strategey was to trade work for attention. I still use that strategy more than I should, and I’m guessing there are a lot of men and women who do….
By the time I hit the working world I had tried lots of strategies. It wasn’t until I studied group process that I realized that groups have patterns, and if you can predict the patterns of the group you can be in the right place at the right time. That sort of knowledge is power.
I also learned about how ruthless groups can be to members who are innovative (deviant) or perceived as weak. Different behaviors will be interpreted differently depending on the stage of the group’s development. That’s what we are here to learn. No matter what strategies you currently use, this one will only add value and save time.” What is this one to you?
Are you in a group or in a network? Or are you in both? What stage of group’s or network’s development are you in?
How do you interpret this? Is this view reflective of what happens in the business world (in a group),and/or in a network? Or is it dangerous, foolish or simply not worth it, because….it may be going against the organisation’s mission or network’s ideal? Wow…. caution! alert!!!
My focus is on how education and learning with technology as enabler and networking could add value to my learning, and could also add value or contribute to the network, not just with connectivism.
When it comes to my own learning, it is the “I” only. When it comes to network learning, or Wisdom of the Crowd, “I” cannot represent the “voice of the crowd or crowd’s views”. So, I said it is a useful theory in my context. Your and other’s experience are very important for its justification as a valuable theory.
I am now considering these:
education needs leadership (so there is educational leadership) (a vision and a mission)
learning needs management (so there is learning management system or personal learning management system), at neural, conceptual and external – social, network levels
So, connectivism or network learning is part of that management. But it requires leadership to make it happen. And both management and leadership must go hand in hand to make “connectivism” happen in networks, institutions and the business world of learning.
What is more important is education (leadership) (the means) which could transform the educational infrastructure (the big picture). And that learning (the process, and the experience you and I value) via networking will/has become a critical success factor for life based or life long learning.
How do you see education and learning under connectivism?
“It seems to be the perception of power that is important”… “As with all effective aspects of learning, personality may be another overlooked element…”I echoed with your view and insights.
As a teacher myself, I had never taken drastic actions without first consulting my learners (all adult learners). I realised that a teacher’s integrity lies with “one’s walking the talk”. So unfortunately, the spirit of networking has been greatly affected, and I don’t think that’s conducive to learning, especially for adult learners and teachers. My comment is based on an incident, rather than based on a person. And as I am not a learner looking for credits, I didn’t want my comments to affect others’ grading. And I realise how upset people (co-learners and lurkers) are.
However, I think this is a revelation that a teacher’s “great knowledge and power” doesn’t come from inside of that person, but from outside. And I learnt that respect can only be earned if a teacher is truly “compassionate, empathetic and knowledgeable to and engaging WITH the learners or teachers – peers”. May be that’s the missing element in connectivism?? Is it?
No one likes to learn without emotions or feelings, otherwise we will become the computers, which could be switched on or off by others. And I do not believe that computer can “learn” as much as human do, and as smart as human too.
Do you think you and your students share such feelings or emotions towards power? Is it the reason why connectivism is so “hard” to stay alive if people are just “connecting” without feelings? Or are people really connected? I have seen such happenings often in organisations, and the result is…I would NOT be bent with power…., though anyone could play with it. But it is like playing with fire. It hurts.
Hi Tom, http://whereoldmeetsnow.edublogs.org/2008/10/29/control-issues-cck08/
I echoed with your views in that as an adult learner and professional teacher, I never like being told what to do, in a class without good reasons. And especially if someone else is trying to control my teaching/learning without my consent.
Throughout my 23 years of teaching (and learning), I have encountered different challenges, especially when teaching teenagers (around sixteenth to nineteenth). If the teenage learners are not ready to shoulder their responsibilities, then I would have to be patient in guiding them through in their learning journey. This includes teaching them the concept of mutual respect, self awareness and control through various activities and critique.
In a classroom where student discipline is still important, it could be a chaos if everyone is talking with each other on irrelevant topics (mere chatting on trivial matters, giggling etc) at the same time. Under such environment, the students could hardly concentrate in learning due to the noises and distractions, and no one could listen to the teacher’s instructions. So everyone loses. And what a waste of time and resources! That is poor education and learning.
Setting of ground rules in the first few lessons (with the adequate sharing of power) with the learners is important. A reminder of the ground rules in subsequent lessons will ensure learners are aware of their rights and responsibilities in a class. Adequate and regular reviews of such ground rules would deem to be necessary if there are constant disruptions in class lessons.
In order to avoid the boredom of lecturing, I often use small group discussions (with Socratic questioning) and collaborative and relevant learning activities to reinforce the learning points. This would then be followed by plenary discussion in which each group’s contribution is valued, shared and summarised. This allows my students to share their ideas, debate and report in a constructive and responsible manner. In this manner, power of learning is shared amongst the learners, and they would also see the power (of influencing) in a positive manner.
I see power associated with such action is not only legitimate, but necessary. I would not relegate my power as a teacher in the classroom to ensure that the environment is conducive to learning. And that’s how I maintain my integrity, accountability, and responsibility as a teacher. What do you think?
Are all the above issues absent in digital connections? I don’t think so. As discussed in Network logic http://www.demos.co.uk/files/networklogic.pdf , networking as a process is emergent, with weak ties and new connections forming in an amorphous manner.
“They are all around us. We rely on them. We are threatened by them. We are part of them. Networks shape our world, but they can be confusing: no obvious leader or centre, no familiar structure and no easy diagram to describe them. Networks self-organise, morphing and changing as they react to interference or breakdown.
Networks are the language of our times, but our institutions are not programmed to understand them.
As individuals, we have taken advantage of the new connections: to earn, learn, trade and travel. But collectively we don’t understand their logic.”
Racism, sexism, sex, pornography, violence, hatred and evils are floating around in different connections in the virtual world. Without adequate guidance from adults, are we sure that our teenage learners will not be attracted to those connections? What are we going to do about it? Can we police the evils? How can we ensure that our coming generations are able to discern such evils in digital networking?
My reflection of the views from Ruth, Jon, Jo, Carlos, Sharon, David, Ariel, Ken, Wendy and Catherine could be summarised as follows: power of a teacher in class is necessary in K-12, especially when teaching those learners who are still at a developmental stage (K-8). And that gradual sharing of power through negotiation is desirable when the learners become more mature.
So, I think connectivism still has a role to play, especially in the higher classes – grade 9 – 12 where students are ready to further develop their metacognition skills using information and communication technology (Web 2.0, search engines, mobiles, and internet etc). However, teachers would need to consider the feelings and emotions associated with such e-connections with their learners. And thus guide the learners in e-connecting with others or sources on the internet in a safe, and responsible manner. Discussion of feelings and reflection of learning on the internet could be shared and reported to the class, where merits and demerits of the use of technology are thoroughly critiqued and evaluated. This ensures that students appreciate the importance of mutual respects, trusts, choice of selection, critical thinking, e-ethics, and the implications of such e-learning in a virtual learning environment.
Learning in an inhumane manner via “improper connectivism” destroy us as a human. Because, we learn through our senses, emotions and feelings, and that make us a better person, not a better “machine”, which could be switched on or off. And we have empathy in which no computer network or artefacts could ever learn.
At the end, I would like to quote Jenny’s comments on her post on power, authority and control
I’d be much more concerned about the influence he could have on my thinking, i.e. his knowledge power, and whether that influence was appropriate for my learning and development as a human being.”
Thank you so much for your inspiring post. Great food for thought.
You are welcome to comment on my blog here on Power in class and networks: http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.coml
I have this dream of looking for full control of my learning some 30 years ago. I resisted unwarranted power exerted on me, especially when it related to my learning goals and strategies. I had started the journey in questioning the legitimacy of power and control exerted by the teachers for a long time. And I found that learning was in the control of the institution and the teachers back in the 70’s to 90’s. I was surprised to find that the only person who could assess and grant me a pass was the “lecturer or teacher”. I started to reflect why the educational system was structured like that, and that why learners were to serve the teacher, and not the other way round. However, without the deliberate efforts and patience of my respected teachers who guided me throughout the learning journey, I wouldn’t be able to appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of the educational system. Now, I have got my questions answered. As a teacher, I realised the importance of sharing of power and empowerment of learners, in learning and assessment. It’s still not too late to support and inspire our fellow learners to achieve their goals and meet their needs.
Teachers are like the network leaders, they start with the deepest needs of their learners, and work back to establish the configuration of organisations, resources and capacities needed to meet them.
“Network leaders start from the outside-in. They start with the deepest needs of their users, and work back to establish the configuration of organisations, resources and capacities needed to meet them. The task then is to find ways of persuading other organisations of the need to work together.”
Will connectivism provide part of the solution? Time will tell.
George thinks that a systemic approach to education is important so as to look after the interests of all stakeholders, not just the learners and educators, as education should be for the benefit of the society. George thinks that authority, power, control in institutions and teachers is legitimate. He thinks that if the action taken by Stephen is to happen in a typical university course, those mainstream students will just continue their discussion as usual, as it seems that it is just a normal practice to encourage learners’ participation. George further thinks that participants should acquire such basic critical skills as filtering of information. On this occasion, learners could take back the control simply by adding filter to the email inbox etc.
Stephen thinks that you won’t be able to satisfy the needs of all stakeholders. Sometimes those stakeholders are not even aware of their roles. So the focus of education would need to start with the learners. Stephen thinks that the action he did was based on an “experimental” attempt to draw participants into forum discussion, and he feels that he has the authority to do so, and so it is an legitimate action. He realised that some participants treated it as a sense of humour, others an abuse of power, and some others with a view mid way between.
My views are as follows:
I volunteer myself to participate in forum discussion, and I love sharing my learning with others. So, I am not too bother with auto-subscription once Stephen has revealed his real intention.
However, some participants are upset with such auto-subscribe action not only because of a sudden change in the “learning practice” (i.e. with no prior consultation or notification), but that their mailbox (work or personal) are suddenly flooded with unwanted or unexpected emails. I understand how frustrating it could be, especially when one has to distinguish such mails from the work emails.
I hope his future intention of switching to auto-subscribe is not for the sake of “forcing participants” to participate in the forum discussion. But a spirit of inspiring participants to learn, engage or connect with others more conspicously. Nevertheless, this experiment becomes a good lesson for everyone.
As an educator and leader. I always start with my learners. What are their backgrounds – knowledge and experience? What are their goals, needs and expectations? How could I customise the educational and learning resources to suit their needs? What are their preferred learning strategies? How could I support my learners in their learning journey? In this regard, I seem to share similar views with Stephen in his more liberating way of thinking of learning – with learners first for adult education, especially when it comes to personal learning, assisted with personal management systems and technology.
In an educational institution, both educators and learners could enjoy autonomy, diversity etc. in teaching and learning because of the use of new information and communication technology. And one could make use of the network to access and learn new knowledge at will. So authority, power and control issues could still be under the control of the educators and learners.
However, when it comes to business, authority, power and control are much more complicated, due to various social, political, economical issues at a system level and power issues relating to one’s roles and accountability with various parties. In this connection, the organisation’s or “group’s” rules are the most important ones to comply with. Non-conformance or non-compliance to rules and regulations to Education and Accreditation standards, AQTF (Australian Quality Training Framework) or ISO9001 (2000) etc. would lead to the closure of an educational institution. So, irrespective of whatever transformation one would like to pursue, in education, the bottom line may be:
1. Has the education and learning programs or curriculum met all legislative requirements?
2. Has the institution satisfied the learner’s needs and expectations?
3. Has the institution incorporated innovative and continuous improvement strategies and practice in its system (including people, technology, processes and procedures, administration, facilities etc)?
In this regard, I tend to favour George’s concept of incorporation of networking practice or connectivism with formal education at a systemic level as a vision.
I would however think that individual practice of “connectivism” would likely be more successful (and could be more readily achievable) rather than the systemic application of Connectivism at this stage of development. I think we are still at an infancy stage of Web2.0 application and learning management systems. More resources and training for both leaders, educators, administrators, and learners are required to allow for the gradual introduction of e-learning and Web2.0 practice be assimilated into formal education. Full support from institutional leaders and government is required for sustainable transformation in education and learning.
What do you see will be the future of connectivism – in learning and education?
Action speaks louder than words. So under connectivism, which is more important – action or words or both?
There is a Chinese motto: “One set of words could help a nation to prosper, and another set of poorly-chosen words could destroy a nation” I am not exaggerating, it happened in Chinese history when an emperor was overthrown due to his inappropriate wordings. That echoed strongly with Jenny’s assertion that “I could probably do them far more harm with a few ill-chosen words than I could with inappropriate action.” http://jennymackness.wordpress.com/2008/10/31/that-cant-be-right/
I reckon this is also an experiment out of a bigger experiment. What do researchers need in an experiment? In our course – people, resources, apparatus, Moodle, Elluminate and Ustream sessions, assignments, networks, blogs, readings…. What are the researchers measuring? The posts and responses of the blogs of participants. Discussion in forums, assignments. The emotions. What are the others doing – including the lurkers? How about the other wikis created, facebook? And I am busily writing my blogs and responses to other blogs.
Have I missed anything? Oh yes- the final report. But we have to wait…..
Is power part of the experiment?
Is learning an experiment?
Is this an experiment in connectivism?
Finally, are we also experimenting?
I am now learning in a “new way”. What I found fascinating is that what I have learnt in my previous University courses or even now at work on say leadership doesn’t sound “right” or “appropriate”, though I believe those concepts were incorrect long time ago under the concept of emergent knowledge as found in networking (see network logic paper on leadership, p94 & 101) http://www.demos.co.uk/files/networklogic.pdf.
“Leading with questions not answers
In Leadership Without Easy Answers, Ronald Heifetz argues that conventional models of leadership confuse it with authority. In so doing, they perpetuate the seductive but dangerous myth that leadership is about influence and persuading people to follow a particular vision. So ‘followers’ look to a leader to solve their problems for them, ignoring their own capacity (and responsibility) to solve it for themselves. People in authority believe that their vision of change is legitimate simply because they are ‘leaders’. And when things go wrong, it is the ‘leaders’ who are blamed and replaced, with little or no reflection on the underlying causes of the problem.” Network logic page 94
‘As Sun Tzu put it long ago: ‘The good leader is the one the people adore; the wicked leader is the one the people despise; the great leader is the one the people say “we did it ourselves”.’ Network logic page 101
I would still go through the typical learning ways, but I added a way of unlearning all previous ways first, so I could allow for any innovative approach or change to emerge. And I would use all connective, constructive, cognitive, behavioural, situated and experimental approaches in rebuilding my learning. So unlearning is just like demolishing or refurbishing my existing house and new or re-learning is like building a new house with new furniture for new learning to emerge. Of course, I would not discard all furnitures (concepts) that I have, but I would retain those which are still valuable or applicable to me. In this manner, I am putting the emphasis on the learning process, but the process sometimes may start with the connections (the neural, i.e. my brain or my network, and then I will reflect on the concept why it doesn’t explain or why there is a conflict of concepts between my previous learning and what is presented in the connections (e.g. artefacts, readings). I would then reach externally through further connections to validate or re-create my concepts. And I will go through the whole process in a similar cycle. See my previous post on how I learn – I mean deep learning, when I mentioned that the problem and solution lies with my brain, my network, and also through connection with your brain and all other external networks (not just through social constructivism, but a much more complicated cycle of de-construction, reflection, connection (neural, conceptual, external -social and experimental), and further reflection, re-construction and re-cognition, observation of behaviour and emotions of myself and others for validation, and then application, and further feedback and experimentation. Again, this cycle of learning may sometimes start at a different stage for me at different times and entry points, as it depends on the concept or subject (a new one or an existing one) that I would like to learn or re-learn.
Why I would like to learn it that way? Because I am unique in that learning mode and process, and it works for me, but may not work for others. Is it similar to yours?
My biggest motivation for such new way is the “change” itself. Changing concepts, changing ways of doing things requires a change in the way of learning. Again the learning theories are all undergoing changes, and although my statement that “all learning theories need to be changed from time to time” may not be agreed by others, I would suggest that without changes to the principles and concepts of all these theories, they seem so difficult to apply under a changing world of learning (or emergent learning).
So, it seems that these are the differences between us.
Don’t you see it that way?
The Consortium for School Networking (CoSN) and the Pearson Foundation announced the official launch of a new public service announcement (PSA), Learning to change, changing to learn. This five minute video shares the views of an international panel of key educators and thought leaders including Education.au CEO Greg Black.
Participants in this video hope to add to the continuing conversation about the important role technology can play in delivering 21st century skills and engaging students in learning.
A list of participants is available from the media release below.
In November 2006, KETC/Channel 9 produced and televised Teaching the Teachers: A Key to Student Success. The goals of the program are to raise awareness of the importance and value of high-quality professional development, to emphasize its role in student success and to spotlight the work of e-Learning for Educators Missouri.
This video is now available from the e-Learning for Educators website and packaged as a DVD, sent to Missouri adminstrators in the February 2007 superintendents mailing from DESE. If your district did not receive this DVD, please contact e-Learning MO to request a copy.
View Missouri PBS Video
Click a link below to view the half-hour program or selected segments in the media player of your choice. File format is WMV. (Duration in minutes, file size in MB)
e-Learning Project Video from Alabama Public Television
A brief overview of the e-Learning project, including interviews with state project coordinators and information about project research components, created by Alabama Public Television, presented from the e-Learning Alabama website.
For more information
Christine Terry
Missouri State Program Coordinator
elearningmo@missouri.edu
(573) 884-4233
Recent developments in teaching and education have been timely in contributing positively towards enhancing the status of the teaching profession, improving the quality of teaching and learning and providing opportunities for individuals to reach their full potential. Thus, it may well be that moves towards fortifying the teaching profession and the role of the teacher through registration and the establishment of standards represents a coming of age. The registration of teachers and the development of standards for the profession will improve the status of the profession and make it mature, confident, unified and respected. Teachers will be accomplished professionals in the same vein as doctors, engineers and other professionals.
Having spent much of its recent history being perceived as a more-or-less respected apprenticeship-into-trade, the accumulation of educational research, and especially teaching research (the ‘new pedagogies’), has finally confirmed what teachers themselves always knew; that teaching is a highly skilled and complex art and science that requires a rare grasp of content knowledge conjoined with an even rarer skill of disseminating that knowledge within the limitations and constraints of bulk learning in the average, not overly-conducive classroom.
Despite a number of advances, a range of challenges also face the profession, education authorities, teacher education institutions, parents and other stakeholders. Meeting these challenges will require vast reserves of creativity, innovation, determination, political will and political leadership. There is, for instance, the issue of teacher supply and the related matter of teachers’ salaries as well as ensuring that the development and implementation of professional standards is genuinely informed by teachers and that teachers themselves maintain ownership. There are issues associated directly with teacher education which, if they are to be resolved, will require increased levels of collaboration between stakeholders and a willingness to innovate and experiment. The support of education authorities will be of particular importance. Similarly, a new approach to professional development will need to be adopted to ensure teachers are involved in continual education. Further educational research will be necessary to ensure effective teaching and learning and relevant curricula. Training for university academics will have to be considered if indeed, as the research shows, teacher quality is the main determinant of educational achievement. Preschool education will also need to be examined to ensure that preschool teachers are adequately remunerated and working conditions improved. Furthermore, there are complex issues associated with school, TAFE and the higher education sectors, all of which will require not only greater public investment but cooperation between the State and Commonwealth governments as well as the application of considerable creativity and innovation. It is advancement in these areas that will help to transform teaching into a true profession, one that complies with the highest standards of teaching and learning and aid the development of a world-class education system.
What sort of professional development do you think will be necessary in helping teachers to become “world class” professionals?
What will be the role of a “global” teacher under connectivism?
Sun Tsu was a war strategist and a philosopher. He was praised for his great strategies and tactics at war. Researchers often refer to his strategies as the best of all times in the military arenas and have thought that they could be applied in the business arenas. And so his strategic philosophies was often used in business to win over others.
Lao Tzu was a great thinker and a philosopher. He was often conceived as a wise leader, but historians have not been able to identify him. Lao Tzu was anonymous and so no one even knew who he actually was. But his concept of leadership was stated as “A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say we did it ourselves.” However, this was quoted in Network Logic as being said by Sun Tsu.
I suspect these may be due to a problem in the translation into English.
Out of the many Chinese Philosophers, the wisest one was called “Chong Tsu”. His most important and famous philosophy runs like this: “Human has a life span, but we know that there is unlimited boundary (knowledge, especially the huge amount of information, and knowledge nowadays) , to use the limited life span to chase after the unlimited knowledge boundary, it would cause “serious consequence – “death”. If you know the consequence, but still want to do it, then, it will just cause “death”. My interpretation of his philosophy is that he was trying to warn people not to chase for the unlimited “knowledge” to that extent, because there are lots of worthwhile things to do other than the mere passion of knowledge.
Another famous story from Chong Tsu was about how to learn. Chong Tsu quoted how he observed a butcher of a cow separated the fresh from bones of the cow. He noticed that the butcher had done it so naturally with speed and seemingly so easy, and so he thought it was due to the practitioner’s practice and his craft in “butchering”. The moral of the story was to illustrate the importance of mastering learning with efficiency based on “profile, pattern recognition and sensing” of the learner and its interface or artefacts – similar in concept to the connectivist’s learning approach of pattern recognition, way finding and sense making. So, his philosophy seems to provide similar direction to that of connectivism.
I am happy to share more stories of those philosophers with you. Some of these stories were lost in their formal records, but I could still recall them. The genres or themes of those stories have great significance in education and learning, and could be used as a foundation of most modern education and learning theories.
After reading your post, I have mixed feelings.First, I am glad that you recovered from your bronchitis and feeling of powerlessness.And I greatly appreciate your openness in sharing how you think about connectivism, in that it is not entirely new, but one that is Christened.
On the other hand, you have pointed out one the most important elements that may be missing from connectivism – the human element and emotions arising out of the connection, especially in this CCK08 course.And you are disappointed with the lack of concerns from the group and teachers.Also, you think you are in a network and your feelings won’t be cared by others.
Let me share this with you and Ken: when I first read about Sia’s blog on her feeling of loneliness, my first reaction was not to extend my emotional rescue as a co-learner.Why?I think it is part of anyone on this “connectivism” journey, and may be how one could develop into a “co-operative, collaborative and independent” learner through such experience.I remember when I first set up my web pages some 8 years ago, with those Google and other first generation web development tools.. no one was interested in my website.Even when I set up my blog 2 years ago, no one visited mine.Why?Because blogging could be a lonesome journey, and so is an on-line course, with so many participants.And it’s very difficult to identify the “group” and yourself in the “group” or “network”
But at the end, if you think you have learned something that you have conceptualised in your goals, you have already succeeded in achieving your goals.It is not because of any theories, not because of any “constructive criticism” or “praises” by others, though some of them may be helpful in your learning, but because of your enthusiasm and passion towards learning.That intrinsic motivation which sparks the learning, that keeps the learning on fire, and that shines.
So, congratulation as you have already found your way.Assessment marks to me has little significance, so whether it is A or A+ or a C- in any test, assignment does not make any difference, though one could say it’s reflective of understanding and performance.What makes a difference is one’s attitude towards learning and education.People can be trained on skills, but you can’t educate people on attitudes, because it’s learned.
I also share your view on theefforts that George and Stephen have made in planning and facilitating the program.They did it with their passion, but obviously might not be appreciated as much.To this end, I hope this experiment could be a success to them and us, as that was the reason why we are here.
In this You Tube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L2XwWq4_BYit concludes: “Each of us must be a learner, and each a teacher. 21st century learning matters for us all”.What do you think will be the role of teacher/learner?
Help us define powerful learning, share resources and support educators. We want to know:
How can we best respond to the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century?
How can we help empower today’s learners and teachers?
What are the alternatives to schooling as we know it?
What does 21st century learning practice actually look like (in a “real” classroom)?
How can I contribute to transforming our educational organizations?
The more voices that contribute to the conversation, the greater the opportunity for our education system to serve a wider diversity of student-learners.
Hi Keith, http://keithlyons.wordpress.com/2008/11/07/cck08-week-9-stacks/
Great to see your nice photos. So you have enjoyed a wonderful time there.
I echoed with others in that you have summarised a lot of other blogs that I think wow, it’s just wonderful to read your blog.
I am also impressed with your Utopian view on connectivism.
I could see the diversity of views amongst co-learners and our teachers, and that could be pretty interesting when it comes to collaboration of projects or working in networks.
On one hand, we might have been “brainwashed” in our previous education to work in teams, emphasising the importance of team leadership and team working. On the other hand, we are now considering the networking phenomena, and network learning, where individuality, autonomy and diversity is emphasised.
I still believe that group work is important, in order to achieve vision and mission. However, I don’t see much liberation allowed from a top management’s point of view, due mainly to the different needs of its participants. Can you please everybody (including the stakeholders)? And the slogan of customer first is still predominant.
What do you think will be impact of these back to our organisations – management and leadership in particular?
I love to see how such integration could become a reality at work.
I have witnessed the quality journey throughout the 80s till now. As a big fan of Total Quality Management (TQM), I was intrigued by the Quality Circle movement, with grassroots involvement supported from the top especially first in Japan, then in the western world, then the customer service movement, Just in Time (JIT) movement, followed by process re-engineering, benchmarking, best practice, Six Sigma and Lean, and customer first etc. now in the business world.
As an engineer and educator, I think it would be necessary to learn from that quality journey, so as to ensure an adequate support from government, business and educational institution in this educational development.
In other words, networking could not operate in a vacuum, one needs support from various parties such as communities, businesses, government and institutions to make it sustainable. And a smooth transition from one stage to another stage of development will ensure that “no teachers/learners are left behind”.
I am interested in this connectivism journey, and would like to compare and contrast its journey with that of the quality movement as mentioned, and to see how it goes.
It has been a nice weekend here in Sydney. So, I hope you have another wonderful weekend.
Cheers from John.
(a) as an assessor (especially in the recognition of prior learning, and recognition of current competency)
(b) as a brightphilosopher (an expert in philosophy or in one of its branches, who searches by logical reasoning, for understanding of the basic truths and principles of the universe, life, and morals, and of human perception and understanding of these) – George, Stephen, Dave, Anthony, Nancy……
(c) as a consultant or advisor to industry, or consultant or coach on auspicing
(d) as a course or curriculum designer/reviewer
(e) as an expert (or e-expert)
(f) as a facilitator (facilitation of discussions and learning activities)
(g) as a gardener (as mentioned by Lisa), guardian angel (Maru)
(h) as an hononaryadvisor (in case of research projects)
(i) as an education and learning innovator
(j) as an (joint)examiner or moderator (to other institutions, universities)
(k) as a gate keeper
(l) as a learning team leader/facilitator/supervisor (whereas a learning team consists of the learner(s), the supervisor, a mentor, and the teacher/leader, librarian)
(m) as a manager/administrator (self learning manager and network administrator)
(n) as a course or networkleader
(o) as a student counsellor/carer
(p) as a learning partner (similar to the co-learner) in this course Ariel, Bob, Carlos, Dave, Frances, Jenny, Keith, Ken, Lee, Lisa, Mark, Maru, Pat, Renee, Roy, Tom, etc. Sorry that I couldn’t list everyone, but you are definitely here.
(q) as a curator (pronounced with q..)(as mentioned by Lisa)
(r) as a researcher/research leader (this may be one of the most important roles of University professors or lecturers)
(s) as an e-learning or project or subject coordinator/developer (wiki, edublogs)
(t) as a trainer, tutor/learning supporter or guide (like a tourist guide)
(u) (you) as a challenger (weight loss education program etc), Alec, Ariel, Frances, Jenny, Ken, Dave, George Siemens, Maru, Stephen Downes, Pat, Tom, etc.
(v) (we) as a change agent (Nancy White, Stephen Downes, George Siemens etc.)
(w) as a wizard (or better a magician) (as mentioned by Lisa), and a weaver (mentioned by Lisa) – Frances, Tom, Mark, and George and Stephen
(x) as a x-man or x-woman (who could transform the education) (George, Stephen, Lisa, Frances and you?)
(y) as a why-why questioner (always ask why?)
(z) as a mentor/coach (especially for trainees and apprentice or interns, whereas the supervisor or an experienced expert/head teacher would be a mentor/coach)
(zz) as a lecturer (as typical in giving lectures in those conferences or university courses)
Hi Bradley, http://bradleyshoebottom.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/cck08-book-review-of-disrupting-class-by-clayton-christensen/
I read your review with interest.
I echoed with your view in that why not having fun in learning. So, if everyone is enjoying learning, would this shed light to our future generation in becoming a knowledge nation? And that we have confidence in preparing our coming generation (K-12 students) for the future challenges.
I am not too sure whether the normal distribution curve of learning applies to human. In that not everyone is learning in the same way, and there are always people who could learn by the exploitation of ICT, and thus may be better prepared for challenges (this needs more qualification!) And I am not sure!
However, one thing is certainly normal in that all the learning theories will sooner or later be replaced by new or emergent ones. Take a look at learning theories based on multiple intelligence, emotional intelligence, where all the directors, education top leaders have attended. What are the outcomes? Some people become smarter, and others more intelligent in leading the organisation – with empowerment, managing change, motivation, leadership, etc.
The result: a top down approach with bottom up support expected or executed, with more policies, more accreditation, more innovations, and more controls and standards. Networks are developed to support the central policies. Major policies must be geared with career prospects, or business and industry requirements. Because a responsible government is preparing its citizens towards better education, with centralised and standardised qualifications – for business and society needs. Vision and missions are the milestones for any education department throughout the world, and all education institutions.
How do these compare with this connectivism approach? Independent learning, but collaborative or cooperative networks, learning with autonomy, diversity, continuous innovative and improvement in learning with ICT as enablers. Learners as centre of learning and education. With emphasis on life-based and life-long learning. Go with the flow type of liberating views on education, learning and networking. (I think Stephen prefers a more liberating view on education). Democracy is emphasised, though voice of the crowds needs to be considered in any social networks.
How will these concepts and applications of networks be linked or integrated with the vision and mission of politicians, directors of business, managers or administrators of business and education, educators, professors, parents, learners? Where are the bridges? What are the interests of the stakeholders (as mentioned by George)? Where are the human, financial, technological and social supports?
What will be the impact on teachers/learners? Do we need more or less teachers as a result of ICT in classes or courses?
Do we need more ICT training in K-12? If yes, what sort of training is required NOW and how to do it? Remember that a lot of institutions have banned the social network sites to ensure safety and security. So, if the educators couldn’t reach them, how could they “teach” the learners? Besides, as mentioned by co-learner Lisa:”To replace our educational system with completely self-guided learners could mean premature specialization, and a lack of exposure to non-familiar subjects.” http://lisahistory.wordpress.com/2008/11/10/learners-students-and-an-ontological-issue/ So, how are we going to strike a balance between an educational school-based system and a self-guided learning system in K-12? See discussion on Reality Check – some of the issues and solutions suggested by Ruth, Tom , Frances, Lee, and Stephen. http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/moodle/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1079
Surely with the CCK08, if 2 “teachers” could serve 2000 plus learners, do you think there is a need to employ more teachers/moderators in mass open on-line courses? Will open on-line courses be the future? Will everyone become a teacher in those “courses” or networks? How about the accreditation? Will such courses be recognised nationally and internationally? Will networks such as community of practice be the education campfire? What will be the educational landscape of the future?
What will be the role of the professors/teachers in higher education? Are they still the way finders for learners? Who will be holding the authority/power in education and learning? Is power an issue? Where will these changes lead us to – emergent knowledge, learning, education? A bright future?
And the questions go on….
I am interested in this connectivism journey, and what and where will these lead all of us up to?….
You are welcome to visit my blog: http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com for comments.
Connectivism attracts attention to practicing teachers. It also attracts attention from educational institutions.
I have found out that my organisation is going to have an on-line Adobe session on networking with emphasis on the importance of connections and network learning in this coming Wednesday.
I think it is a great initiative to promote connectivism in educational institutions. There are also implications…
The main reasons for such initiative are directives from the top that:
Educational institutions are looking for innovative ways to develop their staff (both teachers, assessors and administrators) to continue updating their professional skills. Networking is viewed as an “effective and efficient alternative to training”, and could enhance staff morale and motivation. And connections in the learning networks seem to be viewed as a contemporary professional approach towards life long learning. (I learnt it from you, and this course)
Individual staff are encouraged and are expected to align their professional development to the section plan, college plan and institute corporate plan - vision and missions. My impression is that network approach to learning is not optional, but mandatory from top management point of view.
Stephen – I hope you could comment on this, as your view on openness, autonomy, diversity and interactiveness or connectedness are the essential criteria of success for networks and network learning. But how does it relate to organisation’s interpretation on networks or network learning? – namely that it may become a “group’s” concept and more like a community of practice is preferred by management where everyone has to comply with the rules and obligations (to certain extent). So, will this end the diversity of views as promoted in networks? As corporations normally expect their staff to achieve goals set out in vision and mission statements.
George – I suppose there is a need for top management and major stakeholders to build a deeper understanding in the needs and relationship amongst individual learning and development, community of practice and the expectations from the corporate business or educational institutions. I suppose this is the bridge that I suggest in my blog: http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com
There are many implications in open courses and education: Power issue- who is in power?
Open education- which could lead to “opportunities, challenges – even threats to educational institutions and private providers or businesses, and even teachers”. There are sensitivities involved in discussing the implications of open content, but remember that it is also a wake up call for many “giants” or corporations who are unaware of the impact of internet and Web2.0 and open courses on their business or education provision.
Also, when it comes to openness in content, journals, teaching, learning and sources, it will have a great impact on the accreditation system and educational institution’s competitiveness in both local and global “market”.
Comments?
Postscript: Stephen Donwnes’ paper on “Models for Sustainable Open Educational Resources” http://www.downes.ca/post/33401provides thoughtful insights into the sustainability of OERs.
Though there is great temptation to depict the sustainability of OERs in terms of funding models, technical models or even content models …. it seems evident that any number of such models can be successful. But at the same time, it also seems clear that the sustainability of OERs……requires that we think of OERs as only part of a larger picture, one that includes volunteers and incentives, community and partnerships, co-production and sharing, distributed management and control.
I read your post with great interests. I share your views on the need to develop both oneself and the community. Refer to Lisa’s post on Resistance, Re-assessment and Re-tooling http://lisahistory.wordpress.com/2008/11/13/paper-3-resistance-reassessment-retooling/
So on one hand, an individual may wish to become a great thinker (individualism) (by pursueing a EdD or PhD) as the ideal goal (to fulfil self actualisation). But on the other hand, a lot of organisations and communities are emphasising on the importance of network learning (one must be a good team player) and the importance of mission and vision for the section.
This could have huge implication: Collective wisdom versus individual autonomy; central control versus diversity of views (as in informal learning).
What would happen if organisations would like to control over the networks (informal learning, communities) as individuals’ aspirations may align with the networks but not the organisation’s vision or mission?
A typical example is that some organisations have copyright with their content and would not allow any disclosure to the public. Also, private providers are in severe competition with public ones and so there are always tension between parties in getting the funding from the government and the recruitment of students to their courses. Participants who are in those providers may find it difficult to share their experiences in the networks due to conflicts of interests to their own organisations. So how could these people be open to diversity and openness in the sharing in communities or networks? You are welcome to comment on my blog: http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com
Thanks again for your inspiring post.
Cheers. John
He mentioned the tools that are typically used for open content, expression, creation, sharing, and aggregation in education, and how one could exploit those tools in open education as educators.
How are the tools and technology being used in spreading religious beliefs?
Religious beliefs are complicated and are easily associated with any connections – under connectivism. Is this another niche area in openness?
The deepest tao cannot be expressed, it is a state of mind. That was learnt in my high school. “Tao that is told is not the tao. It is not easily understood”.
Being a Catholic (and a Christian) myself, I have my religious belief, and so I would treat tao as another way to describe the nature (state of mind) of act and people.
Are there commonalities in connectivism and religious beliefs?
Is it true that the more one interacts or connects with others, the more one could reveal the “knowledge” of nature, and the more we learn in a network? And will this result in distributed learning in a network? To what extent is it true in theory and practice?
Do people spread their religions through “teaching” and/or “connections”/ ”actions”?
Are there good ”spirit” of nature and the “evils” in the connections?
This is my experience and observation:
Good ones include establishing weak ties that overcome space and time, making friends, communicating and listening, sharing and contributing to communities, spreading the news of peace and harmony, and great love”loving each other”. And that as learning is distributed amongst network and the PEOPLE, we could appreciate each others’ thoughts with a deeper understanding going beyond any religions, races and cultural backgrounds, age and sex. We are just born to be natural learners/teachers who are ready to serve each other.
Evil ones include having floods of emails telling me that I have been given sums of money by a widow, and I could get those money by return emails, by revealing my personal details. This has never happened to me before I joined the course. Or I am the lucky one, now. Also the various attractive spams advertising products or services, the deadly evils spams who lure me to their “evil sites” by praising how well I have done. What a hypocrite from those evils! And could we stop them?
So there are opportunities of socialising, learning through interaction, growing of faith and hope spiritually, but also challenges to our daily life if too much of ourselves are exposed to the public eyes, when we are invaded by those evils of adult themes, violence, indulgences, spams etc.
If this happens to me, how about others? How about the educators? How about the K-12 students? How will they react?
Are they ready for the opportunities and challenges?
Would it be better be “choosy” in connections? How could one avoid the spams and evils? Has technology added or reduced our security of “education” and “life”?
How do you see such timeless wisdom realised in the midst of religion, politics, education through connectivism or network learning? Is Connectivism a solution towards wisdom?
In summary, I am hesitant in introducing connectivism into or applied in religions due to the complex nature of human and the associated ‘arguments” or “beliefs” underlying the religions.
Have we understood enough about all religions?
Is politics and religions still the taboos in education? I don’t know the answer. How about you?
Do these illustrate the importance of learning and education (under connectivism in particular)?
Will religious beliefs overcome some of the side effects (evils) due to the (improper) connections?
Who is the instructor? George, Stephen, and each others too? I suppose that’s what George and Stephen would like to see… we are actively building up the connections through forums, blogs, wikis and other various tools, which is all part of the learning process. And we are proactive in peer teaching as practising “teachers”: to explore what is distributed in the web and networks and people, to be inquisitive, to challenge each others’ perspectives by postings and responses based on reasons (not just passions – with emotional control) in a network. Some of us have used our own writings, postings, others have used podcasts, videos on Youtubes, pictures, powerpoints, and mind maps etc. to share the knowledge and learning. In order words, modelling and demonstration as a teacher and connecting and practice as a learner (as cited from Stephen in various forum discussion).
When such connections and exchange of perspectives are coupled with personal reflections, I think it could generate powerful learning amongst the individuals – with valuable emergent knowledge shared and developed. For me, it has already changed the way I learn.
In the forum I often like to learn the views of the participants, mainly because here you are: George, Stephen, Jon, Frances, Bob, Lisa, Old Socs and others… the lively ones whose quotes and perspectives are more relevant and important than those quoted in “theories” in OUR discussion. Your views are based on years of experience and knowledge, and are equally valuable when compared to those findings coming from applied research done by great educators, researchers and professors.
In this connection, I think the exploitation of ICT in the mining of distributed network knowledge and network sharing and discussion could often outperform that of an individual “teacher” or “professor”, as the process could more readily crystallise the essence of connected knowledge, which is emergent.
Such deep learning is often more valuable to the participants because the emergent knowledge is a result of ”co-construction” by its network individuals. The diversity, autonomy, interactivity and openness, in a connective knowledge network is both encouraged and forged under such learning ecology (adapted from Stephen).
So in this network, is everyone a leader and instructor in learning? If you want to enlighten and share the learning, what are you going to do about it? Lead from the front? Keep each other excited! Stay current with knowledge upfront! Is it what most professors are doing? Isn’t it in line with the principle of life long learning? Is that the spirit of emergent leadership – exploiting the learning via technology and network (artefacts and people) ? Sorry too many questions already, as Bob said. Your turn…
Can a network of individuals replace a teacher or professor? Your conclusions…..
In my year 7 high school study (many tens of years ago), my teacher suggested us to study in pairs to develop better spoken English, and to improve study skills. That mode of pairing is similar to the mentor/mentee relationship we have nowadays. I wasn’t awared of this being called mentoring at that time.
He first arranged us to pair up with other students. I was paired up with another bright classmate who needed to develop improved reading skills. Academically he was the star (much better than me in most studies). On certain mornings before the class started or during the breaks (we negotiated the time), he practised reading with me, and I just listened, and provided feedback where necessary. Throughout the process, we learned and improved. We had become very good friends based on that relationship. We both had to “report” back to the class, and every pairs did the same too on the progress and outcomes. My classmate actually had to read in the class to show his improved performance (peer assessment). And we could even change mentors and mentees at will. So it was fun, emergent…relationship, learning and leadership.
During the last 10 years, this practice has been happening throughout my own work and outside membership in associations or networks. On some occasions, I joined as a “formal” mentor and did the mentoring – all between us (me and the mentees) in private, and then more openly with the other mentors, during site visits, meetings, but we are both “mentors” to each others, and sharing the learning either face to face or in groups.
So, we are now extending such mentoring relationships to the networks, this course – with sporadic mentoring and coaching, consciously and unconsciously, sometimes propositional, other times nonpropositional (as cited by Stephen).
I always like to break the rule, if it is good for “us”- especially the one to two paragraphs cited by the experts or professors in forums. Why? Because I think that is one question only, and is limited to one paragraph of answer (correct?), a didactic Socratic approach. But I would like the stimulation of multi-conversation, and that’s the challenging part of the discussion. That simulate the multi-facets of complex issues in real life, and we could become the curator blended with creativity. And Bob, Lisa, Ruth, Frances, Stephen, George…you are the one….
Did I pass marginally?
Thank you for being patient with me….more stories to share…in coming posts
Can a group of networked individuals play the same role as a teacher? This course could be a good example. In the short term, I do think such group of networked individuals have played “part” of the role of a teacher… provided the individuals perceived the network as a valuable source of knowledge and experience, which could be trusted and relied upon.
But will there be a timeframe for such role?
How about the emotions of the individuals towards each other? How would the emotions be resolved? An example is if the member was not “liked” or was neglected by other networked members, he/she may decide to leave the network. So how could that member learn or be helped out? How about the lurkers?
Are there any “facilitators” or “leaders” needed in such networks? Will these individuals assume their role as ”teacher” ultimately? What motivate these individuals to stay in the network? Is the network based on a community of practice/interest/project/problem/social reasons? Is there a definite start/end time for such network (like a project)?
To what extent will such network relationship persist?
How will power relationship be developed in external/social network? How will conflicts of power be resolved?
As the network develops, will the “weak ties’ grow into “strong ties” or “transform into something else – like a group”?
Will there be a cycle of network – group?
Will it be similar to the TQM (Total Quality Management) movement, starting with Top TQM Steering committee, quality circles, then formal TQM cross functional teams, Just in time, then leaderless teams, then process re-engineering, best practice, customer service, then lean, six sigma, and now networks (quality networks), then…will it be Network Steering or Community of Practice, network circles again…? And the cycle goes on?
Even if we don’t need teachers, will some people still want to become teachers or like to take up the role of a teacher?
Where will the teachers go? Re-deployed? Will the parents become the teachers?
So will it be schooling then de-schooling, then re-schooling cycle?
Where there is a solution, there may be a set of problems arising from that solution, the TQM movement cited above well illustrates the lesson from history. Does it?
An old saying: it takes half to a year to grow a crop, ten years to grow a tree, and many tens of years to grow people. At this digital age, we have a manic society. How long will it take to grow and develop a person – to become a digital, net or network citizen? Do you need a seond life?
Here is a picture in a scene featured in a best-of compilation called Parrot Sketh Not Included:
It is the Silly Olympics. The stadium is full. There is a blue sky overhead. There is a sense of great anticipation as the main event is about to begin. Assembled at the starting line are the finalists – an elite band of runners who have absolutely no sense of direction.
The runners are clearly agitated. They are itching to get on with the race. The starting gun fires, and the runners are off. Very quickly they all leave the track – sprinting forwards, sprinting backwards, sprinting sideways, sprinting in circles. They are all running extremely fast. Maximum haste. Great effort. Fantastic speed. Very athletic. But there is no track, no direction, no finishing line and, ultimately, no purpose to the running.
How does this relate to the learning in this ‘Fast Society’? Are we no difffernt to the fast runners? Are we becoming a generation of “fast laners” in the networks? Are we testing the limits of fast living, fast business, fast learning, fast instructions? Fast posting? Fast responses? Fast research?…..Fast teachers? And fast learners? So you don’t need years to become expert, don’t you?
Is instruction important? Do you need a purpose to your learning?
Though we seem to have overcome the space problem by communicating or connecting asynchronously or synchronously via e-chat, forum, Elluminate or Ustream, Facebook, Myspace, Youtube, Slidewares, blogs, wikis, and various web resources etc, we could hardly read or learn through the sense of “smell, touch or body language etc of other human, animals or artefacts” in e-learning or e-connection.
So, the sensory-motor skills and affective domains would not be easily addressed in e-learning.
That may account for the difficulties in teaching and learning of those related skills on the web. Actual outdoor games and activities are important in the building of physical and mental health (i.e. the knowledge of physical and mental well being). Perhaps connectivism could provide theories, knowledge and principles in certain disciplines, leaving the skills to be practised by the learner.
Typical examples that require motor and sensory skills include: cooking, swimming, driving and gymnastics.
I have “learnt” how to cook some dishes by watching Youtube, but have to actually practise in order to make a delicious meal. Watch this video on Youtube on cooking the crab
Perhaps, you need actual piping to connect the smell.
Have you thought of any ways in overcoming those limitations cited above? I am sure that there are always innovative ways to teach and learn the affective and sensory-motor skills, via connectivism. Suggestions?
This is interesting. We seem to touch on an important and sensitive subject: integrity amongst educators and participants.
Trust, honesty and openness are the connerstones of network learning (in my humble opinion IMHO), that was also mentioned by George, after my response to Catherine in previous forum discussion. Otherwise some conversations, critiques become apparent appreciative inquiries (sorry, I don’t mean to be negative), where participants would praise with responses to each others, in order to please and concur, (or the sandwich approach), in order not to offend each other, which sounds “good” in a class.
Fake critiques and conversations are happening in many social networks. Is it the reason of the avatars in Second Life? Are the conversations “really reflective” or honest saying of the participants? Just for fun or exaggeration?
On the other hand, as tensions amongst participants build up, some people would stay away from the forum, in order to avoid conflicts. So even networks (or this group) have norms (and implicit rules). Is it?
Video chatting and posting is one way to identify people. Due to time zone problem, I found it difficult to attend some “Elluminate” or “Ustream” sessions here in Sydney, Australia. Is it a problem for others?
Are people in networks (this group in particular) willing to identify themselves in open space? How many participants are willing to openly comment on their work practices, associations, organisations, society or community in public? Is politics, religion still a taboo especially if ones identity is revealed? Are people willing to speak the “truth” from their hearts?
Is it true that network could provide that protection for people who wishes to engage and connect if they hide their true identity? Is people free to voice their opinions with minimum risk if they stay anonymous? Again, is it why Second Life is so popular? Is risk an important factor in network learning?
If this is happening in “our network”, how could we know if the blogs, forums, facebook posts or even wiki (in this and other networks) are genuine or authentic (both content and personal experience)? Are they real or just imaginary in such a virtual, digital age? Any research done in this area?
Is on-line assessment trustworthy? Are there lots of plagiarism in on-line network assessment? If that is the case, how could one detect and avoid it? These all belong to another big topic that deserve a new post.. Who would like to start?
Hi Jenny,
Thanks for this in-depth analysis on that important question. As mentioned, it is pretty difficult in generalising nowadays, as even situated learning is contingent to the situations.
In network learning:
Is there a teacher needed in a network?
Who are the “teachers” in a network?
Why does one join the network?
Not all scientists like to work in a network, Newton is a typical example. His lecture was not filled with any “student”. He liked to work alone. There are few Newton nowadays.
Even Einstein preferred to conduct research (i.e. on relativity). Isn’t it interesting? Many great philosophers and scientists were lonely researchers and thinkers, and they may not like to be bound by the rules of communities, society, so as to allow their creativity to flourish. Besides, society places higher values to those great educators and research scientists (the Nobel Prize winners in particular). How would one be remembered in history? Individual or collective contribution?
Nowadays, people could only achieve their goals with the co-operation, collaboration and connection with others. One needs “learners” to become a “teacher”. So teachers and learners need to be connected. And it all comes back to the vision (pathfinding) of both learners and teachers.
George and Stephen are leading the way in this course, and they deserve the credits in opening up the avenues towards connectivism.
Is teaching still a noble profession? In a commercial world, is corporate training more important than higher education?
Under connectivism, apart from the technology that I have used (as an enabler) and the various connections made, I have made use of other related personal development resources to enhance my learning.
He mentions about Conscience (modeling), surrounded by Vision (pathfinding), Passion (empowering), and Discipline (aligning)- the four roles of leadership. I found the pathfinding and modeling concept quite similar to Stephen’s learning model.
I have interest in Stephen Covey’s 7th and 8th habits for years.
Emotional and Social Intelligence
I also found the books on emotional intelligence and Social Intelligence by Daniel Goleman very good read. To me, those concepts on the human relationship leverage the effects arising from connections in connectivism.
Motivation
Other further interesting theories include: Self-Determination Theory
http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT
It highlights the focus on professional development by creating an environment that facilitates intrinsic motivation.
How do you find the above resources?
1. What sort of resources are you using?
2. How do you use those resources? For reflection? For application?
The suggestion by Mary was: Move responsibility and decision-making to the lowest possible level.
The Litmus Test: When workers are annoyed by their job
Under the same concept, when learners or teachers are annoyed by the “teaching and learning ecology”, what option will you choose?
Are you going to be the cathedral builder?
Some suggestions:
May be we can do experiments
Try innovative solutions – develop open course/coursewares, build networks, community of practice
Be adaptable in learning new ICT tools via continuous personal learning and development – applied connectivism
Go out and learn more - join communities, networks, open courses and forums
Use creativity in building constant improvement both individually and collectively (connectivism and connective knowledge with brain power) with the exploitation of ICT (Web 2.0), networks, community of practice
Leadership in place – every learner a leader – takes ownership in learning and teaching
Network leadership – co-operation, collaboration amongst networks, community of practice
Research
Your suggestions….
May be a wiki to collect more ideas…
Or a set up of a community/network to continue our exploration on connectivism…
If we have a few of us starting it, I think it will just take a few days to build the initial one – we can have a few suggestions on the title of the “wiki or blog”. And if people like to contribute, just leave your blog contact here and we could keep in touch with each other to have a go. What do you think?
Everyone is welcome. And I trust that all of “us” are equal in sharing the “power” if there are any!
“Connectivism can draw much from research in related fields such as neuroscience for understanding biological basis of learning, AI for how neural networks function, sociology for external connections, psychology for conceptual formations, systems thinking for understanding how the entire system of education relates”
Reinforce the theory of connectivism – especially a deeper understanding of the concepts and principles governing connectivism.
Inform authorities and stakeholders (i.e. higher education in particular) of the theoretical framework of “emergent” connectivism
Introduction of psychology for conceptual framework and connections would provide a leverage to connections, and a framework in understanding the dynamics of both strong and weak ties (at all three levels – neural, conceptual, external/social).
Challenges:
Some critics viewed connectivism as a blend of different theories – including behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, social constructivism, complex and chaos theories, constructionism,..and are similar in certain ways to Actor Network Theories (ANT). How would such research be “integrated” given that each theory proponents have their own views on those theories? Extending those theories into connectivism would need to be considered under specific context. Will the findings be inconclusive? And I am not too sure when it comes a “virtual world” whereas some research findings may not be reflective of reality (will provide evidence based on url in coming threads). How would one overcome that?
Which is more important in research? Applied connectivism? Empirical research? Cross discipline research?
Will any of the researches be funded?
Given that such researches may be based on individual initiatives (such as a PhD thesis), competition (in funding) rather than collaboration may arise.
If the researchers are to form networks, will copy right (or plagiarism) be an issue? How original will such researches be?
How will peer review be coordinated? Is it through instititutions or networks? How will credentials be achieved?
It’s difficult for novice to weave through the different theories, and any research on those other areas create conflicting views in connectivism (which may turn up to be a good idea).
I think getting research done in those areas is not too difficult, as there are already many PhD candidates doing research in this connectivism area. Getting coordinated results and colloborations amongst researchers would be the most difficult part of it. A “network” or “community of practice” approach would likely yield better result. But would it be easy to coordinate such efforts? Networking amongst researchers is never an easy task – note the ”autonomy of scholars” and “islands of researches” that has happened in the past.
Even by now, only you and Stephen are the main pioneers in this area, would we need more people to join? But again, this will add complications to the theory, as it is evidenced in this course, towards a learner centred approach, and as an emergent learning theory.
Would we want our coming generation to become a virtual human being without identity? And that “such e-citizen” are not trustworthy? Do we want to educate our children to connect and communicate with others with integrity (trust, honesty, openness with respect)? Do we wish to see each other connecting with a fake identity? There may be good reasons not to expose one’s identity. But in the long run, why?
Can we trust any survey done when it could be done with fake identities? Can we trust scientific study based on digital networks which have fake identities? I suppose any e-surveys can then be made to serve its purpose – with fake results. Fake-in-fake-out!
I can claim to have done all researches and surveys on connectivism, just like the cloning research conducted, which was later found to be fake. Why? Is it because human are selfish? Looking just for fame? Or is it a joke to the whole world? Is it really education? Is that learning?
Would it be disastrous to see this happening?
Take a look at the current terrorist pandemic, is it a result of terrorist networks? How could “human” be identified within such network? Are we really secured under a network learning environment?
Here is my final paper on Connectivism-Part I.I am doing all the assessments starting from the end, due partly to the time needed for reflection, but also my quest for a better version to be published to the public.
To address George’s questions
1.What is the quality of my learning networks: diversity, depth, how connected am I?
2.How has this course influence my view of the process of learning (assuming, of course, that it has)?
3.How can you incorporate connectivist principles in your design and delivery of learning?
4.What types of questions are still outstanding?
May I start off with a metaphor?
Flight in search of learning experience with people and learning/educational landscape
I have often liked to take flight to reach different places of the world.This has widened my understanding of the knowledge, perspectives and habits of other people.I could see the importance of social, political and cultural values, and habits of people in learning and education in this global village.
When I first joined this course, I found I was boarding a virtual flight on connectivism.With a 2000 plus passengers on board, we were all ready for the take off.At the start, everything seemed so smooth.It was an exciting journey, so new to me, that I wondered if I have chosen the “right” flight.
Then, here came the announcement of the chief pilots- George Siemens and Stephen Downes (G&S), that the flight was on time and on track.And our plane climbed the heights (the connective knowledge, networks and history of networks sessions in 2nd, 3rdand 4th week) smoothly….
Then the Moodle, Blogs, Wiki, Daily, RSS, Facebook, Second Life etc. were all in place and I felt like connecting to the other passengers using the computer screens – the internet and the artefacts. And it seemed that we have all boarded on an actual plane, where we could connect and have conversation with each other.Due to the friendly service of G&S, everything seemed nice and calm.
Then there came a surprise announcement from a female co-pilot named Catherine.We were informed that the course track wasn’t right. Our flight was heading to the wrong direction! I was taken back by such a surprise notice. I thought it must be a hijack!
I talked to myself: ’Take it easy, calm down”
With the courageous act of the two steering pilots G&S and few passengers, the voices seemed to calm down. It wasn’t a hijack at all. It was just a virtual game – to entertain us. And we were told that we could enjoy our flight, and so just relax with our dinner.
Then, there came the turbulence, power in between the pilots and passengers, when I have to fasten my seat belt.It was a bumpy ride, and luckily, I have got my gears ready, and so I was safe and sound.On one occasion, I took the breathing apparatus to keep alive.But after a few more roller coaster rides, the complexity and chaos theories, the jargons, metaphors on friction, pipes, etc. I managed to focus on my exploration. I finally understand where I am, and who I am talking to. And I soon got accustomed to the flight.
Once we have moved to the 9th week, we were safe.And here came
the landing in Week 12. Safe and sound landing on the wonderland of connectivism.
I am going to start my reflections by trying to answer these questions – but I may come back with further reflections in a later post.
1.What is the quality of my learning networks: diversity, depth, how connected am I?
Throughout my journey here in this course, I managed to make a few strong “ties”, but most of the others are just “weak ties”.In the moodle, I took an active part with a lot of co-learners.I often interacted with Roy, Ken, Bradley, Dolores, Ruth, Jo Ann, Om, Pat, Mrs Durff, Jorge, Carlo, Jon, Sarah, Bob, Carlos, Frances, Catherine, Andreas, Ed, Lee, George and some others.In the blogosphere, I often connect with various co-learners, like Jenny, Mike, Lisa, Tom, Maru, Ariel, Ailsa, Viplav, Dave and Keith, and many others.
I managed to maintain conversation with more than 40 participants throughout the diverse network.Gradually, I have to use RSS, Google Reader, Delicious, Wiki and blogs to keep up with the connections and aggregations.I thought I have been able to connect with others without too much difficulties.However, I also realised that it was a challenge in sustaining the connections due to two main reasons. First, any connection must start with a sincere intention, whether it is a post, or a response.Second, reason and passion (and emotion) must be considered in a connection or interaction.It really opens up my learning in that not only “like minds attract”, “unlike minds attract too”.
I hope I could maintain such enthusiasm in connection even after this course, by taking an active part in blogging and response.
2.How has this course influenced my view of the process of learning (assuming, of course, that it has)?
Learning
I started off on-the-job training in 2000, and since then I realised our learners (including me) all learn in a diverse manner.Learning from the instructor, peers, various artefacts mediated (resources, internet), work itself, etc.Both formal and informal learning are important, in that they all contribute to one’s life long learning due to its emergent nature. From this course, I further realised the importance of emergent learning distributed throughout the networks, at neural, conceptual and social/external level. So, learning could be complex, and chaotic.But out of all these came the emergent pattern, where one could find the order, the knowledge hidden behind – both the tacit and explicit knowledge in connections are important.
Patterning of Knowledge and Wayfinding
This course has helped me in focusing on the pattern that lies behind those formal and informal learning.I have gained a better understanding of the knowledge distributed in the network and in particular the artefacts and people.Without such mining of distributed knowledge and learning, I would still think that knowledge could only be acquired.I have also steered my learning in a different direction, with a focus on continuous learning via way finding.
More than anything else, being an educated person means being able to see connections that allow one to make sense of the world and act within it in creative ways. William Cronon, 1998
3.How can you incorporate connectivist principles in your design and delivery of learning?
I have already incorporated a number of principles in my design and delivery of learning at work.
These included:
·Re-structuring the units of competencies that map the learners’ needs.A complete learner centred approach towards learning
·Design of Resources and Delivery of Learning –Resources were customised to each trainees’ needs – printed learner’s guides and assessment tools followed by mentoring visits and on-line session
Learning Management System (LMS) are structured: the Janison Learning Management System Tool box (similar to Moodle) with e-learning resources like virtual warehouse etc. and all powerpoints on lectures, activities and assessment tasks and quizzes are available in the LMS.
Further attempts include the extension of more blogs and wikis to support learning.
4.What types of questions are still outstanding?
·How decisions could be made effectively in networks, given the diverse opinions and autonomy of the learners.
·Explore the wider use of connectivism in a corporate training environment.Is applied connectivism (such as Web 2.0) applicable to the training of CEOs and senior management?
·What will be the use of connectivism in e-mentoring?
·How will connectivism add values to teachers who prefer to teach in a face-to-face format?
I have noted numerous intrusion to my blog and emails (in particular) and computer (over the internet):
spywares
pingbacks/spams with adult themes (advert. on porno, sex, dating, car insurance, etc.), and others such as construction jobs advert. …(at least 4 spams)
offer me with a huge sum of money (from a mysterious account)
virus
Am I still secure?
I have even found a mixed blog which has “posted my recent post on blog” on its blog with “an attraction” for advertisement. It hasn’t got my consent. Is it an “e-theft”? What are the ways to stop these from happening?
And here in the forum, at times, with no idea about who I am talking with, not knowing their intention or needs, and expectation (a metaphor – the camouflage). Are people really open?What portion of the conversation is genuine?
In second life: Is he/she an avatar (fictitious one) or a real person? Is the learning experience shared authentic?
Unfortunately, these are the by-products of connections. These are not only future dimensions, but immediate threat. How to deal with these?
I learn from my co-learner that sage on stage would be better to be guide on side. In this insecure ecology filled with terrorist attacks and computer virus and security threats (I don’t want to be negative, but have to be realistic), who could be my guide?
I found her post so inspiring that I would like to respond to it here:
Hi Lisa,
This is an interesting debate. I appreciate your, Bob’s and Jenny’s points on the course on restructuring and other comments.
My point is: It’s really difficult to have a black or white strategy under connectivism – is it duality or plurality? Are there any grey areas?
As mentioned by Jenny, a fully learner centered approach could be complex and chaotic. I have used that in my on-the-job training and assessment in Distribution Centre Training. Every learner becomes a leader. They decide what, how, when, where and why they would like to learn them, all on an individual basis. Every learning experience would be based on their needs, not mine. I could be the guide on the side…
So, what make sense to the learner may not be what the instructor wants to do. And whether connectivism could really achieve this would depend on the learning paradigm adopted by the learner, not only the teacher.
For me, I take the stance of a learner (while I am a teacher by profession). But I may not be connected to others, as others may be avoiding me as I am a “teacher”. These are just my speculation. With the same token, George and even Stephen took a stand-off role in some ways, to let go of the teacher’s hat. But, what are the reactions of the participants? It’s a complex and emergent situation. A structured course like this will suit someone like you, perhaps. But, again under connectivism, a network or community of practice will suit a bigger “audience”. Are we having the “right” audience or participants for this course? Are we having the “learner centred” approach to “teaching and learning”? This experiment has revealed part of the emergent phenomena. Does it mean that we have to become “true” learners to appreciate connectivism? Would you mind me including everyone, you, Jenny and me as true learners? I am not sure whether Stephen and George would agree. ??
Cheers.
Here is the response that I left on 27 September 2008:
Sui Fai John Mak:
George, great to learn about this taxonomy.
Your taxonomy prompted me to reflect upon Bloom’s Hypothesis:
1. A normal person can learn anything that teachers can teach
2. Under favourable learning conditions the effects of individual differences will approach vanishing point, while under unfavourable learning conditions the effects of individual differences will be greatly exaggerated
3. Individual learning needs vary greatly
4. Uncorrected learning errors are responsible for most learning difficulties
Under Bloom’s model, instead of trying to bend the learner to suit the method of teaching, Bloom’s approach sees the task of educators being to tailor the teaching process to suit the learning needs of the individual.
Since I learnt the above model in 1985, I witnessed great changes in the learning approaches, and that most of the hypothesis set out by Bloom needed modification if we are to consider a similar behavioural approach in teaching in this digital age.
For instance, hypothesis 1 doesn’t fit the on-line learner, as any normal person can learn anything even without the teachers. In hypothesis 2, Bloom contends that the most important factors influencing learning in the individual child are the interactions that occur between the child and its parents on the one hand and between the child and the teaching process on the other. Again, such hypothesis is no longer true in an on-line environment where the emphasis is no other just on the teaching process, and that the learner is not merely relying on the teaching process, rather the learner will consider his/her learning style in his learning(David Kobb’s learning style seems to be more useful in an on-line or connectivism approach).
Also an experiential approach is often preferred amongst adults in an on-line environment.
In your connectivism taxonomy – you have proposed a staged view of how learners encounter and explore learning in a networked/ecological manner (the taxonomy begins with the basic and moves to the more complex).
My comments are: As connectivism is operating in an open system model, would such a simple taxonomy approach be good enough? I am doubtful if learning could be viewed in a linear manner in a connective environment, and am unsure if one could describe a staged view of how learners and explore learning in a networked/ecological manner that reflects the reality?
Once we define such staged views of learners, we may have assumed that a learner is learning in distinct stages, and that we can measure competency in a discrete manner – i.e. there are units of competency, elements and performance criteria clearly articulated.
But if I reflect on the chaos and fuzzy dynamic environment any learner is facing nowadays, the reality is that competency of an on-line learner can no learner be based on those defined units of competency. It must include a fuzzy set of continuum variables which are attributes transcending beyond the semantics, or linguistics – this includes emotional elements (i.e. EQ – emotional control, self awareness, self confidence, motivation, social skills and interpersonal skills, social elements (social awareness, ethics, intellectual property awareness etc.) which are very difficult to define in terms of competency. Even if can define all these emotional, social elements, there would be difficulties in drawing a map between all these dynamic factors or competencies, which could all change due to other factors such as culture, equity and learner’s access to technology.
In this respect, it would be imperative to develop hypothesis that are robust enough to take all those factors into consideration.
1. So what are the hypothesis behind this connectivism taxonomy?
2. Will such hypothesis be fluid or static? I would be interested to know if a further change in some of the technologies or learning environment would change the hypothesis.
3. Is a taxonomy good enough reflection of the staged views of learner.
4. Is such a taxonomy able to generalise under different learning circumstances?
In conclusion,
I am uncertain if a rigid taxonomy would be appropriate in building up a model on connectivism.
My suggestion:
I think a dynamic n-dimensional (or mxn matrix) model of taxonomy would be more appropriate and reflective of the reality. An adaptation of a Quality Function Deployment approach may be useful (ie. the voice of the learners on the left columnn and and the enablers and process of learning on the row of a matrix): i.e. With a matrix of What versus How in the the learning hierarchy/taxonomy. The “what” aspects would include What the learner’s needs are in a hierachical form and the How’s aspects would include the teaching/learning process, the enablers such as the technologies (Web 2.0 etc.)the networks,and other important enablers of learning such as support, mentoring, etc.
3. This might also take the form of a network, though such network may be in the form of a mind map superimposed by the what and how aspects of learning.
I would be interested in conducting research in this area to further explore about the theory of connectivism. Please contact me if you think such an approach might be useful to you.
As I have now completed the course, I have learned that there is a folksonomy developed versus taxonomy.
I also learned the Chaos and Complexity Theories applied in learning situations, and so a linear taxonomy approach may not provide the answer. But, I think this is an important area for research
I am still reflecting on my original suggestions to George Connectivism Taxonomy, but would like to explore such framework based on the survey (both qualitative and quantitative findings), and analysis.
I greatly appreciate George’s initiative in creating the model. And would like to learn from our colleagues in CCK08 on how George’s model could be further built upon, based on our experience in CCK08.
George: What do you think about this research?
For our colleagues in CCK08:
Are you interested in this further research?
If yes, what approach would be appropriate? A network approach? Individual research? Or a survey research?
Can we explore this based on the survey results of CCK08? How about the inclusion of hypothesis in the research questions of the end of course survey? Is it appropriate?
I have attended the e-learning 08 held on 4-5 December 2008 at University of NSW. Here is the website for Australian Flexible Learning Framework http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/flx/go
E-learning is now being mainstreamed across vocational education and training (VET), a new survey reveals.
The national E-learning Benchmarking Survey shows 91% of students and 88% of teachers and trainers now say their VET experience includes at least some form of e-learning.
Another valuable resource is ARED (Application for Rapid E-learning Development).
AREDv2 is a fee resource from the Framework – could be downloaded from
flexiblelearning.net.au
then “home”->”Business activities”->”Past activities”->”2006 Projects”->”New practices in Flex L…”->”AREDv2-Applications for Rapid..”
How do you find use of the above resources? Are they useful for instructional design?
How do these resources relate to connectivism?
Hi Jenny, http://jennymackness.wordpress.com/2008/12/06/taking-things-forward/
Great to learn how you feel and think about blogging. You have already started practising that synthesising technique Keith has used, that was what you mentioned in the previous blog, and that is wonderful! I will use that approach in the coming posts too!
Isn’t it amazing? We soon put such “hidden skills” into practice.
I have always reminded myself, actual learning starts when you are out of school, when no boundary (assessment, accreditation, and limitations of your imagination) is imposed. Isn’t it what Einstein has done? He developed the Theories of Relativity after graduation from universtiy. I suppose he might have conceived those great concepts at a much earlier stage. His research has explored Physics well beyond what Newton had found.
Though we are not Einstein, are we adopting a similar approach to exploration and research in our field of interests? This time we are armed with technology such as Web 2.0 as an enabler and theory of learning – Connectivism . And we could reach the connections and the world via internet and tools at our finger tips. One more click and we are there, to any research or information site… the Google, the Reader and RSS, Yahoo, Delicious, etc.
I recalled when I first graduated from University, my impression was: here starts my learning journey, this time, really learning with others. And by blogging, one is a step closer to the Praxis:
Praxis, as a cyclical process of reflection, experimentatin, and action, allows the learner to critically evaluate the tools, processes, and elements of an ecology or network. (George, 2006)
Does blogging make you
(a) reflect more frequently?
(b) listen better?
(c) question more critically?
(d) experiment more frequently?
(e) understand better?
(f) apply new techniques?
(g) choose connections wisely?
(h) learn faster?
(i) learn more strategically? (i.e. with a vision in mind)
(j) feel better?
The above 10 questions are just the starting point. Would you like to add more?
I will follow up with the 5 W’s and 1 H’s of my learning journey in the coming posts.
“As “open” courses become more common, they need to offer (or continue to offer) a middle ground, an opportunity to practice skills and master new material and ideas – a learning double whammy– without the (if only imagined) potential for vast public scrutiny and the threat of digital foreverness, as Emerging Tech does.”
I agreed. It’s a matter of choice for the blogger (and learner). Not everyone is comfortable with blogging or even discussion in forum.
My experience is that one’s learning or teaching style may have a great significance towards whether you would like to blog or not.
One may be a director, a relater, a reflector (analyst) or a thinker.
Directors would prefer directing others to specific goals, or strategies in the teaching/learning process. They may prefer teaching over others. This style is especially suitable for teaching novice learners, who have limited knowledge and skills. A lecturing style could be adopted to guide the learners. This may still be a predominant style in university lecturing for first year degree students, or lower grades of K-12.
Relaters would prefer to relate to others through building up the connections, relationships. They would like to communicate with others in an effective way using technologies. This style is suitable for building up morale amongst networkers, and to achieve a spirit of team working. Team leaders would naturally be relaters in most cases. Passion may be more important than reason for relaters.
Reflectors or Analysts would prefer to reflect on what they have learnt through observations, readings or research. This stye is suitable for most facilitators and learners. Praxis, as mentioned in my previous post on blogging, also adopts such approach. Reasons are more important than passion for reflectors or analysts.
Thinkers would prefer to learn individually through deep searching of philosophies and research. They are likely the researchers. Newton is a typical example of great thinker. This style is suitable for those who like to conduct individual research (some PhD’s), where autonomy and creativity is important in the search of “truths”.
Whilst no one is adopting one or two of the above styles all the time, one could be having a predominant style of reflector, and a secondary style of relaters, at a certain stage of her life.
Or you could be a relater in the network, but a reflector in your personal learning journey.
For successful networking, it seems that relaters could sustain a more lasting relationships with other networkers. This of course depends on whether the relaters have also included something valuable to contribute or share in the connections or not.
Here is my observations and finding:
People having the attributes of a relater or reflector may more likely blog, whereas directors may prefer the forum and thinker may prefer a personal private blog (not necessarily sharing with the public).
People who are relaters would like to network with others more than the thinkers
People who are reflectors would like to share ideas with reflectors and thinkers, more than the directors
People who are directors may find difficulties in sustaining connections with thinkers
People who are thinkers would prefer to relate to thinkers (peer review in research)
The above are based on my limited observations and studies and so further research is required to validate the findings.
You could find the above “concepts” in many pioneering work. I presented the above in my own words, so you are welcome to comment and discuss. I may include links to those concepts if you would like to explore further.
It’s a challenge to post a blog under public scrutiny, and may be it’s safer to do so in a closed course. So before you decide to blog, would you like to ask yourself?
Are you a
(a) Director?
(b) Relater?
(c) Reflector or Analyst?
(d) Thinker?
Will a person’s style change throughout the stages of her life? Probably.
“Some important things to note here regarding that. In last week’s conversations about identity I suggested that we need to be careful that we don’t say things ‘on the record’ or ‘on the internet’ that are easily misinterpreted. One of the other important issues relates to digital identity. It can be very important to monitor what people claim you have said, and to address those issues in a professional manner. Our online identity is all most people will ever know about us,…” Dave
Expressing opinions and perspectives in forum or blogs always carry risks. In the case of forum, some institutions will even insist on the moderation of the posts and threads. This is especially important in the high schools and even vocational educational institution. To safeguard the participants from trolls - and the associated unwarranted criticisms or comments.
So, expressing opinions and connecting in a professional manner is important in any blogs, forum or even digital media postings, live conversation or recordings. This will also build up your credibility and professional image in the network or community of practice within a digital world.
However, I would think that one’s view on the educational issues might be more openly discussed via blogs (outside the wall garden) where people could debate and share perspectives. This is the essence of connectivism, as espoused by George, Stephen and Dave in his rhizomatic education – community as curriculum http://davecormier.com/edblog/2008/06/03/rhizomatic-education-community-as-curriculum/ (especially in peer review), and that knowledge is in the network, and learning refers to the navigation throughout the network. Without such exchange, sharing and contribution in the connections, we might be going back to the old model when we have to wait for the experts to authorise what is and what is not “knowledge” in a particular field. This may still be desirable for the younger kids, where security and an authentic source of knowledge is important. But for adult learning, why are we building walls in the networks that hinder our learning development?
There are good reasons why people are scared of openly criticising or commenting any colleagues or their organisation, as one could easily lose her job or could affect the relationships with others. If that is the case, it is imperative to consider what to share or contribute wisely in forum and blogs.
Would these be the options to consider in the postings and responses in blogs or forum?
(a) be “professional” in all conversation – no criticism on their employer? Stay positive, be constructive with solutions?
(b) seriously consider every connections they would like to make, weighing every risks each carry, and connect with caution (especially if the connections are dubious, or lacking in credibility)
(c) share ideas in a closed environment such as a class with known digital identity, with no written or verbal records held on opinions or criticisms
(d) hide one’s digital identity – no one knows who you are, and so there will not be any “liability” issue
(e) cite all others’ opinions, but not yours, and be reserved in commenting or criticising (even if it is viewed as constructive, from your perspective)
(f) don’t comment on anything, you are just an aggregator. Leave others to think
(g) use appreciative inquiry – every exchange connection is appreciative – and only allow to have positive comments (use a sandwich approach) – the good – the comment – followed by good wishes…
(h) your suggestions here……
How does it sound?
After reading the posts below, I have mixed feelings. On one hand, it seems that older adult learners prefer liberal arts education, to fulfil their aspirations. On the other hand, some younger adult learners prefer to take up courses like business/ commerce or vocational education and training to prepare for their future “career”, or for building competencies for their existing career, in face of rising costs of higher education that has become a burden to them and their family.
Is this a trend or just part of the pendulum swing, or a result of the economic crisis/tsunami?
Will technology lower the cost of delivery of “quality education”?
What is the future of higher educational institution?
Would a forum discussion/Elluminate/UStrem/Facebook chat help in unfolding some of the issues and sharing feasible solutions, using a network approach. I think experts ideas such as those shown below are great, however, would community responses add further values to such debates or discussion? And would we like to start from here?
If colleges use productivity gains from technology to restrain prices, they’ll continue to thrive in a world that values their product more than ever.
Fed up with unaccountable colleges and uncontrollable prices, the public will gradually withdraw from its historic commitment to higher education, weakening institutions that are vital for the nation’s competitiveness in the twenty-first century.
Students, meanwhile, will likely turn in increasing numbers to the for-profit universities that are aggressively moving into the market by offering convenient, no-frills degree programs over the Web.
The idea of “bubble” has been on everyone’s mind since the escalating housing and economic crisis first erupted in July 2007. Throughout these turbulent times, one institution appeared to be coasting along above the fray: Higher Education.
Obviously higher education will (and should) survive. But there is no reason to think that higher ed will be immune to the shakeouts and reorganizations that have affected so many other institutions in this age of globalization.
And perhaps fewer young adults will attend college. This is not necessarily a bad thing, for the growing gap between aspiration and reality, and between cost and benefit is not a healthy phenomenon. Millions of young adults might be better off attending schools or apprentice programs that train them to perform such important and responsible jobs as carpenters, electricians, plumbers, and mechanics.
Meanwhile, liberal arts programs for older students might flourish, attracting individuals who have finally discovered the motivation to learn and expand their intellectual horizons that they lacked in their earlier years. To borrow from Shaw, who famously lamented that youth is wasted on the young, liberal education is often wasted on young adults, many of whom are prone to be impatient of and unreceptive to the wonderful intellectual benefits that liberal education can bestow.
“Education is a global currency” By Rupert Murdoch
For most of us, the best path to success is through an education that will allow us to fulfil our potential. That begins by setting high expectations, adhering to real standards and ensuring that when you do leave school, you leave with the tools that will help you get ahead in life.
Another way of putting it is this: it’s not that the poor are getting poorer. It’s that the economic rewards to the skilled are making them much richer. This is clearly understood by the leaders of developing countries. But it seems beyond the comprehension of much of the developed world.
That is one reason I have two key criteria for education programs that News Corporation supports: schools must be focused on achievement and they cannot make excuses for why some students are supposedly poor scholars.
I suppose Facebook (FB) is a social networking tool in its original design, but it has also got blogs and other features added now. Whether it could be used for educational purpose or not depends whether the people there wish to do so. There were reports that some university students have been using FB in their courses. There are limitations in its use in research. However, I found it useful to cultivate some “new flash ideas” in research, if members of the FB link wish to do so in particular as a ”FB group”. And it may be better than the wiki in this aspect as it is more easily accessed and “all in one” type of connections for the FB group.
Research and networking
I like Jenny’s ideas on doing research paper with one acquaintance who are interested. In the past years, I spent some occasions in assessing and reviewing research articles (while on development awards panel as convener or member), and reading research articles. I haven’t spent much time in writing research articles nowadays, but may start again next year.
It seems not easy to work in a network environment, particularly in group research, as I found that commitment and motivation could easily shift not only by oneself, but also by each other. Unless one is doing an advanced or research degree such as PhD or MEd, otherwise, it would be just working on some researches of interests. For me, I thought it may be too time consuming to do PhD at the moment, and I have thought about it more than a decade ago.
I have worked on a research project for my section in 2003 with surveys of all stakeholders (students, employers), peer and industry reviews, meetings etc. It was a time consuming project. It took more than half a year for completion. The report was only available on the organisation’s website. My experience was that group’s efforts worked better on that occasion. And the writing of report was under my control – as I wrote the report for submission for the Quality Awards. We won an Achievement of Quality Award based on that research.
My observation is that though people working in weak ties in a network may develop strong bonds after sometime. There are many personal factors that come into play, that will lead to changes in direction, goals, strategies or actions of the network. As it is not “an absolute group” where “members” are aiming for agreed goals, so there are implications when it comes to “collaboration project” work. In the case of CCK08, I think the credit participants are more committed in working on such group projects. Whereas, for me, as I have spent time doing other things instead of the group project.
However, it doesn’t mean that we couldn’t try similar group or network projects in the future. Except that there must be some reasons for doing so. Is it for a community of practice? Is it for ones research such as a PhD? Is it for doing a course? Is it for submission to a conference in e-learning, emergent technology, or connectivism?
Each of our interests differ. The more one is involved in those different networks, the more chance one could be exposed to the different knowledge sources, at the expense of “time” and “discretion of credibility of knowledge source”. Time management and wise connections may be crucial to success in network learning.
Have you thought of other critical success factors in network learning?
What do you think are the critical success factors in group research or review under a network environment?
I have just read the up-dated principles on connectivism by George Siemens. I am glad and impressed that he has added one of the most important elements in connectivism – the emotional dimension in learning, and that he has highlighted its primacy in connectivism.
I am intending to research in this area - the emotional elements which are critical in the personal internal and external connections building, formation, development, and sustaining, using technologies (such as Web2.0, internet and other digital media). And how a person’s principal style of learning (i.e. director, relater, reflector and thinker) will have an impact on such connections under connectivism.
I tend to conclude that theorising the teaching and learning using a pedagogical approach would sometimes lead to over-generalised conclusions at this digital age. Experience and knowledge accumulated in the CCK08 have already hinted that diversity of views on knowledge formation and development(by Maru, Viplav and Carlos) could only be meaningful and applicable if there are significant merits in reflecting what, how and why people learn in a networked environment.
Charlotte Allen’s ”Postmodernism’s Dead End” provides an interesting account on what is epistemology.
The review was less about Cusset’s book than about Fish himself and Fish’s own ideas about the postmodernism: the notion, promulgated by the ur-postmodernist and Fish idol Jacques Derrida, and now the reigning orthodoxy in college literature departments across the country, that essentially there’s no such thing as reality, and there’s also no such thing as a “you” or “me” with sufficient rational ability to know anything about that reality. All we have are “texts” or “narratives” that may purport to tell us what is real (example: a scientific article) but are actually no more than self-referential expressions of ideology (such as belief in scientific progress). Fish wrote: “All we lose (if we have been persuaded by the deconstructive critique, that is) is a certain rationalist faith that there will someday be a final word, a last description that takes the accurate measure of everything. All that will have happened is that one account of what we know and how we know it — one epistemology — has been replaced by another, which means only that in the unlikely event you are asked ‘What’s your epistemology?’ you’ll give a different answer than you would have given before.”
This has a significant implication when it comes to the transfer of knowledge across domains and the significanceof epistemology from an individual and network perspective.
The transfer of knowledge from one domain to another domain is therefor another important area of research study. This could have a significant impact on domain experts’ interpretation of what makes “valid and reliable” knowledge. The multi-faceted view of knowledge and learning perceived by domain experts need to be examined and researched systematically under an open system, from an ecological perspective. It’s imperative that networks of diverse domain experts be invited and encouraged to re-examine the impact of technology in learning and education in this era. And both the educators and learners to develop methodologies that could be used to validate the knowledge under a network approach. The e-learning network conference presentation and discussion, community of practice networks, wiki (wikipedia) and (institutional, educational and personal) blogs, and research papers websites have provided viable solutions to such validation. Further research are required to consolidate the findings of such validation approaches.
The transformation of such transfer of knowledge along the networks will accelerate the learning and educational shifts at grass roots and institutional level.
This also means that grass roots level’s urge of a shift of learning paradigms and the associated institutional educational reforms must be weaved with those developed by domain experts and grassroots network to ensure that both paradigm shift and reforms are sustainable, at least at a local, community or national level. As each community has its immediate needs, it would best be addressed at such a level by the community networks. Educators, learners, community networks and institutions (governments, educational institutions and businesses, and unions) must also be involved and consulted throughout the different stages of development of such educational reforms. This ensures transparency in policy and principles, equity in access (to networks and resources such as technology) and resource support (financial and technical) are thoroughly considered. Again a network approach to such consultation is desirable to ensure the Wisdom of the Crowd are feedback to the networks, with increased wisdom and learning for the networks and institutions in response to changes.
How could this be achieved? The development of free open education courses (or openlearning networks) on the global market would encourage more people who are ready “learners” to be engaged in active learning at a grass root level. This could be based on the MIT OpenCourseWare or Yale’s University course model. When professors, professional teachers and enthusiastic graduates, and learners are involved and inter-connected in such open learning networks (or in such open course at a university level), a synergy of learning will give rise to a proliferation of high quality, cost effective network learning. Such approach will lift the community of practice approach near to its ideology, and would be an added value to professors’ and teachers’ credibility in reaching the learners in a proactive manner, beyond the traditional educational boundary. Such a learner centred approach will truly enshrine the learning networks that are developed, and will inspire more educators and learners to join in to build a better community.
The leverage of this open education approach will further accelerate a community’s education and learning on a cross domain level, culminating the merits of “liberal arts education”, “vocational education and training”, “community education” and “university education” as required by individuals and societies. This will also lessened the boundary that existed in the fundamental educational institutional, public and private educational and training providers’ setting.
The educators and learners of different levels could cross “cultivate, teach and learn” their knowledge and experience under such a free education and knowledge network. The e-mentoring approach which has long been promoted in education, business and industry could be incorporated under such a network model. Both educators and learners (or mentors and mentees) grow and develop together in “multi-visions and missions” networked learning ecology.
There are many implications to this open education or mentoring approach apart from those mentioned by Dave Cormier on his 3 little pigs story on MOOC and the pre-requisite knowledge in order to build a solid foundation on the open education course:
(a) Will substantial research in this education initiative be needed? Do we need to ensure that educators and the administrators are fully aware of the merits and risks in the design and development of curriculum and network formation?
(b) How will funding and costs be established under such open education courseware, networks or “university”? Who will fund such initiative?
(c) How will stakeholders and their interests be considered to ensure long term growth and sustainability?
(d) How would market segmentation be considered? Is it necessary to aim for the right target market of “educators” and “learners”?
(e) Whether a blend of “educational” and “business” approach is preferred in an open market educational programs?
(f) Should the establishment of such University or networks be based on some sound business and education principles? What are those principles?
(g) What are the visions and missions of both the University or networks and the associated networks (i.e. the University or institutions that are associated with this open education networks)?
It’s also imperative to look at the Trends Shaping Education 2008 and a blog post by Don Ledingham that summarises the Trends Shaping Education 2008. This report on Trends Shaping Education provides important roadmaps for future changes in education in the OECD member countries.
Open education is not a dream, this is already happening around us.
How would we be able to meet up these challenges – on research, development of networks and open courses and learning networks?
What do you see will be the most important areas of research in network learning under connectivism?
How could such researches be achieved?
What sort of open courses are useful for your community? Will it be in Liberal Arts Education for the adult learners?
Peter Berkowitz in Liberal Education, Then and Now provides an excellent insight into how liberal education could be better delivered in Universities.
An auto repair shop in which mechanics and owners could not distinguish a wreck from a finely tuned car would soon go out of business. A hospital where doctors, nurses, and administrators were unable to recognize a healthy human being would present a grave menace to the public health. A ship whose captain and crew lacked navigation skills and were ignorant of their destination would spell doom for the cargo and passengers entrusted to their care.
Yet at universities and colleges throughout the land, parents and students pay large sums of money for — and federal and state governments contribute sizeable tax exemptions to support — liberal education.
Mill’s nineteenth-century analysis of liberal education is relevant to the twenty-first-century university not for the specific curriculum he proposes but because of the larger principles he outlines and the greater goods he clarifies. His analysis suggests several lessons. First, a liberal education aims to liberate the mind by furnishing it with literary, historical, scientific, and philosophical knowledge and by cultivating its capacity to question and answer on its own. Second, a liberal education must, in significant measure, provide not a smorgasbord of offerings but a shared content, because knowledge is cumulative and ideas have a history.
Third, a liberal education must adapt to local realities, providing the elementary instruction, the stepping stones to higher stages of understanding, where grade school and high school education fail to perform their jobs.
Fourth, the aim of a liberal education is not to achieve mastery in any one subject but an understanding of what mastery entails in the several main fields of human learning and an appreciation of the interconnections among the fields. Fifth, liberal education is not an alternative to specialization, but rather a sound preparation for it. Sixth, a liberal education culminates in the study of ethics, politics, and religion, studies which naturally begin with the near and familiar, extend to include the faraway and foreign, and reach their peak in the exploration, simultaneously sympathetic and critical, of the history of great debates about justice, faith, and reason. Seventh, all of this will be for naught if teaching is guided by the partisan or dogmatic spirit, so professors must be cultivated who will bring to the classroom the spirit of free and informed inquiry.
Peter Berkowitz also mentioned that:
Nevertheless, reform confronts formidable obstacles. The principal one is professors. Many will fight such a common core because it would require them to teach classes outside their area of expertise or reduce the number of students for boutique classes on highly specialized topics.
Would this be the time to examine how liberal education be introduced in network learning? This will provide an alternative approach to liberal education, with a more enriched curriculum suited both to educators and learners.
Would it be on blogs, wikis, forums of open courses or “liberal education courses” under a network setting?
Such an approach will tap into the rich resources on liberal education and historical research on education available on the internet, university’s open course ware and cross domains of expertise from different professors and professional educators in Universities.
Both technologies (Web2.0) and virtual (or personal) learning environment could be effective means of accelerating the liberal education agenda, which allow learners to become the drivers of their learning and contributors to knowledge creation.
Educators could also play a significant role in ensuring such liberal education curriculum is relevant and cost effective to learners via connections (research, consultations) and feedback (surveys, responses on blogs), and the co-creation of emergent knowledge with learners through an adaptive curriculum.
Do you see this as a viable approach towards liberal education?
What do you think may be some of merits and demerits with such approach?
How would we overcome those obstacles in delivering liberal education in Universities?
How would we overcome those obstacles in delivering liberal education in learning networks (blogs, wikis, forums, open courses etc)?
Could this be the start of liberal and teacher education? Or at least a stepping stone towards the design of learning and sharing of knowledge in different fields or domains?
What sort of resources do you think would be necessary for liberal arts and science education?
Which of the following provides you a quicker way of tracing your comments left on other blogs/wikis/Ning/forums?
(a) Go to Google or Yahoo, type your name (or name of your blog), and check those blogs/wikis/Ning/forums you have commented or linked with
(b) Check with the blog/forum features (comments links in wordpress or edublogs etc.) and trace those comments
(c) Tag every blog/forum you have visited using Delicious
(d) Go to Google Reader and check on RSS those blogs
(e) Add to favourite any blog you have visited (then group such favourites)
(f) Create a blog/wiki/Ning where you include URL of every blog/forum you have visited
(g) Your way is…..
For me: (a) works, but not for all forums…
How about you?
I was the presenter of the above showcase of excellence in the Learning Powerhouse Conference held on 4 August 2006.
Distribution Centre Training: Delivered When, Where and How Customers Like It
SHOWCASE 13 | Sui Fai John Mak, Teacher of Logistics, TAFE NSW Sydney Institute
‘Distribution Centre Training: Delivered When, Where and How customers Like It’ is an award winning project of Sydney Institute. This showcase will demonstrate how International Trade and Logistics Training Unit’s (ITLTU’s) continuous improvement planning resulted in it becoming the preferred training provider, creating new and repeat businesses in distribution centre training.
ITLTU established commercial on-the-job distribution centre training and assessment programs in 2001. These programs were evaluated in 2003 with a view to ensuring continued customer focus, the objectives being:
to evaluate the educational and administrative infrastructure
to evaluate customer satisfaction
to improve current teaching and learning methodologies
to develop future goals and strategies incorporating the improvements made
There are also other show cases of excellence which may be of interest to you.
There is no doubt that the use of blended learning is on the increase. The simple combination of ‘face-to-face’ programmes and e-learning has both shown the benefit of combining more than one type of learning and brought e-learning into the mainstream training arena.
There are still challenges however – both technical and cultural. As well as a cultural change amongst employees, where they see learning as an important and ongoing process, the training and development function itself will have to adapt to a new role. This may be the biggest barrier to blended learning as the skills required to design effective learning are very different to the delivery skills traditionally required, and valued, in training professionals.
The research demonstrates the continued growth of managers at all levels using online technologies to select and access their learning resources. Through the case studies we are now seeing the evolution of a more integrated, blended learning offer, where both online resources and traditional face-to-face training and development are offered as a complete learning experience. It is by clearly identifying the desired learning outcomes and mapping this to career paths that organisations can seek to align personalised blended learning experiences to ensure they are building the management and leadership capabilities required to drive performance.
Recommendations
The following are examples, arising out of the current research, in which organisations are using ‘blended solutions’, and demonstrate how the move towards blended learning can be introduced incrementally.
1. Put assessment online.
2. Follow up with a community of practice.
3. Make reference materials available.
4. Deliver preparatory online learning.
5. Provide online office hours.
6. Use mentoring/coaching as a tool.
7. Access experts.
8. Maximise communications and messaging.
My reflections on blended learning, some of which resonated with the report findings are listed below.
For me, blended learning has been my favourite since 2000.I am intrigued why it has taken such a long time for the implementation of blended learning in management development amongst managers in business and industry.One of the issues may be a lack of promotion of blended learning in the workplace. This may be due to a misunderstanding of blended learning amongst employers and employees in the past decade. Another issue was the inadequate application of the first generation e-learning where e-books and web-based resources were used in training, which were based on factual information and were presented in a linear structured fashion. Some of the learning resources were hardly interactive or of a multi-media type. This led to a loss of interests and motivation in the learners in completing those e-learning programmes. Fortunately, the contemporary ICT including Web2.0 such as mobiles, blogs, wikis and social network tools provide more options for personal learning, and have allowed more interactions and connections amongst the learners.
My experience in mentoring and e-mentoring in industry and online learning reveals the importance of support and guidance for developing managers. A manager also needs to immerse in both group learning and networks (such as intensive management workshop and networks) and integrate the learning with individual mentoring development program to reap the full benefits of blended learning. The use of mentoring, coaching, blended with e-learning and on-the-job training would deliver cost effective solutions, and could provide excellent results, if it is supported by the organisation. This is also highlighted in the findings of the paper.
The traditional use of management development workshops on top of e-learning management programmes may be of value if there are follow on application of the skills acquired in the workshop.
However, I have noted that many top CEOs, senior executives and managers are not buying in with the typical “flavour of the month” management development workshops because of the “brainwashing” one-off type of training. Some of these ”guru-delivered” type of training conferences or workshops are often short-lived due to their limited applications at work. Some other training became another “Management training fads of the month” and dies off as soon as another “Management training regime came in and replace the previous one”.
It would be worthwhile to introduce e-conference or “hot topic conversation” where executives and managers are invited to share their leadership, management, communication and training experience. This could be integrated with a Community of Practice approach to allow managers to adopt best practise and benchmarking their performance across the supply chain, rather than the sole improvement of performance in their organisation. More extensive training and learning of technology and tools such as: blogs, wikis and social networking tools would also be helpful in equiping the managers with skills required for success in the workplace.
What do you think about a Community of Practice for Managers or Leaders?
Please also refer to my previous post on Distribution Centre Training on some of the findings in on-the-job training.
Really amazing portable content built with sophistication.
Isn’t it another breakthrough in technology?
Does it perform some of the integration and distribution tasks for you?
Measuring the strength of a workplace can be done with twelve questions (adapted from a source that I couldn’t trace).
These 12 questions don’t capture everything you may want to know about your workplace, but they do capture the most information and the most important information. They measure the core elements needed to attract, focus, and keep the most talented employees.
Give a score of 1 to Yes and 0 to No.
1. Do you know what is expected of you at work? Yes (1) /No (0)
2. Do you have the right materials, equipment, tools, instructions and procedures you need to do your work right? Yes (1) /No (0)
3. At work, do you have the opportunity to do what you do best every day? Yes (1) /No (0)
4. In the last 14 days, have you received recognition or praise for doing good work? Yes (1) /No (0)
5. Does your supervisor, manager, or leader, or someone at work, seem to care about you as a person? Yes (1) /No (0)
6. Is there someone at work who encourages your development? Yes (1) /No (0)
7. At work, do your opinions seem to count? Yes (1) /No (0)
8. Does the mission/purpose of your section or company make you feel your job is important? Yes (1) /No (0)
9. Are your co-workers committed to doing quality work? Yes (1) /No (0)
10. Do you have a best friend at work? Yes (1) /No (0)
11. In the last six months, has someone at work talked to you about your progress? Yes (1) /No (0)
12. This year, have you had the opportunities at work to learn and grow? Yes (1) /No (0)
Now add up the score and write it down:………….
My suggested interpretation of score:
If your score is 9-12 – congratulations, you must have enjoyed working with a fantastic workplace, with supportive supervisor and colleagues. Your workplace must have attracted and kept the most talented employees – including you.
If your score is 5-8 – good that you are working with a nice workplace, with generous support from your peers. But you may have to rely on yourself for future learning and career development
If your score is 0-4 – I am not sure what has happened to you or your workplace regarding your work. You may be dissatisfied with your work or workplace, and may start to look for another workplace soon. Or you may be working rather lonely in your workplace, without much support or feedback from others. Are you working too hard yourself? What changes would you like to suggest? To yourself and/or to your workplace?
The above questions are intended to stimulate reflections only.
You are welcome to share your comments here.
Looking forward to a happy and prosperous 2009.
I will create another questionnaire on learning connections. It’s forthcoming!
The higher education establishment wants us to believe that having more formal education coursework under your belt necessarily makes you better educated (and vice versa). The sad truth, however, is that for many young people these days, college courses impart very little in the way of skill or knowledge. Due to the erosion of academic standards throughout much of our K-12 system, hordes of students enter college with extremely weak academic preparation.
Students like that want a college degree, but have little interest in education. Having a degree is important because many employers now use college credentials as a means of screening out people who haven’t gotten their degrees and are presumably harder to train. Consequently, many students enter college simply to get that fancy piece of paper….
Many colleges and universities are very accommodating to students who want a degree but are averse to serious work. While there are still islands of academic rigor, students can easily sail around them, picking up enough credits in courses where the expectations are slight and the grading easy……
After we process these young people through to their degrees, what awaits them in the labor market? Often they end up in mundane jobs that call for no academic training. Lots of college graduates now work as travel agents, retail sales supervisors, aerobics trainers, and so on…
Why indeed? Despite all the hype about the wonderful intellectual and economic benefits of a college education, the reality is breaking through—for many young people, college is a poor use of time and money. The reason why the percentage of Americans 25 to 34 who earn college degrees is starting to fall is that families are figuring out that a college degree is neither necessary nor sufficient for a good life.
The report on measuring up 2008 higher education provides an update on the US higher education. It highlights the uneven distribution of higher education opportunity and achievement in the United States.
The core message of Measuring Up 2008 is that despite our historical successes in higher education, the preeminence of many of our colleges and universities, and some examples of improvement in this decade, our higher education performance is not commensurate with the current needs of our society and our economy. Our nation and our states can do better. As we have done many times in this nation’s history, we must reach higher. We must educate more young people and adults, so that more Americans have the college-level knowledge and skills they need to succeed.
So, what may be the solution? Here are some thoughts from Mark in his post on Inflexion Points
In this near future world, students are the administrators. All of the administrative functions have been “pushed down” into a substrate of software. Education has evolved into something like a marketplace, where instructors “bid” to work with students. Now since most education is funded by the government, there will obviously be other forces at play; it may be that “administration”, such as it is, represents the government oversight function which ensures standards are being met. In any case, this does not look much like the educational institution of the 20th century – though it does look quite a bit like the university of the 13th century, where students would find and hire instructors to teach them subjects.
The role of the instructor has changed as well; as recently as a few years ago the lecturer was the font of wisdom and source of all knowledge – perhaps with a companion textbook. In an age of Wikipedia, YouTube and Twitter this no longer the case. The lecturer now helps the students find the material available online, and helps them to make sense of it, contextualizing and informing their understanding. even as the students continue to work their way through the ever-growing set of information. The instructor can not know everything available online on any subject, but will be aware of the best (or at least, favorite) resources, and will pass along these resources as a key outcome of the educational process. The instructors facilitate and mentor, as they have always done, but they are no longer the gatekeepers, because there are no gatekeepers, anywhere.
When we look at the classes of participants in higher education–students, faculty, administrators, staff–as well as those who invest in higher education or have a stake in the outcome of the process–parents, politicians, trustees, corporations–we see many conflicting agendas. The university has evolved as a way of managing those agendas (to no one group’s satisfaction). The answer to Pesce’s final question is simple. For the most part, students are not in the business of getting an education; they are in the business of getting a degree. And we shouldn’t view that as a negative thing. It simply is what it is. If students were in the business of learning for the sake of learning, then they might be able to proceed as Pesce suggested. This would certainly change the business of teaching as well: students would say we want to learn x, y, and z, and a teacher would then accommodate that.
But that’s not what higher education is about for students, at least not primarily. Students want to be vetted and certified. Faculty, administrators, accrediting bodies determine the definition of a particular degree. Students who earn the degree attain a particular identity. Are we going to allow students to determine their own curriculum and then at some self-determined end state that they are now certified to be public school teachers or lawyers or doctors? I suppose we could, and then we would leave it up to the employers (school districts for example) to determine if students were qualified. But I don’t really see anyone wanting universities to abdicate that responsibility.
And there is also the Peer 2 Peer University that may provide an alternative avenue to higher education through the networks.
There is still some way before network learning could fully take the place of formal education in universities and colleges. Rather, open education in the form of network learning may complement and supplement what may be perceived as weaknesses in existing higher education courses.
There are many challenges that are yet to be overcome, especially in the area of accreditation of courses and curriculum and the assessment of students under open education and network learning.
The following are some of the questions relating to open education and open education institutions/learning networks:
How would the government grant accreditation of courses and curriculum?
Who are going to oversee the accreditation of such degrees award associations or networks ?
Will there be any funding provided by the government to these open education institutions/networks? How are these institutions or networks financed?
How would the employers and employers associations perceive the qualifications obtained through such avenues?
How are the qualifications articulated or transferred across universities and these open education institutions or networks?
Who are the educators of those courses in the open educational institutions or networks?
Who are the learners in those open educational institutions or networks?
So, will there be significant changes in the higher and further education sector in the coming 3-5 years? What sort of changes will there be in 2009?
Will open education or education networks be able to fully replace the “formal education” that are offered by the universities? Time will tell.
More discussion and debates on the future of higher education are deemed necessary. Your comments are welcome.
I think some of the on-line Universities are already using such approach in delivering their programs. More researchs may be needed to study the merits and limitations of those approaches.
Do you think this will happen in your school/higher education institution?
What are the implications of such schools?
What are the challenges for educators?
As an educator, how would you overcome those challenges?
What will it mean to be an educated person in the 21st century? As Future of Higher Education – How Technology will shape learning study indicates, sweeping technological changes will effectively change the skill-sets of the future workforce, as well as its approach to work in general. As a result, societies around the world will need to consider how to make the most of these new opportunities and thus ensure that they remain competitive in the global marketplace.
Here is an abbreviated summary:
Technological innovation, long a hallmark of academic research, may now be changing the very way that universities teach and students learn. For academic institutions, charged with equipping graduates to compete in today’s knowledge economy, the possibilities are great. Distance education, sophisticated learning-management systems and the opportunity to collaborate with research partners from around the world are just some of the transformational benefits that universities are embracing.
But significant challenges also loom. For all of its benefits, technology remains a disruptive innovation—and an expensive one. Faculty members used to teaching in one way may be loath to invest the time to learn new methods, and may lack the budget for needed support. This paper examines the role of technology in shaping the future of higher education. The major findings are as follows:
Technology has had—and will continue to have—a significant impact on higher education.
Online learning is gaining a firm foothold in universities around the world.
Corporate-academic partnerships will form an increasing part of the university experience.
University respondents view technology as having a largely positive impact on their campuses, but acknowledge that operational challenges may hinder the full benefits from being realised. In addition, technology may be disruptive in ways not intended: respondents note a rise in student plagiarism, cheating and distractability, which they attribute to easy and ready access to mobile technologies.
Higher education is responding to globalisation.
What are the major challenges to educators in higher education?
What changes do you think are necessary to meet up those challenges?
What will the future schools look like?
Virtual High School (VHS) has been in place for more than a decade and is still popular in supplementing the teaching of formal High Schools. According to the Web-based Learning – Theory, Research and Practice (page 333) Virtual High School 2003 Annual Report, VHS has grown to 200 high schools. Here is an example of Virtual high school.
The demand for Choice:
Virtual schooling also appeals to the growing number of parents and policy makers who seek to expand choices for American education.
What I would like to see are more choices for the learners, the parents, the educators, administrators in institutions and even government policy makers. This will bring a wealth of educational experience and emergent knowledge to the learners, institutions (formal schools and informal VHS) and community, via various technology affordance. This will also prepare the learners for further education and careers.
I also think that learners, educators, government, businesses, and all related stakeholders should work more closely in collaboration through network connections to achieve the educational outcomes. Educational institutions could leverage the “just in time” education arising from the technological affordance and respond to the needs of learners and community more successfully.
I hope there are more researches done on the impact of VHS on our education system (both global and local education). It may be worthwhile to conduct such a cross country research to see how it could extend the high school education using an open education approach.
Do you think some of the existing high schools will shift into a blended VHS mode of operation? Will such VHS be able to fill the educational gaps of the brick and motor high school?
I have longed to explore why people create blogs in the first place. I am also interested in knowing how people could sustain in connecting with others via blogs.
This could be an important area of research, as blogging is now so popular in the “day-to-day business” in the digital world. In the past few years, there has been substantial research on blogging. However, the findings are always interesting, in that they partly reflect what the bloggers are interested in, and they are also a reflection of the current areas of interests in the blogosphere (especially in the education and learning area).
In the past few years, blogging is not only viewed as a “professional business”, but have also been used in promoting one’s business in the global business. In this connection, benchmarking and process improvement in blogging seems to have become a core business in the blogging business. In What are the best metrics to use to measure ROI and improve your blog’s contentby Beth Kanter, she mentioned
At the end of 2008, I did a “Best of Beth’s Blog” analysis using PostRank.It takes your RSS feed and applies engagement metrics, analyzing the types and frequency of an audience’s interaction with your content. Each blog post is given a score from 1 to 10, representing how interesting and relevant people have found your content. The more interesting or relevant an item is, the more work they will do to share or respond to that item so interactions that require more effort are weighted higher. PostRank scoring is based on analysis of the “5 Cs” of engagement: creating, critiquing, chatting, collecting, and clicking.
Relating to Beth’s post, Stephen Downe indicated in his Daily that
For me, the metric for success for this website (and the rest) is how much I learn from doing it. Because for me blogging isn’t about raising money or generating churn or being sticky. It’s about personal development. ….. How to measure the learning? Well: can I understand what I read and, in public, summarize it accurately? Can I hold my own end of a conversation? Can I make my site work better (and, related: can I build good educational technology)? Can I respond to suggestions and ideals with innovation and creativity?
First relates to social interaction and social presence, and suggests that one general purpose for blogging may be to support, facilitate, model, and increase opportunities for social, peer and group interaction, communication, presence, feedback, networking learning experiences, and getting to know each other.
From this framework, we derived two purposes for blogging one being social and the other for knowledge construction. These are purposes that have been largely identified from a theoretical perspective rather than an empirical one. In this study, we frame our investigation in terms of these two purposes. We investigate the case of a group of post-secondary learners in relation to how they engaged in blogging for social and instructional purposes.
The second theme relates to the social and collaborative construction of knowledge and suggests that an additional purpose for blogging may be to support, contribute to, and provide opportunities or means for collaborative, cooperative and community-centered sharing, building, contributing, outlining and asserting knowledge, ideas, opinions, different viewpoints, interpretations, perspectives and common goals.
So, I could see that people develop blogs for different purposes, and may be using different strategies and tactics in both attracting readers to read and comment, and connecting to others via responses to comments on their blogs or comments on other blogs.
If the blogger is an educator, the topical interests may be focused on education and learning: such as connectivism, e-learning, research, open education, information and communication technology (ICT) and Web 2.0 etc. There are also other related areas of interests that relate to the educator’s area of specialty. I would reckon that a global research in this area may be needed to validate those “common practice and related interests” of blogging.
Ever heard the song: Where have all the flowers gone? Long time ago…
Where have all the people gone, only short time ago: They have gone to make and upload the videos on http://vimeo.com. Finally, there is a video site for education, teachers and students. And video blogging will surely be popular in 2009.
May I link them together? I am passionate in learning and am interested in lifelong learning. I would like to inquire in my learning journey and these inquiries are based on my curiosity.
I would like to start looking into the research in Connectivism, technology and e-learning. Tony Bates has prepared this Mapping on research into e-learning as a guide.
As mentioned in my previous posts, I would start looking into future research in Connectivism and related areas of interests using a wiki/Ning approach. This would also require collaboration amongst CCK08 and other interested people in its development.
I would also consolidate what have been found in e-learning/connectivism research to date in this coming 4-6 weeks. Please leave any URL Blog address, articles links, or research sites that you are aware of in connectivism, technology and e-learning as a start. Your assistance on this matter is greatly appreciated.
A classification system may also be necessary to kick off.
This may take a few weeks (6 – 8 weeks minimum) to explore. I will be in touch with our CCK08 graduates in the mean time.
As mentioned, this is a “network process” and may I suggest that any CCK08 people or anyone interested be involved in this process, both on an individual level and network level? A community of practice approach in such collaborated research may provide a superior outcome than that of individual research.
However, as this is a voluntary pilot network activity and so both independent learning and collaborative learning are equally encouraged and valued. Your comments are important here….not just with me, but with each other who are interested.
Blogging/wiki and ning is like fishing. Some people would like to fish in ponds, others in rivers, lakes and still many more in beaches, seaside, seas and oceans. If you wish to catch big fishes, you will need to equip yourself with navigation skills, use a ship equipped with modern technology, tools and possibly work with a crew to do so.
You will therefore need to ask the following basic questions, when fishing:
What: What sort of fishes do you want? Are you looking for big, medium or small ones? Are you looking for varieties or just a few species? Are you looking for expensive or cheap ones?
Where: Where would you like to fish? In ocean, seas, rivers, lakes, ponds (e.g. artificially-made ponds), seaside or beach.
How: What sort of equipment, tools, and techniques, procedures are to be used?
When: What season/time of the day to go fishing?
Who: What sorts of skills, knowledge and experience (competency) are required? Who would you like to fish with? Do you need to have a crew? Who is the captain of the crew? Who are the sailors? Who are the engineers? Who are the fishermen or fisherwomen?
Why: What are the purposes of fishing? For self interest? For profit or commercial use? For a living? For the community? For a corporate business , an educational institution or government?
With this metaphor of fishing, one could easily translate it to the use of Web2.0 and ICT in the connections in this digital world or global business. This is also the basis of corporate,business, social or education networks: where edublogs, wikis, nings are formed with a network of interested people fishing together, with the fishes like ideas, topics of interests or learning, or research work, etc. Or one may be blogging independently, where the blogger decides all the 5Ws and 1 H and thus have complete control over the topics of interest and ones areas of learning.
The creation, development of such networks and connections require skills and knowledge in:
(a) the use of Tools (such as Web 2.0 which are interactive) – blogs, wikis, nings, social tagging (delicious) & RSS feeds (Google Reader), slideshare, emails, social networking – Youtube, Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, and many others…, widgets (additions as translators, as feedburners, and RSS) etc.
(b) the use of personal (or virtual) learning management system, and
Stephen Downes responded in his Daily that: But I doubt that only 16 percent of my readers trust me – why would they even bother reading? But trust is based on some sort of acquaintance, and most people in the world have never heard of me!
Will you trust me in providing any information or resources? You could check on my previous blogs to see if I am trustworthy. Or you could check me out on Facebook. As I noted that in previous posts, the one thing that really intrigues me is the digital identity in the blogosphere. How about the hoax out there in blogs?
Risk: In this Why Blogging is Hard… Still, risk is referred to as an unfinished matter by the author. Once you are in the blog of writings, you may risk losing contact with your readers if you stop blogging, and that may be the case to some of the bloggers. If you extend this idea to wiki and ning, it is not a surprise to find many wikis and nings without any further development, in case if there are no specific input or contribution from any respondents to those social or education networks.
Blogging is still a risk to me. And what hinders me in blogging is not so much on the conversation that I have, but on the risks related to spams and my privacy that are disclosed to the public.
I welcome any comments except those wishy washy advertisement of ”dirty ideas, links, sites or products” to me through spams. So far, I have not received any “unfavourable comments” and so I don’t have to respond to any of these indeed.
With regard to the unfinished matters, I do think blogging prompted me to continue my learning journey as an unfinished personal business.
How to create and stimulate connections? How to attract responses or comments? How to keep the conversation?
PLEs were never about developing a new generation of educational software. PLEswere about a change in the way learners used technology to support their learning. PLEswere about reflection on different sources and contexts of learning. PLEswere about learners taking control of their own learning. PLEswere about collaborative and social learning
Web 2.0 and social software has facilitated that happening. Be it Facebook or Ning, blogs or Wikis, Webquests or social bookmarking, it has taken place. Not every learner is progressing at the same pace and has the same confidence in developing, configuring and using their PLE. Why should they?
This is an interesting phenomena in that learners and users (the many technical savvy or geeks included), and some early adopters (educators, leaders, and education or business entrepreneurs) are “leading” the way, first time in the education/business history or “evolution”. This means that the bloggers, Facebook/wiki/ning developers/users, social bookmarkers, collectives and digital natives are “quietly” moving forward, and they are learning both in the formal and informal setting based on their needs, with PLEs. The Web2.0 and various social network tools have greatly accelerated the social and educational learning in the past few years.
In the wider society, the educators, administrators, parents and some other learners are now keeping in pace with the “technical” trends and see how such gaps could be closed. Will the present development of free open courseware, blogs, wikis/nings, facebook, twitters, network learning forums and courses, network communities and open source training be able to fill the gap?
How about the affordance of technology for people in different communities? Could everyone (learners and educators in particular) afford those technologies? How about the people or communities who have limited access to such technologies? What are the support given to those who have limited access to technologies? What are the roles of government and communities on this matter?
There is also a subtle difference between Learning Management Systems (LMS) and Personal Learning Environments (PLE). To me, LMS focuses more on administration, teaching and assessment, though it is also important in consolidating learning and documenting evidence of learning. PLE focuses more on education and learning, based on personal needs, and it could also be used for documenting evidence of learning and resources.
And so there is an issue evolving out of this. On one hand, institutions and businesses (the commercial tools and technology developers) have invested lots of money in the development of LMS, and many still believe in its use in effective teaching (and learning) in the ecology. To some extent, LMS still plays an important role in the teaching and learning process. This is also likely a requirement laid down by the education accreditation bodies and the administrators: for quality audit and management. This will also ensure that the education institution is able to demonstrate evidence of “teaching and learning” to the standards required. The professionals (educators) are also expected to demonstrate competence in the use of such tools, to ensure that education, teaching and learning are “aligned” under such “e-learning” or “blended learning environment”.
On the other hand, the use of free open source tools of Web 2.0 have opened up huge learning opportunities that are vital to personal learning. Some of the tools used under PLE may be compatible with the LMS, but it is still not yet integrated with the LMS. There is little that institutions could do in combining the tools used under personal PLE and LMS, simply because such tools adopted by the uses or learners are still not yet part of the “course or curriculum requirements” in most cases. Besides, there is a problem relating to licensing, security and privacy issue in some of the Web2.0 and social networking tools used by the institutions.
In this connection, some institutions have banned or limited the use of social network tools to ensure security and child protection acts are enforced. The news Facebook posts get UK girls suspended released today prompted us to re-think about the use of such tools in the school setting. Will education based on PLE be part of the solution? What are the roles of parents, educators, institution and school leaders (principals), social network developers in relation to this matter?
PLE are here to stay, where people are learning and using all these technologies and tools differently, at different “velocity” (a vector which has speed and direction) with different contexts. There is no need to converge, as people all learn differently. However, from an education institution point of view, a sense of goal and control is important, to satisfy the educational, societal, government and business needs and requirements.
What will be the advice to administrators and educators? Are institutions going to adopt and integrate PLE? Are educators going to shift the focus from LMS to PLE? What will be the ultimate direction for government, education institutions? How could the personal needs and societal needs be met, based on the LMS and PLE?
What will be the next “industrial or education evolution” that could make learning more enjoyable, accessible and beneficial to the learner and society? Let’s wait and see.
Answer: See Comment no. 9 in Daniel’s blog left by me, and it seems I got the answer but from a “different logic “(to acknowledge Daniel and Misha in posting this mathematical problem) (Comment No. 11 provides the answer with full explanation)
2581 = 2
map 0, 6, and 9 to a value of ‘1′
map 8 to a value of ‘2′.
map any other digit to ‘0′
sum up mapped digit values of the left number and you obtain the number on the right.
The nation needs to do a much better job teaching and measuring advanced, 21st century skills that are the indispensible currency for participation, achievement and competitiveness in the global economy.
Beyond the assessment of reading, mathematics and science, the United States does not assess other essential skills that are in demand in the 21st century. All Americans, not just an elite few, need 21st century skills that will increase their marketability, employability and readiness for citizenship, such as:
There are also real technical and logistical challenges the movement must overcome. Outside of intensive writing assignments, measuring many of these skills in a large scale or standardized way is difficult. As my colleague Elena Silva described in a recent analysis it is possible to design assessments that test both content and skills like critical thinking or problem solving. But unless these measurements are carefully designed, students can fake knowledge on many exercises intended to measure skills, again shortchanging content. In any case, most states are ill-equipped to implement such assessments today and too many teachers are not prepared to use them or teach this way today.
In other words, we should not teach what we can not easily measure. To argue that we should not teach higher level thinking because our tests are inadequate and teachers lack preparation is advocacy for the status quo – a declining spiral of testable mediocrity and irrelevance.
Well, here’s some news: We already measure many sad truths kids are learning, We count high school dropouts, teen pregnancies, drug arrests, incarceration rates, mean family incomes, child welfare statistics, and a host of other social dissonance indicators. And all of them indicate there is a problem outside the schoolhouse. And there is NO evidence that a steady diet of testable basic skills, disconnected from any reality in the known universe outside the sterile confines of an education policy think tank, will have any impact on THOSE statistics.
However, can we assess what learners have learnt instead? Nearly all the 21st century skills could be learnt through problem-based or project-based learning (with the use of blogs, wikis/nings or social network tools such as Youtube and Facebook) and life experience. With the advent of open sourced technologies (Web 2.0 tools), mobile technology, internet based learning, and the support of enthusiastic and trained educators, it is possible to supplement the formal education with informal learning, leading to advancement of skills amongst the learners.
Instead of having standardised tests, are there better alternative assessments that could be used? How about the e-portfolios, wiki-based projects, independent blogs and edublogs, and videos/podcast as alternative means of technology mediated education/learning especially in the senior years of study?
Postscript: This paper by Jay Mathews provides further reading on the 21st century skills.
Great educators tell me that teaching and learning are more about relationships than content, more about asking questions every day of everyone in class than depending on students to soak it up on their own. In our poorest neighborhoods, we still have some of our weakest teachers, either too inexperienced to handle methods like modeling instruction or too cynical to consider 21st-century skills anything more than another doomed fad. There might be a way to turn them around, but if there isn’t, instead of engaged and inspired students, we will have just one more big waste of time.
At MIT Large Lectures Are Going the Way of the Blackboard there is a shift from large lectures to small classes that emphasize hands-on, interactive, collaborative learning. Isn’t it good news? Let’s see it from different perspectives.
The physics department has replaced the traditional large introductory lecture with smaller classes that emphasize hands-on, interactive, collaborative learning. Last fall, after years of experimentation and debate and resistance from students, who initially petitioned against it, the department made the change permanent. Already, attendance is up and the failure rate has dropped by more than 50 percent.
George Siemens remarked in his Weekly: Changes of this nature still occur within the existing structure of universities. The next, somewhat obvious, question to tackle is “how should universities be structured when access to information and ability to create learning networks shift from instructor to learner control?”.
From an educational perspective, such structural changes in the way teaching is delivered are viewed as an innovative approach, as reported in the article.
A study of of comments provide interesting perspectives. As the comments are pretty diversive, it seems that no conclusion could be drawn whether such an approach is really beneficial to the students or not.
What changes do you think would be necessary to shift higher education towards a hands-on, interactive, collaboratie learning approach? Will network-learning couple with personal learning platforms and tools (Web2.0) change the way higher education is developed and delivered?
As mentioned in my previous post on At MIT Large Lectures Are Going the Way of the Blackboard , there is a trend in shifting from large lecture to small class with interactive and collaborative learning among Higher Education Institutions. This is really a good move from teacher – centered towards a more student – centered learning approach.
However, such an approach also carries some implications. For those elite and gifted students who prefer exploring on their own rather than attending lessons, what could the Universities do about it? These students could still be bored by the “easy” tasks of clicking the answers or discussing with their peer students. Would more challenging tasks in the form of problem-based tasks or collaborative tasks requiring team work be alternatives? And for those weaker students who have trouble getting the right answers with the clickers, how could they be helped out in the learning process? Would one-on-one or one-on-few mentoring or peer teaching be an alternative?
In small class discussion, learning with peer students will only be helpful if the peers have also acquired significant experience in the areas. Otherwise, some of the students may think it to be a waste of time by checking the answers during a session. Some students really expect to learn directly from the professors, as they perceive that they pay heavy fees to attend the “lectures” delivered by the prestigious scholars. So, how would an educator strike a balance between giving a lecture against small group work or discussion? Would a combination of lectures and group discussion help?
Besides, deep learning requires time for personal reflection and application, meaning that simple clicking of the right answer to multiple choice is not good enough. More thorough discussion in forum or blogs would help most learners in sharing and contributing to emergent knowledge.
Would a review of major teaching and learning techniques be necessary to move this agenda forward?
For educators and learners in Higher and Further Education, here are some of the major methodologies that could be considered for training, learning and development:
Group Discussion/Development Methods- Conference, Forum, Symposium, Workshop, Social Networking/Education (Facebook, Ning, Wikis, edublogs), Community of Practice
Group Participation Techniques – The Case Study, Brainstorming, The In-Basket Exercise, Role Playing, Games, Laboratory Training
Information Presentation Techniques – Lecture, Video lecture, Slide (Powerpoint, Slideshare) Presentation, Videos (YouTube, Myspace, Vimeo)
So, would educators (professors, lecturers, teachers, education technology/instructional designers) and administrators be re-thinking about how the Learning Management System and Personal Learning Environment (Space and Tools) could best be used to suit each learner’s needs, under different context (i.e. learning ecology). This may require an understanding of the paradigm shift of teacher-centered to learner-centered in a practical sense, not another theoretical approach. Otherwise, it would just be like a pendulum swinging from teaching to learning and then back to teaching.
Nevertheless, I still reckon that some of the traditional teaching techniques and methods are still relevant in today’s learning environment, especially when young novice learners have only been exposed to a handful of learning techniques in the first year of studies. Again, it is imperative to weigh the merits and demerits of using each of those “teaching” techniques in the learning process, so as to ensure the learner’s needs are met.
In summary, formal education and informal learning methodologies need to be considered in its own merits throughout ones learning journey. A reflection of learning styles and an understanding and practice of those techniques mentioned will help a learner in choosing the most appropriate form of learning.
Who determines and controls the learning? Who will evaluate the learning? Will it be the learner(s)? Will it be in the form of a network of learners?
I don’t see much difference in the grades when it comes to graduate education. Though someone may obtain an A due to the excellent “performance” or “achievement”, graduates would be “expected” to excel in their studies. So, should a professor grade the students? I think it depends.
First, if the university stipulates it as a requirement, there are standards to be achieved, not just pass or fail. This may also be the expectation of the employers and government. Second, in some countries, the grading of subjects in the graduate courses are under A, B, C etc. and most students are expected to achieve those standards before they could be awarded the postgraduate degree. Again, if professors are not to grade them, who are the ones doing that? Third, I am interested in understanding the grading system in Canada, i.e. A is a “pass” normally, and B is “marginal pass”, really interesting. This to me sounds good in that every student is motivated to learn, not so much for the grade in accordance to a typical assessment. Will this be similar to the competent/not yet competent concept under competency based training and assessment? My interpretation is: If one is competent, he/she is 100% competent, not 50%. For a surgeon, competency means that he/she can perform the surgery to the standard 100% of the time required. Otherwise it is 100% failure. Isn’t it?
Finally, I think this is a complicated issue and cannot be judged solely from an educator’s point of view. It depends on the context, the grading and accreditation system of the course, the expectation of the students and employers, and most importantly, the educational value out of such grading.
Comment by Sui Fai John Mak — 14/1/2009 @ 19:32
We should extend our thinking around open education to include more of a Learning 2.0 perspective, based on Web 2.0, for two key reasons….that students bring their social networks with them. Those networks reach back into the students’ communities and schools. Using the social-software and social-network tools of SMS, IM, Facebook, and MySpace, they extend the discussions, debates, bull sessions, and study groups that naturally arise on a campus to encompass that broader constituency — thus amplifying the effect the university has across the country
The term e-Learning 2.0[14][15] is used to refer to new ways of thinking about e-learning inspired by the emergence of Web 2.0[16]. From an e-Learning 2.0 perspective, conventional e-learning systems were based on instructional packets that were delivered to students using Internet technologies. The role of the student consisted in learning from the readings and preparing assignments. Assignments were evaluated by the teacher. In contrast, the new e-learning places increased emphasis on social learning and use of social software such as blogs, wikis, podcasts and virtual worlds such as Second Life. This phenomenon has also been referred to as Long Tail Learning[17]
The first 10 years of e-learning (e-learning 1.0) was focused on using the internet to replicate the instructor-led experience. Content was designed to lead a learner through the content, providing a wide and ever-increasing set of interactions, experiences, assessments, and simulations. E-learning 2.0, by contrast (patterned after Web 2.0) is built around collaboration. E-learning 2.0 assumes that knowledge (as meaning and understanding) is socially constructed. Learning takes place through conversations about content and grounded interaction about problems and actions. Advocates of social learning claim that one of the best ways to learn something is to teach it to others.[18]
There are many social networks in place which exemplify the e-Learning 2.0 phenomena. So Social Network Learning seems to be the connerstone of contemporary e-Learning with an emphasis on connections, and learning through such conversations.
Have you been involved in any of these e-learning 2.0 recently?
How did you find it different from typical e-Learning programs?
I agree that there has to be evolution, not revolution in education and learning, see What comes after this by Deangroom. The challenge is: Who is leading whom? In the education sector, we could see a really interesting phenomena, not only in Australia, but throughout most countries, in that leading authorities and communities in K-12, TAFE (or Vocational/Community College/Further Education) and Higher Education are trying to find pathways to have the “online collaborative creativity”. How should such movement be structured? And where should this lead us to? I have indicated in my earlier post of connectivism that we may be prodding a way similar to the Quality and Customer Service first movement, where pragmatism (collaboration within various sectors, networks, corporations) and economic rationalism are coming the way with technology as the driver.
It’s a challenge to educators, administrators and learners in such education movement. We have come to a multi-mission, multi-vision stage where the orbits are not converging, but diverging. Otherwise we won’t see so many millions of blogs and thousands of communities all voicing with different perspectives and opinions. This is a good sign in that it shows a true sense of democracy in a digital world, where any one or community could comment on the policy of the government, organisation, institutions, communities and society. However, this also implies that it is never easy to satisfy any one (stakeholders) involved in education and learning, as the interests and needs of these parties are different. Under the network phenomena, the movement is both complex and complicated (and “chaos” may be another better word to describe the current status). I don’t think there has been any ”tsunami” urge of education reforms or transformation ever recorded in history. So where does this education movement arming with technology lead us to?
The open-source technology is changing rapidly, with new technology coming on board in lightning speed. People in education and business sectors are amazed by such introductions. Training, development programs in education and business are in high demand to keep up with the paces. People are talking about the half-life of knowledge being at most 2 years. And there is a recent trend, that such half life is getting shorter and shorter.
If you check on the computer that you have got (say 1 year old model), and compare it with the one offered on the market now, you could see that the price might have dropped nearly 20-40% within one year, depending on the model. You will also find the latest model is not only better than the previous model in its function, but could also perform a lot faster than any of the computers that you might have. The same thing may be happening to your television set, where the latest models are always cheaper and are having the high definition features that you have always dreamed of. Is this also happening to the knowledge that you possess? So, a renewal of knowledge is important for anyone in the education sector, whether one is a director, an administrator, education leader, educator, or a graduate or a learner. No one can remain expert without a renewal and update of knowledge, by being connected to the digital world on a timely basis.
So here comes the problem of control in education and learning. Controls are perceived as both strengths and weaknesses by educators and learners alike. Everyone is striving for complete control over his/her education and learning, whereas educational leadership is requiring a system control over the education and learning, as expected by the institutions and society.
Where is the leverage point for these “power” control”? Are there any convergence coming out of the institution/network learning? What do you see are the major challenges and barriers to such changes? Will a “grassroot-level” urges for changes provide the impetus for transformation? Will systematic change come from “steering vision and mission” out of educational leadership? Will transformation come from collaborative network’s wisdom of the crowd? What do you think is the “best-practice” approach towards education for your community?
“It is our responsibility to help our students understand that learning how to learn means acquiring “a collection of good learning practices … that encourage learners to be reflective, strategic, intentional, and collaborative” (James et al., 2007, p.28). Teaching our students, not as whole grades, not as classes, but as individuals, how to learn in the world where knowledge resides in webs, nodes, and multifaceted connections and correspondences is now our greatest responsibility.”
This is a challenge for both educators and learners. As mentioned in my previous post on Education and Learning Movement, I think collaboration and conversation amongst educators, learners and their peers are the connerstone of good network learning practice. However, I am really interested in knowing how learners and educators would see this “sea” of opinions in the education “arena” as reflective of what they are practising NOW.
Many reports and blogs are revealing “truths” or “best practice” from different perspectives. Whenever one tries to fix one problem with a solution, there could be another set of problems arising out of the solution. Such phenomenon is common, just like the use of internet, which is so ubiquitous amongst most schools in the developed countries nowadays. So, if you look back into history – whether it is the quality movement, learning organisation movement, previous economic melt-downs and current financial crisis, you could find “pools of wisdom and smart thinkers” suggesting solutions after solutions. Every community (institutions, on-line, networks) claims its victory in its solution. This is good news. However, in some cases, are we touching just the tips of the icebergs?
When we seriously look at the root causes of the problem, it is easy to find the problem may lie with the system itself – we are trying to pour new wine (web-based learning, e-learning, blended learning, Web2.0, technology, virtual educational games, e-portfolio, education and social network) into old wine skins (with old patches) (reforms, structured courses, examinations filled with multiple choices or quizzes, conventional tests which are typical basis of mass education, one size suits all or many etc.), and when the skin bursts (learners failure in the system, learners lack of interests in the system or lectures, learners drop out from the courses and complaints on the courses or instructors), the wine leaks out (we blame the technology, the educators, the professors and the system of assessment and evaluation, and the learning management systems). Are the professors not doing their best in teaching? Are the assessment appropriate for the learners? Are the learning management systems helping the learners in the learning process? These are all too important questions for any institution or community to explore.
So, should we go back and look at the existing education system (the school and 4-walls that some students don’t like, in particular), and see what really matters? If we just think that the kids need to check or explore with the outside world throughout the learning process, then they will do it on their own wish even if you have not asked them to do so? The most important point is: how could educators help and support those kids throughout their learning journey, especially when they are unsure of their future? Besides, would it be be the responsibility of the learners to learn outside the formal education system? Or would it be the responsibility of the educator to guide the learners throughout the informal learning? These basic questions must be addressed before one could build a better “education and learning” system that could suit the learner’s needs?
And when there are new researches and approaches which sound good in solving the problem, should we be cautious in interpreting the implications in education on a long term basis, as learning is both multi-faceted and chaotic. Perhaps, more debates and discussions around the approaches would be necessary to unfold the implications in education, and would prevent the pitfalls of “pendulum” swing in this challenging education journey.
Which way should we go, as each has its own merits?
Postscript: A reflection of the comments on At MIT Large Lectures Are Going the Way of the Blackboard reveals some of the points that I highlighted in this post – where there is a solution to a problem, there may be other problems arising out of such solution, when the original problem may lie with the system itself. Some educators and learners welcomed such approach, while some others didn’t like it at all. Why? What are the main problems here? What do you think are the solutions? What are the implications of such solutions?
The notion of teacher as a student is sound in theory, but quite a challenge in practice for most professional educators, especially when interacting with kids. My experience is that kids would prefer to have a private space where most would like to explore on their own, without any interference from adults. This has already been explored and discussed in the report The Living and Learning with New Media (Ito, Horst, Bittani, et al., 2008). Kids would also like to take risks that are beyond the traditional boundary in the physical world through those virtual games like SECOND LIFE, WARCRAFT, or Wii, or social network like MYSPACE, FACEBOOK, ON-LINE CHATS, MSN or Mobile CHAT. And they would NEVER tell you the truth that are classified as PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL in an interview or survey. Why? These are the hidden secrets that they won’t like to share, just as any hidden secrets adults have. If each of us reflect on this theme privately, one will find that learning in private could be one of the most enjoyable experience in life, without comments, criticism, control and judgment by any body else.
So, what I think is important is to understand that kids have their rights to learn, in their own way, at their own time, and under an informal learning environment, though sometimes they may need to be guided by their parents or guardians when they are too young. This does not need to be mixed up with the formal education to avoid destroying their creativity and autonomy. Also putting new wine into old wine skin (or bottle) will only make the matters worse, as there would be leakage of wine, and this is used as an analogy in my previous post of education and learning movement under technology (part 2) in http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com
What may be a better solution? Peer learning is a generational phenomena, and we need to respect that kids feel more comfortable in communicating with peers for advice. Opening up conversation with kids is important. However, if the kids are looking for relationship, interest, fun in the interaction and conversation, then learning may better be related to those themes rather than the academic education and learning agenda.
Besides, it depends on what we meant by learning. To learn better in playing a virtual game by a kid may help in boosting one’s confidence. On the other hand, a kid may also be addictive to virtual games upon time. So, too often, parents are concerned with such habits and have thus joined with the kids in playing the games. Is this the solution? Will this also assist both parents and kids in acquiring media literacy?
As mentioned in The Living and Learning with New Media , there is no benchmark to measure media literacy. So is it really necessary to measure it at all? We are now moving in an uncharted water, and so more researches, discussion and debates on these areas may help us in understanding the needs and expectations of our kids and next generation at this digital age.
Prevention is better than cure. Education is better than discipline. And learning is better than ignorance. Are we also a generation of digital walking along with our kids?
Great to learn that your community (by Keith Lyons) is so committed. I hope every one is well. And with the support of so many other enthusiastic volunteers in the community, I am sure that your community would be able to overcome the threats of fires.
This also brought me back to my memory on community service.
When I was in my early twenties, I participated as a volunteer in the Community and Youth Office, part of the social welfare department in the government. I was elected as the Vice Chair of a Volunteering Association called Dawn’s Association after a series of events were organised and run for the poor families in a community (with a few thousand people). Our Association was made up of youth volunteers between the age of 17 to mid 20’s. We organised game stalls, cartoon shows, visit to soft drink company, picnic during a summer vacation for the young kids of poor families. On one occasion, whilst I was leading the kids to a picnic, I witnessed one of the most memorable incident on our way in a coach. I noticed a small kid (may be 7-8 years old) was really enjoying his ice-cream cone. After a while, I was surprised to find that he has finished eating it without any wrapper left behind. Oh dear! The kid has eaten the ice-cream cone with the paper wrapper. On the same occasion, I noted another kid dropped his red-bean popsicle on the deck of the coach, but he immediately picked it up and continued eating it without any hesitation.
What was the lesson I had learnt? Kids of a poor background needs education, or at least they need to learn about what is edible, and the health, hygiene and safety aspects! Besides, they need strong support and care of peers and adults throughout their early stages of development in the community.
Everyone needs such support through social networking, and learning could be greatly enhanced through those valuable connections. And that’s education! And we could then be able to better understand each others’ needs through the networking processes at this digital age.
In our community, we need to support the poor and disadvantaged too, just like the kid’s example, so they could live with pride, confidence, and decency.
Are we all born with compassion towards our fellow citizens? How could we show such compassion towards our community? Is it through our continuous involvement in our community?
So, I echo with Keith on the needs of building our community, to make it a better place for everyone to live in. Social networking and education are just like the two sides of the coin. They work side-by-side.
Are these also the result of valuable connections – to the community? Does what you give and contribute to the community make a difference? Is it the learning we share through Connectivism?
We are already witnessing all these community building through our blogs, networks – and the New ConnectivismEducationLearning network as well!
Hoping that we will continue our contribution to the community through our wonderful acts of love, care and support.
Thanks Jenny for sharing this important message on Connecting through people’s people. Face to face interaction conveys far more emotions and could allow for deeper sharing of feelings, knowledge and experience, and learning. As noted, it is the conversation that is most important. And it is a two-way process at least for two parties. However, technology mediated conversation could enable multi-connections and thus could enable multi-conversations to take place, though the fidelity may not be as high as that of face-to-face. It could overcome the tyranny of time and space, so that nearly everyone could take part in the conversation over the web with Web2.0 tools, in particular.
The best form of conversation most likely happens face-to-face, and it is already a reality via MSN, video conferencing and even life chat supported by on-line videos.
The only draw back with real face-to-face conversation, I suppose, would be the lack of space for reflection, and the problem of time and space under certain circumstances. It could even be costly, as you might have to travel long distances to meet the people on the other side of the globe.
I am still pondering on the deeper art and implications of these connections. How traditional conversation differ from our current conversation over blogs, wiki/Ning/FB/SL networks in its fidelity, its significance in education and learning in the communities, and the impact of such technology mediated conversation on the communities and educational institutions.
Teachers teaching teachers how to teach everyday - the peer teaching approach, with teachers collaborating with each others in order to improve their teaching skills.
Is it quite similar to what CCK08 participants had experienced throughout the forum discussion, or the blog conversations? How about the conversations that are happening with the Friends of ex-CCK08 Professors and participants in Facebook?
Is such peer teaching approach an ideology or reality? Is it easy or difficult to apply in your workplace? What are the short and long term implications to individual educators and the institution?
Can a network of educators exercise the education leadership role?
Helen mentioned that all portfolios need to include three forms of reflection, focusing on the past, present, and future. These questions are:
What? (the artifacts that I have collected from the past)
So What? (what these artifacts show about my learning at the present time)
Now What? (my future learning goals)
Researching Electronic Portfolios
I am interested in continuing my research on electronic portfolios in education with an emphasis on exploring and changing the predominant paradigm:
from an institutional focus to a more family and/or individual focus
from a metaphor of “portfolio as test of skills” to “portfolio as story of deep learning”
from institution-centered data management systems to more individual-centered Web 2.0-based, lifelong/life wide interactive personal learning environments
Use of electronic portfolios and Web 2.0-based tools
Create digital archives of personal and professional development (collection)
Maintain purposeful journals/blogs that document the learning journey (reflection)
Present selected works for a particular purpose and audience (selection/presentation)
Receive feedback on portfolios to support lifelong learning (collaboration/assessment)
ePortfolio, when used appropriately, could be quite a useful tool. This is especially popular in the case of a mentoring program where the mentor supports the mentee in developing an ePortfolio. It focuses on learning goals and requires the learner to adopt a systematic approach in the development of learning strategies and action plans.
However, in reality, there are too often emergence knowledge and learning due to the complexity nature of learning. Rapid changes in technology and advances in theories and pedagogies may require an adaptive approach towards personal learning. An appreciation of ePortfolio may provide strong motivation towards the achievement of challenging goals.
So, is ePortfolio helpful in your personal learning? Or is it a hindrance to you?
Enjoy this Never had a dream come true.
What message did you get from this video?
For me, love.
I love to learn, and share.
Is this the basis of all connections?
In second life, we could all have our dreams come true. I mean true second life, where you could relive what you haven’t done before, love the ones you dream of loving.
This is not a fantasy age. It is an age you can have all your fantasies, with and without technologies. Does it sound interesting?
Has there been any researches done on the relationships between education, learning and fantasies (not just the SL, or immersive technologies)?
What are the implications of these fantasies for us and our next generation?
Are we living in a dream world or world of dreams?
Will the open up of fantasies facilitate education and learning?
Much thinking about digital cities is in terms of community groups. Yet, the world is composed of social networks and not of groups. This paper traces how communities have changed from densely-knit “Little Boxes” (densely-knit, linking people door-to-door) to “Glocalized” networks (sparselyknit but with clusters, linking households both locally and globally) to “Networked Individualism” (sparsely -knit, linking individuals with little regard to space). The transformation affects design considerations for computer systems that would support digital cities.
Are strong ties losing favour to weak ties for individuals (educators and learners)?
Let’s see. My reflections
Strong versus weak ties
How many of us have strong connections (or ties) with our colleagues, our immediate supervisors or family members, relatives?
Do we share our inner feelings and emotions (level 3 and 4, the deep ones) with them?
Do we trust them?
Do we comment and criticise them?
Do we judge them in a fair way?
Have you got polarised answers? Why?
Why do people prefer weak ties to strong ties?
- Could establish ”trust” and friendship with someone at a private level (i.e. with those who are not close at work or family)
- Protect ones privacy and identity
- Hold ones integrity
- Less conflict
- More willing to share due to openness
- Become more confident in establishing relationships
- Wider connections – gain insights from diverse perspectives and learning from different domains
- A “test of uncharted waters” – could try different networks, connections
- Failure to connect or interact doesn’t harm that much, could try again
- Have dream “partners”, “co-learners”, “professors” or “instructors”…
Are there any implications with this strong versus weak ties?
Limitations with staying on with strong ties (work place, strong groups or communities)
- Learning with your peers, colleagues and supervisor or family members is limited to that of your family group, section, organisation, and sometimes within the same domain, the closed little box
- Group think – everybody tries to conform to the rules, and please others to create harmony. Complacency follows.
- Waiting to be directed at work or at home, especially when one is under an autocratic “leadership” environment. Why border? Lack of initiative. Lack of innovation. Low self esteem, confidence and motivation to learn.
- Dare not share the beliefs with others. Poor trust and respect on each others resulting from conflicts. Poor relationships follow
- Competition rather than collaboration. Lose – Lose becomes the way
- Politics, control, gossiping, destructive comments and criticisms poison the ties.
Merits with strong ties
- Learning with your strong connections could more easily establish professional “friendship” and “respect”
- A team approach towards problem solving. Team building leading to even stronger ties.
- Common vision and missions. Gearing of strategies towards vision and missions.
- Adoption of a pragmatic approach in collaboration.
- Win-Win, if the team develops positively towards “Best Practice”. Continuous improvement and innovation.
Interesting to see the trend towards informal learning (refer to Viplav Ed Talk), via different pathways – connections with eportfolios, learning landscape, and community of practice approach and connectivism.
Does it mean that learning embraces all aspects of learning – both formal and informal and education? Once quoted, 80% of informal learning comes from social networking. I still would like to see how formal learning is distinguished from informal at this age, as it seems that there are a lot of formal and informal learning happening at institutional level. It could be misleading to conclude that attending a course in an institution is a pure formal learning, or attending a class strictly comes under formal learning. It depends on the context, the structure of delivery. Blended delivery (a combination of face-to-face and elearning) could be a combination of formal and informal if networking are blended with formal classroom face-to-face teaching. And eportfolio could only be useful if the learning is goal directed or oriented from the learner’s point of view. More often, such eportfolios have been institution driven where learners have to submit- for competency assessment (Recognition of Prior Learning – RPL) to ensure compliance to assessment criteria and accreditation of courses.
All these formal and informal learning could be confusing to the educators and learners in terms of what, why, how, who to learn with, especially as these approaches are relatively recent, and there has not been a comprehensive research comparing and contrasting each of the approaches. Every approach has its own merits and demerits. As explained in my previous posts, where there is a solution, that could lead to various implications and problems. Changes at systemic and personal learning and education are involved in each of the approaches. A clear understanding of these approaches via Connectivism, Network Learning and Community of Practice perspectives could help learners in focusing the “most appropriate and adaptive” approach to adopt.
Would it be easier if we could clearly indicate why and how informal learning could complement and supplement the formal education in simple terms?
EPortfolios, community of practice and Learning Landscape, social networking are part of the non-formal learning approaches, and could be viewed in the context of Balanced Score Card basis. You give a weight of importance and time to each of them, based on pattern-recognition, way finding and wise selection of connections and time-management. You could then continuous implement and review the effectiveness and efficiency of each approaches on your own learning.
The Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle of learning is implicit in all these approaches.
Whatever approaches that the educator and learners have considered, what is most important is WIIFM (What is in it for me (the learner))?
What are your passions? What interest you? How would you achieve those goals? Who would you be connected to? How much time could you afford to spend on those communities or network connections? Do you learn through such informal network connections?
In view of the lack of results on the surveys that was previously conducted via the forum, may I suggest to use this network to initiate a survey tool and conduct such research on network learning and course evaluation of CCK08. This may take some time for our ConnectivismEducationLearning network members to consider. And I would volunteer to be part of the survey design network.
If we decide to go ahead with this research, then we could form small research group(s) to undertake such a research.
We will need to thoroughly design the questionnaires to evaluate the course. We could consolidate the questions from the forum and the ones posted by George Siemens as a start. We could further add questions to the survey to ensure it covers the various aspects of the Connectivism and Connective Knowledge course.
Those who are interested could start on the posting of some of the questions on ConnectivismEducationLearning as a reply. Alternatively, you could consider putting them into a pbwiki network that I have recently created Connectivismeducationlearning, so those who would like to add or review the questions could do so. Please note that the wiki network is still under construction as I haven’t designed all the features for this research yet.
Would you please include your name, contact email or blog address in ConnectivismEducationLearning if you wish to pursue with this project?
I hope this project survey and the research results could be owned by this ConnectivismEducationLearning network. We could use a survey monkey to conduct the survey. After then, we could also form a small group to analyse and report on the results. Again this depends on your availability and interests.
This may be a first of its kind in conducting research – using a collaborative network approach in conducting the research on Connectivism and Network Learning. We could start small with such a project, and I am sure it would be a great success if we all provide some input and support into this research. I also think it would be an interesting and exciting project based on our shared ownership of research.
If you have found a similar network using such an approach, would you mind sharing their success stories and experience with us so we could learn?
What do you think about this research project? Do you have any suggestions or advice on this research project?
I read this post on Social Networking and Talent Management by Dave Wilkins with great interests. Are leaders tall, thin and attractive? How would one define leaders? Whilst there are formal leaders in organisations, there are informal leaders leading in a social direction. How these social leaders are interacting with others are yet to be known.
In most organisations, employees often praise their leaders to achieve “collaboration, and cooperation”. Why? They are employed by these leaders of the company. I don’t see any reasons why employees are going to criticise the employers upfront, unless they are under serious grievance, or they don’t like their boss. But one common understanding is: Most employees leave their companies not because of the “system”, but because of their boss – the leader.
So when it comes to Social Network Analysis, we could see a lot of interactions – and may conclude that there are lots of collaboration. But there are certain assumptions that require further exploration. Are those other “non – top performers” consulted based on social reasons, or for technical support etc? Why are the formal leaders not being consulted or interacted? What happens if an employee openly criticises his/her organisation or the leaders?
My observation is: Never comment or criticise your organisation in public. It is both unprofessional and unhelpful. So, does it partially explain the phenomena?
I have once been with a company with the motto of everyone is a leader. If leadership is about empowerment of their employees, then social networking is the complement of leadership where employees could shine. Both leaders and their followers would resonate and shine in the organisation. http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com
London — AT&T Inc announced that the use of social networking tools as part of everyday working life has led to an increase in efficiency, according to an independent market report released by AT&T. The pan-European survey of more than 2,500 people in five countries, conducted by Dynamic Markets, shows that of those employees using social networking tools in the workplace, 65% say that it has made them and/or their colleagues more efficient. In addition, 46% say that it has sparked ideas and creativity for them personally.
The top 5 social networking tools being used by organisations across Europe are:
1. Companies’ own collaboration sites on intranets (39%)
2. Internal forums within the company (20%)
3. Company-produced video material shared on intranets (16%)
4. Online social networks, like LinkedIn, Facebook etc (15%)
5. External collaboration sites on the web and internal blogging sites (both 11%)
When asked, 74% of European employees think there are benefits to using social networks and online communities in the workplace. Increasing an individual’s knowledge and giving access to solutions to problems (both 38%) were the two main benefits highlighted. Harnessing the collective knowledge of employees, customers and suppliers (36%) and stimulating team building and better internal collaboration (32%) were also mentioned by those employees who have first-hand experience of using social networks at work on a daily basis.
In contrast, the research also highlights a number of challenges, with the two main negatives being that social networks are a distraction to employees (49%) and a source of company leaks of confidential information (45%). In addition, 24% of employees admit they are not sure how the return on investment (ROI) of internal sites could ever be measured.
What are the benefits of using social networks and online communities in your workplace?
Do your employees consider social networks a distraction? How about the leaking of confidential information via social networks? Is it a concern for your company? What strategies would you recommend in overcoming those challenges?
What are the implications of social networking and Web 2.0 on our company’s internal networking strategy?
Anthropology bloggers know of Erkan Saka for, among other things, diligently tracking the contents of a great many anthropology blogs on his own online field diary.
Given his time spent blogging and reviewing anthropology blogs, it is good news that he has produced a working paper titled, “Blogging as a research tool for ethnographic fieldwork,” for the Media-Anthropology discussion list.
The abstract for Saka’s paper is as follows:
This presentation argues that blogging emerges as a new research tool for the ones conducting ethnographic fieldwork. Moreover, I argue throughout my paper that new media with a particular emphasis in blogging will have even larger consequences for the discipline of anthropology. In order to substantiate my main argument I focus on these issues:
a) Blogging might be a remedy to the anxiety of being in ‘after the fact’ that is shared by many anthropologists. Blogging takes place in the present tense while actively engaging with ‘the fact’;
b) blogging brings immediate feedback
c) not only from the limited scholarly circles but from a wider public/audience
d) which exposes the ethnographer to a much more effective issue of accountability.
Moreover,
e) blogging urges to see motives in a more regular sense, thus creates a strong sense of regularity
f) that forces the ethnographer to produce on a regular basis
g) with a constant appeal to narrate what would normally remain fragments of fieldnotes.
Based on the findings of Erkan Saka, an analysis of blogging in a particular field would provide valuable insights and input into research studies. Would this shed new light towards how we could conduct research in Connectivism? How about research using blogging in Connectivism?
Throughout the course of Connectivism and Connective Knowledge CCK08, I realised that the bloggers involved have been taking an active research role in exploring Connectivism. Even after the course was completed, many bloggers of CCK08 continued their journey of exploration, and they tapped into other interested areas using various platforms such as social networks, Wikis and Nings, Second Life, Face Book, Community of Practice and online Conference. A follow up research on how our CCK08 fellow participants have been involved in those activities could be useful in understanding the impact of Connectivism and Social Networking on educators and researchers.
I would now see that research is no longer confined to the job of academic researchers or scholars (the PhDs, or professors), but a part of every educators’ or edubloggers’ continuous search of new knowledge and application of such knowledge in their daily work. The boundary and perimeter of learning, education and research is somewhat overlapping. And as an educator develops his/her skills as a blogger, such learning could be based primarily on research over the web, via visits to other blogs, resources, and conferences etc. The distinction of learning and research is at times blurred.
Does it mean that we have to re-define research under a technology-mediated learning ecology? Will the emphasis of learning be on ontology, the study of the nature of being, existence or reality in general, and “learning to be”, rather than the acquisition of knowledge, as we further develop metacognition skills? And the knowledge creation is not only based on the cognitive and social constructivist approach, but on an adaptive connectivist approach which integrate the principles involved in Complexity and Chaos Theory.
So, research would no longer be done in a linear fashion, and that an alternative research could be based on a collaborative approach, with interaction and connections amongst researchers, scholars, experts and leaders in the field all taking place in an on-going basis. These could be achieved through blogging, participation in wikis/Nings, community of practice and networks, social tagging, on-line conferencing, and various formal and informal networks such as Facebook, twitters, Second Life or MSN etc. Would that be a best – practice research paradigm that we should be aiming at? Would that bring us closer to the Wisdom of the Crowd using such a collaborative, multi-channel, instantaneous research approach?
Would this open up a new chapter of research, where it is more in line with the philosophy of Folksonomy, apart from the Taxonomy. And that research could be carried out using the Web2.0 as an enabler with Learning 2.0 as a research basis and vehicle, with learning pedagogies based on continuous research for advanced learners.
Can we rely on Web2.0 tools – blogging, wiki, Ning, Facebook, twitters, Delicious and RSS etc as Research Tools?
If each of our CCK08 bloggers are to summarise our learning journeys, would a synthesis of those blogs be a basis for Connectivism research ?
So, may I suggest to carry out such research using CCK08 blogs as a start? This would be as good as any research done by a PhD. We are already in the pathway of research (of a PhD or groups of PhDs). Are we?
Would this also be a challenge to the formal setting of academic research that have been used for decades (or even century)?
As research is basically an adaptive learning process rather than a mere static learning product. Research is no longer staying with the ivory tower, but is open to the public for people’s critique and reviews.
The primacy of Connectivism is then on the connections, through learning, research, interaction and collaboration.
I resonate with Jenny’s views on sustaining communities, her insights on the Community of Practice, and the challenges we all face in sustaining networks and community of practice.
I think educators and learners are leading multi-visions and missions in the journey of life long and life wide learning. It’s similar to the metaphor of having virtual learning flights that I mentioned at the end of the course of CCK08, where you visit the virtual world of learning.
People have already landed on the wonderland of “Connectivism”, and some are exploring other different virtual flights or avenues in their wayfinding and sensemaking. I suppose most of “us” have gone to the stage of putting those theories (whether it’s Connectivism and Connective Knowledge, Actor Network Theory (ANT) and Complexity and Chaos Theory, or Social Network Theory) into practice. Mere connections and discussion may not necessarily fulfill our needs. Educators have developed interests in exploring how each of those new social network tools Web 2.0 could be integrated into their connections and interactions as they navigate through the Web, and putting them into action. The emphasis is more in sharing and contributing to our own families and closed personal networks (strong ties), the personal communities of practice (not only for the CCK08 community), and social and academic networks and communities (weak ties). This time with an ever bigger wave (some obvious, some yet to be revealed) of learning using a macro, adaptive but systematic approach (wise connections, smart time management, macro and micro views of education and learning integrated). Community of Practice could fulfil the desire of our educators and learners in weaving together the new knowledge and learning they have experienced throughout the networks and the Web, and share and learn in a collaborative manner.
Have the concepts of meme and “selfish genes” taken on a new coat? This time with a more refreshing dress of “wise meme” and “altruist genes”. This is evidenced by the work of Nellie, Cris, Frances, Doris whose work and contributions to the communities are fantastic. And many other leaders in the field, George, Stephen, Terry, Howard, Jay, Nancy, Jane and Tony etc. who have led the informal education and learning movement, and continued in building communities of practice. These social networks and learning communities all foster a climate of active learning and change that is conducive to life long and life wide learning. Such transformations could take months or even years to reap their fruits in society and community.
I suppose many of our fellow participants are still observing how these communities of practice or networks unfold. It’s great to witness such great changes in the blogosphere and virtual communities. And learn through such changes. We are observers, theorists, thinkers, reflectors, and practitioners within the networks or communities.
It takes a year to grow crops, tens of years to grow people, and perhaps many tens of years to grow communities. However, under the current learning ecology, will it just take months to grow the community?
I sincerely hope that there will be more interactions and activities happening in the ConnectivismEducationLearning Network in the coming weeks or months.
I will endeavour to play an active part in the community ConnectivismEducationLearning - you will get what you give. Will you?
I also wish to express my sincere thanks to Jenny for her great encouragement and support in this initiative. ConnectivismEducationLearning is our network and community!
Our brains and spirits are the freest things in the universe. Our bodies can live in chains, but our intellects cannot. It’s that simple. The mind will be free, or it will be dead. It can be numbed, quieted, and restrained so that it memorizes names of Portuguese explorers and plods through grades one to twelve. If it is fiercely alive and teamed up with a forgiving spirit, it may find a way to be free even in school, and stay awake that way. But these strategies are defenses, not full-fledged learning. Albert Einstein, as compassionate and insightful as he was brilliant, said:
It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate little plant, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom; without this it goes to wrack and ruin without fail. It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion and a sense of duty.
The author seems to have strong negative attitudes towards schooling, and I am not sure whether it was due to some negative schooling experiences or not.
Have I got any negative experience? Hm.. Who hasn’t? But, what have we learnt from those experience?
Schooling and Un-schooling could be two-sides of a coin. When one attends school from K-9, there is an emphasis on basic knowledge, discipline, social norms, rule and regulations, which are important for kids to learn in preparation for adulthood. I could still see value of school for kids, though such value may diminish rapidly for middle-aged to senior adults.
However, the concept of school could be totally different for adults. For adults, the significance of schooling fades when one gets older, especially when the school environment (teacher, classmates and atmosphere) is not conducive to adult learning. So, is school a place where you could not learn freely? Are universities schools? Why do people like to get a PhD? Did Einstein pursue a PhD? Yes! Why? Did he like to study in a school setting?
Adults prefer to learn with autonomy, and be creative in the pursue of knowledge. So networks could be alternative best “school” where adults could freely learn based on their interests, passion.
Would this be the ultimate intention of the author- in saying that schools can never allow you to learn freely? Would we need to consider the context? As an educator, I think it’s important to show the two sides of the coin, and explain it to our children. This would avoid misleading our children with only negative thoughts about schools.
I have also checked with the book review. It seems that the author was emphasising deschooling for the teens. Again, she mentioned about going to museums, search information on the internet and self studies, etc as a better learning pathway than schooling. I would say most of us had gone through similar pathways when we were young. As for me, I liked visiting libraries, going to an art exhibition and musuem, and reading while I was young. So, despite of all the negatives of schooling, what might be a better solution?
What might be required are reforms of schools, to ensure that the learning environment is conducive to active and interesting learning. Learning should be fun in schools (at least for the kids). And schools could be the best place to allow people to make mistakes, and to learn, especially when educators and parents could provide that support to them.
1. How should we reform the schools?
My impression is: this is going beyond e-teaching, and more in line with e-learning, where the learners (the kids) will be able to explore learning via the multi-media and technology, Web2.0 tools etc.
We have made a few assumptions here:
(a) most teens are interested in the use of the tools (Web 2.0) (may be we should also include the TV, movies, videos, internet resources, networks and those associated tools and technology)
(b) most teens will learn better than the class room teaching via YouTubes, Facebooks, social networking, wiki, blogs
(c) most teens feel comfortable with the use of such tools, once guided by the teachers or their peers
(d) most teens enjoy learning via the technology as they could immerse into the virtual environment and have fun
(e) most teens are digital natives and so would embrace these Web2.0 as enabler in social networking (for the rest of their lives?)
Then the various speakers shared their experience on teaching using those tools such as mobile, wiki, blogs etc.
There are questions which might have been addressed in various research studies. See this PhD research paper by Danah.
Are those (a) to (e) assumptions (or hypothesis in the case of scientific study) valid? Are those the main criteria in motivating the students (teens) and enhancing their learning? To what extent are they valid? What percentage of those teens are interested in these modes of learning? How do these teens feel about the learning? Do they really want to learn under a school environment if they could learn these by themselves? What sort of interventions will be necessary as educators?
And I would like to explore the following too:
1. What about the safety of these kids over the net? In Australia, there are Child Protection Acts in which teachers are expected to sign and comply with and that kids are protected under those Acts under a school environment. If there is a breach of the Child Protection due to inadequate caring by the teachers concerned in school, whose responsibilities will it be on any allegations? Will the teacher be liable to prosecution?
2. How will the learning of these teens be associated with their future studies? And future careers?
3. Will it be based on open curriculum, courses or a fixed number of subjects in a course?
4. Will the teens be expected to attend school? What are the requirements of “progression”?
5. How could we ensure that these teens are learning towards those goals of the 21st century as “prescribed” and promoted by the education authorities?
6.What will be the role of the teachers, educators and school administrators in the support of those types of “e-teaching” and “e-learning”?
7. Are there enough technology resources and support for these teens (the supply of computers with internet connections to these teens)?
8. What implications will these be on the learning and development of teachers?
9. Are there any involvement of other stakeholders such as parents, teachers’ union, school administrators, librarians, and instructional designers in the design and delivery of such e-teaching or learning?
Applied research seeks to produce applied results. These results are good or bad depending on their real-world application. But in academia, success is defined by peer review. Peers do not test real-world applications! Moreover, researchers have an approximative idea of real-world problems.
Why is success defined by peer review in academia? Why don’t the peers test the real world applications? Was it based on tradition?
I did applied research on many projects in the past decades. Whilst I was a Factory Manager backed in the 80’s, I did researches on MBO and project management, as applied in my company, as part of my projects in Industrial Management studies. There were many useful applied findings at work. And those were the few research studies in those days. I think the University library had still kept my copy of the project reports (dissertations) as it is an evidence that I had done it. I have a hard copy of them, but I would need to revise the chapters to reflect the current state of the art, if any of the theories are to be re-examined and applied.
Now, the concepts of strategic management – based on Management by Objectives (MBO) (first proposed by the late Peter Drucker) or Management with Objectives, a refined model on MBO, we could see the adoption of vision and mission statements being applied throughout organisations – government, educational institutions, businesses, communities and associations.
Without applied research, we would never be able to reveal the true value of the theories.
So I think applied research is one of the important research methodologies in academia. Should it be based just on peer review?
Again, I am not trying to showcase my research, but to highlight the importance of “peer review” where the peers are not confined to the academia, but the practitioners to make the theories relevant, and useful in the real world. When I did my research in the 80’s and published the result, most people still had doubts on the use of vision and mission, and their implications. Now, nearly all organisations are using it. Even the supply chains are adopting it to ensure their effectiveness and efficiency.
I had also attended a Fellowship training in Quality Control and Standardisation in Japan in 1988. Upon return from the training, I had applied those learning in the conduction of staff development through conferences, conduction of quality management training courses (Quality Function Deployment – QFD, and Total Quality Management (TQM)), and had composed country reports on its application.
The result of such training and the conduction of various ”applied research” is: all learning is context based and the emergence of knowledge as a result of technology will make pure research quickly obsolete. That explains why it’s easier to conduct research on vocational education and training based on applied research, rather than the pure research (or empirical ones) that are adopted in university education.
Would the bringing in of applied research be wasteful? I am willing to try again on applied research and see its impact on academia. May be it would take another 10 – 15 years to see the outcome. But I am confident that I could learn through the research process. As I believe in the importance of research based on the process rather than just on the product (the report).
Is it also the spirit of highest order of learning – of a PhD? Will that be the paradigm shift that academia should be aiming at, rather than the traditional peer review that often become an outdated rigid “product of knowledge” when the theory is released? I have published a paper which had taken a year to be published, as a result of academic review. That’s my experience with the peer review.
But for my applied research in on-the-job training (a paradigm shift from theoretical based education to on-the-job training) it took a few years to validate the model, and now nearly everyone in our organisation are looking for that sort of model, with top management support. When I started with this model, I have nil student, and needed to convince most of the leaders in its viability, despite that I had already conducted rigorous research on its use.
Within few years time, the population of on-the-job training in this area grew exponentially to thousands. And this is promoted throughout the nation, with the philosophy embedded in the vision and mission of every institutions in Australia.
So, is applied research really wasteful? May be Universities should examine and analyse the current ecology and rethink about the combined academic and applied research model that business and educational authorities are looking for, rather than just theoretical model.
I think this is a challenge to the traditional model of research. But is this also a trend?
Should we refine what research really mean? If the research findings from pure research could not be applied in real case scenario, then would the theory be just an Utopian view of the researchers? As mentioned by Daniel, pure theory is wasteful. Some of these theories had been proven to be wrong. The concept of ether is a typical example. Another example is the theory which relates to light consisting of wave or particle only.
On the other hand, if the findings of applied research is really restricted to certain contexts only, generation of research findings would be inappropriate to form a theory. Typical examples are the e-portfolio, digital identity and personal learning environment, which are all context based.
I resonate with Daniel’s final statement:
You cannot live in an ivory tower and pretend to tell others what to do. Instead, use your tower to have a bird’s eye view on the world! Study the world! But be humble about what you can do to transform it!
And that’s the knowledge and learning that will transform the world – that humility to search for truths. Will it be?
It has been around 4 weeks since this community on ConnectivismEducationLearning was set up on 20 January 2009.
We have 49 members in this community to-date. We should be proud of ourselves in having such a growth within a short time. And we hope our presence will bring in new hopes to the building of global communities for life-long educators and learners.
We are also greatly honoured to have George Siemens, Stephen Downes and Terry Anderson being part of our global community.
We have some community members introducing themselves, and sharing their visions and missions. There were also some discussions amongst us on various topics on Connectivism, education and learning.
Some videos, slideshows that relate to Connectivism, network learning and Personal Learning Environment have since been added to this network. I hope you like them. You are welcomed to add any videos/slideshow of your interests here.
There have also been some interests in research as indicated by various members.
In view of the coming Valentine’s Day, may I wish every member of our Community to have a Happy Valentine’s Day tomorrow?
You are warmly welcomed to send a short message of love and friendship to each other. Your partner or kids wouldn’t be jealous on this as you could show him/her my request here! And I am sending each of you this Valentine’s love
This is your community of learning, sharing and research that care for each of you, by yourself and amongst yourself.
So, enjoy, have fun and you are welcomed to share with us your interesting story of love on Valentine’s day. Even a short anecdote, message or blog would excite each of us. That fire of passion will continue to burn!
Looking forward to enjoy our Valentine’s Day. Where is your heart of love? He/she must be someone close to you. I could see you smiling
I participated in some of the discussions in Moodle. I realised that Connectivism was perceived differently by many participants. And I still think that there are divergence of perspectives on whether it is a new learning theory or not despite the “convergence” of some of the “principles”, but not all. This is quite revealing, as participants were coming from different social, cultural and educational backgrounds and experience, and as a result of the connections, and interactions, it has really given rise to the emergence of knowledge and learning, and even some “cultural shift”. How one sees it depends on so many factors that I think no one could completely draw up the picture as described as “patterning, sensemaking or wayfinding”, as it is an ontology, a journey that could only review some “learner’s footprint”. Also, the boundary of Connectivism is blurred by the people’s opinions, and perspectives. And in some areas, it is across the various fields, domains, and networks, and its spanning could be based on a historic outlook to cultural evolutions. It is the engagement and interaction of people and its artifacts and technology which gives meaning to emergent knowledge and learning at this digital age.
Connectivism has stimulated me to pursue a new way of thinking in the problem formulation and solutions development, based on critical, creative and lateral thinking, organising my concepts and connections with brain power, and preparing me to tackle challenges of personal learning due to the introduction of emergent technologies.
I am amazed by the type of academic services that are now available in the corporate business of academics for the academia.
This best dissertation seems to be pretty promising. You could get the best dissertation by paying a price. Though, I wonder why writing a dissertation or a proposal has now turned into a business or service with “commodity for merchandising”.
May be I am suffering from myopia and couldn’t see the ivory tower clearly. Why do people need such services?
Are there many people who need such ”writing service” to achieve their qualification? Would it be a surprise for a Professor to receive an assessment from his or her students who might have borrowed the service of other professionals having “superior writing and research skills” and as a result the learner gets an “A +” in the dissertation or assignment? Are the professors awared of these? What are the strategies in place to check these out?
What does it mean in an online education and learning community when academic studies could be achieved with such means? I am not too sure whether on-line assessment based on this would have the same credibility as that of the academia in the University. Would this be a happy or sad story for the academia to learn that this is happening in the on-line or real world?
Please note that I haven’t got a full understanding of those businesses, and so I have more questions than answers to this interesting phenomena. I wish to share my understanding with you, our fellow educators and learners on my perspectives.
I hope this will also raise the awareness of the importance of accreditation of education and assessment in higher and open education.
1. Are we in a business of writing dissertation ourselves or in a business of gaining qualification based on the service of some prominent PhDs or academics behind closed door?
2. Do you see any ethical issues here?
3. I am really interested in knowing how people view such academic services. How do people see plagiarism in research and the impact of lending a hand to somebody else in writing research dissertation, proposals and reports?
4. Under Connectivism, what do you think would be the underpinning ethics in learning and education, especially in e-learning and navigating along the networks?
Metacognitive skills are essential for successful learning. It is the “thinking about thinking”, and involves an awareness of how I learn and what I need to do to control my learning and thinking processes. This skill is expecially important for educator- bloggers.
Metacognition refers to a level of thinking that involves active control over the process of thinking that is used in learning situations. Planning the way to approach a learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating the progress towards the completion of a task: these are skills that are metacognitive in their nature. Similarly, maintaining motivation to see a task to completion is also a metacognitive skill. The ability to become aware of distracting stimuli – both internal and external – and sustain effort over time also involves metacognitive or executive functions. The theory that metacognition has a critical role to play in successful learning means it is important that it be demonstrated by both students and teachers. Students who demonstrate a wide range of metacognitive skills perform better on exams and complete work more efficiently. They are self-regulated learners who utilize the “right tool for the job” and modify learning strategies and skills based on their awareness of effectiveness. Individuals with a high level of metacognitive knowledge and skill identify blocks to learning as early as possible and change “tools” or strategies to ensure goal attainment. The metacognologist is aware of their own strengths and weaknesses, the nature of the task at hand, and available “tools” or skills.
An individuals’ metacognitive capability strongly influences their attitudes, levels of motivation and resulting behaviour in term of tackling new tasks at hand. This explains the importance of refining the metacognitive skills so that learning would be based on ontology. Would this be the reason for bloggers to create new posts (the new tasks)?
Sensemaking – Individuals are required to make sense of unpredictable situations that arise. To do so, they draw on their previous experiences and their stores of knowledge. This process is called sensemaking.
Sensemakingis the ability or attempt to make sense of an ambiguous situation. More exactly, sensemaking is the process of creating situational awareness and understanding in situations of high complexity or uncertainty in order to make decisions. It is “a motivated, continuous effort to understand connections (which can be among people, places, and events) in order to anticipate their trajectories and act effectively” (Klein et al, 2006a).
Sensemaking in individuals and organizations
In individuals, sensemaking is the largely cognitive activity of constructing a hypothetical mental model of the current situation and how it might evolve over time, what threats and opportunities for each action are likely to emerge from this evolution, what potential actions can be taken in response, what the projected outcomes of those responses are, and what values drive the choice of future action. In organizations, sensemaking is a collaborative process of creating shared awareness and understanding out of different individuals’ perspectives and varied interests. The process of moving from situational awareness in individuals to shared awareness and understanding to collaborative decision-making can be considered a socio-cognitive activity in that the individual’s cognitive activities are directly impacted by the social nature of the exchange and vice versa.
Klein et al (2006b) have presented a theory of sensemaking as a set of processes that is initiated when an individual or organization recognizes the inadequacy of their current understanding of events. Sensemaking is an active two-way process of fitting data into a frame (mental model) and fitting a frame around the data. Neither data nor frame comes first; data evoke frames and frames select and connect data. When there is no adequate fit, the data may be reconsidered or an existing frame may be revised.
When I reflect upon what happens when I interact and communicate with others using our blogs, I realise that I am employing this sensemaking to understand the connections, act and react, and respond to comments from bloggers. This sensemaking becomes more like an art in that it embraces ones’ ability to turn blogs into powerful individual learning tools (and that it forms part of the Personal Learning Environment)- for personal reflection, engagement with peers, collaboration with others, and portfolios of learning.
Do these help me in becoming a sensemaking blogger? How about you?
Postscript:
Ontological approaches
Social scientists adopt one of four main ontological approaches: realism (the idea that facts are out there just waiting to be discovered), empiricism (the idea that we can observe the world and evaluate those observations in relation to facts), positivism (which focuses on the observations themselves, attentive more to claims about facts than to facts themselves), and post-modernism (which holds that facts are fluid and elusive, so we should focus only on our observational claims).
2. The red hat is to do with feelings, intuition, and emotions.
3. The black hat. The black hat is for critical thinking, for caution. The black hat stops us from doing things that may be harmful. The black hat points out the risks, and why something may not work.
4. The green hat is the energy hat. Green hat is for creativity. Under the green hat, you suggest modifications and variations for a suggested idea.
5. The blue hat is looking at the thinking process itself.
What should we do next?
What have we achieved so far?
6. The yellow hat. Under the yellow hat we make a direct effort to find the values and benefits in a suggestion:
What are the benefits?
Who is going to benefit?
How will the benefits come about?
What are the different values?
Under Connectivism – Learning and knowledge is IN THE CONNECTIONS, and INTHE NETWORKS and learning is the capacity to navigate across the networks, at neuro, conceptual and external, social levels. Technology and tools could be the enablers in the learning connections.
Will these hats form part of those connections at all levels?
What may be the values and benefits of using the hat metaphor in the thinking process for educators – bloggers?
Will a concept map on these 6 hats metaphor help us in thinking? How about the relationships between parallel, creative and critical thinking?
Has there been any empirical research done on the thinking process – in the connections?
This From Andragogy to Heutagogy by Stewart Hase and Chris Kenyon emphasises on a learner-centred approach to learning.
I think Connectivism comes close to heutagogy.
The on-the-job training – a shift in training paradigm from trainer centred to learner centred learning has adopted such heutagogy in the last decade. See my post on Distribution Centre Training and What’s new in connectivism? http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com for details.
Recent emergent technology accelerates the application of this heutagogy approach.
To what extent will teacher accept and adopt this approach? Any survey done?
Back to our teacher training decades ago, have we all been educated on the importance of pedagogies? We were supposed to have lesson plans in order to pass the course, and to be employed as a professional teacher. Even educational institutions and professional bodies still emphasise the importance of pedagogies or androgogy in teaching and learning. Is it still important?
Is it a pendulum change?
Is it a challenge to you, as an educator or learner?
Any comments?
I see technology and tools as enablers or aids to learning only.
My observation is: people are fascinated and at times excited with the use of technology and tools in learning. And I think it’s the learning where educators and learners are passionate about. Overall it’s the individual empowerment in learning which keep people inspired.
I don’t know the answer to your question. It seems that people have tuned into the Web2.0, with some educators and learners equating the tools to learning in some respects. These Web2.0 tools appeal to most educators due to its open and free access and registration, and ease of use.
The learning and application of the Web 2.0 tools allows collaboration between educators with peers, and learners with peers etc. These tools provide platforms for educators to facilitate learning and in some cases to accelerate learning . However, it may come to a limiting point where educators and learners might feel overwhelmed with those complex technical tools, especially if these tools are developed for social purpose rather than educational purpose. Also, some tools such as LMS are mainly built from an educators’ perspective, and may not have fully considered the learners’ needs and the learning context.
If we are serious about the learners’ needs, then would it be imperative in assisting these learners in understanding their needs and the tools available to suit such needs? This could also be achieved by exposing them to a learning ecology where they could easily immerse, enjoy and share their learning with others.
How could this be done? Involvement and engagement in social networking /Web 2,0 tools - FB, Youtube, Myspace, twitter, delicious, slideshare, Flickr, social tagging, reading and “listening to” blogs/video blogs, responding to blogs, writing blogs, etc. may be a good start. Otherwise, just try a few social network tools and see how it works.
Once educators and learners have accustomed to the on-line and virtual/digital environment, they will gain a deeper understanding of the learning ecology. Learning would be part of the day to day “personal business”, where formal education and informal learning are integrated.
At this later stage, educators would be more serious about real transformational learning. That relates back to the effective use of metacognitive skills and sensemaking as mentioned in my other posts. The 6 hats – which include information, system thinking, organising, critical thinking, creative thinking, and parallel thinking may be useful for sensemaking and pattern recognition. Ultimately, this would be based on an ontological approach towards learning, where wayfinding, sensemaking and patterning are fully exploited.
I like your ideas about everything being open, including the educators. This is a perfect model for adult learners who are passionate in learning. Do you think it’s worthwhile to re-define the role of the “teacher” or “educator”? Are there better name for it? Nancy calls herself an expert learner. I have once liked the title of “mentor” but it seems to be more appropriate for professional development.
I have posted the role of teacher/educator with A-Z
Would an open learning model (or open network learning) focusing on the learning itself work? Everyone (including the teacher and learner) plays an equal role sharing the teacher-student model, or the peer teaching model. I have once been in a mentoring program working as a mentor. And I think the reciprocity of mentor and mentee and peer mentoring model, when immersed in your model shown would give excellent results (and it has!)
I have still retained the role of the teacher, but I think such rigid role needs to diminish upon time when the learner has grown into an expert learner (or teacher). The connectivismeducationlearning may be the community network that fits into your suggested model.
I also learnt that you have facilitated or have been involved in other networks with such model. Like to learn the extent of success from your point of view.
Thanks again for sharing this excellent model.
The Colourless (transparent)Hat - This hat is looking at the nature and sensing of our spirit.
Thinking about nature, religious beliefs and spiritual coherence, growth and development- where it relates to supernatural thoughts that may only be revealed by the stimulation of a combination of our senses and emotions- sight, hearing, tastes, smell, breathing, touch that are associated with joy, love, hatred, sadness etc. This is stimulated by pictures, slides, patterns, movies and videos, sound, fragrance, delicious food and drinks, observing the nature, the ecology of the environment, creatures and animals, the sky, the oceans, the mountains and the plants etc . It is based on tacit knowledge of nature and its existence and is sensed within our “hearts” and “mind”. People who reflect, meditate, pray or worship often experience such thinking.
The PurpleHat – This hat is looking at the conscience – individual, digital, network and group identity, laws and ethics.
Thinking about human rights, copyright and copyleft (digital or e- laws and ethics), an altruistic self and the collaborative entity, weak and strong connections (or links), their relationships and their mutual connections and recognition. This is stimulated by communities’ successes or failures, digital identity success or crisis, and an understanding of the impact of virtual communities, games and reality on our life.
These 2 additional hats, when used in conjunction with the 6 hats would allow for transformational thinking at this digital age, especially in education and learning. I am not sure what and how Dr. de Bono would think about these. And I would surely be humble to learn from him if these hats could help in such transformation.
For me, the post has to resonate with my own experience in some way. It has to make a connection, either to my understanding and experience of the subject or in a social capacity. This initial connection makes the post meaningful and makes me read on.
Deciding whether a post is valuable or not is slightly different. I have to relate the post to my own context, experience and needs and determine whether the post will have an effect on any of these. As a tutor online I try to connect with my student. To do this I try to find out as much as I can about them so that I can connect with them on a personal level and post something that resonates with their experience and is meaningful. I think this initial relationship building can help successive posts to become more meaningful and hopefully valuable.
1. Whenever we read a post in a blog or microblog, we might be looking for information (white hat). We may ask questions on “What information is available from this blog?”, and “What information is missing?”, “What information is based on facts, beliefs or opinions etc.?” (white and black hats) etc.
2. Then when we found some relevance or resonance with our experience, we will continue to critically ask if the information presented is meaningful or not (black hat).
3. We then find out more information from our learner or blogger by retrieving and searching backgrounds of the learner or the blogger via the introduction to blog, previous blogs or URL links (white hat again).
4. We may further reflect on the experience ourselves and see how our experiences could echo with that of the learner or blogger, or if there are new experiences that could be acquired. This relates to the whole thinking, reflection process (blue hat)
5. We will then respond to questions or leave comments, suggest modifications, or provide advice (green hat). We will also formulate the comments and response in message that the learner or blogger could comprehend. We will also try to use creative thinking in the process. This could include using innovative responses (e.g. a video or graphic response or a referral to such media) (green hat).
6 And if the comment is received with “acknowledgement” by the learner/blogger, then it may turn up to be meaningful and valuable one (yellow hat) from their perspectives. These may be validated through their responses or feedback to the educator/reader.
7. Throughout these reading/reflection/response processes, we (the educator/blogger) may have thought about the intention and identity of the learner/blogger (purple hat) and check whether the post contains unique concepts that relate to the learner.
8. As an educator, one could further inspire the learner/blogger through the use of media (videos, pictures, slides, music or songs, lyrics, poems, story) that will transmit our emotions or remarks of an emotional nature – likes or dislikes, love or hatred in our response post or comments left on the learners’ post (red hat).
9. These responses will assist in connecting ourselves with the other bloggers /learners with the nature or our spirits (colourless or transparent hat).
The above metaphors of hats may not happen in a linear fashion, and there could be loops and shortcuts when the educator and learner have established further connections with each other. Further validation of this model via research (surveys, interviews, and discussions) is required.
Will raises an important question in his interesting People remember 10%, 20%… . What is the correct figures for how much people remember through their senses – reading, hearing, seeing, hearing and seeing, and doing. Will concludes with the following suggestions and comments:
How to Improve the Situation
It will seem obvious, but each and every one of us must take responsibility for the information we transmit to ensure its integrity. More importantly, we must be actively skeptical of the information we receive. We ought to check the facts, investigate the evidence, and evaluate the research. Finally, we must continue our personal search for knowledge—for it is only with knowledge that we can validly evaluate the claims that we encounter.
George Siemens asks “What can visuals do that text can’t?”, and Dave Gray just presented such a visual about text that answers the question. In the What can visuals do by X28
The verbal description of the communication process has to use words, like “pack” and “unpack” a thought, which keep suggesting the misconception that the content is invariably transported across the communication channel (which, in turn, suggests a false supremacy of content). The visual, by contrast, immediately shows how different and how much richer the ideas at both sides of the “pipe” are, and that the connection may be more important than the content.
Some sloppy research on the old “10%hear, 20%read, 80%do”
He further raises these questions:
Why I want to use images/visuals. To increase effectiveness of learners who take a course I teach? To improve my ability to communicate? What can visuals do that text can’t? And where is the research that supports that claim?
“I hear, and I forget;
I see, and I remember;
I do, and I understand”
from Confucious, the famous Chinese Philosopher and Thinker. It’s an educational philosophy often quoted in educational journals and books. To what extent is it still applicable at this digital age?
Images, visuals have all play different “roles” under different context, situations, and they seem to form not only a visual pattern, but also microscopic patterns which are not visible by human eyes. They could be seen under electronic microscope - or patterns within patterns, and within patterns. The big patterns are made up of small patterns. And that’s the challenge!
Let’s see below an enigma:
What is this pattern made up of? Did you see the pattern?
Besides, there are also hearing and sound patterns (the music, the songs), tactile patterns (the pains, the tinkling, the itch) and breathing patterns (the stresses, the relaxation, the sleep) etc. that may be associated with the showing of images and visuals, and the text in learning. Through the linking of visual patterns to other patterns such as sound, tactile and breathing, will it add to our understanding of why some people learn better with certain senses and not others? Also, will that explain why some people who are known as “visual learners” will find it easier to identify with visual aids. Though this is not backed up or explained fully by research findings, this could be an interesting area to explore. See my previous Comments on What Makes You a Blogger? on this. I am not sure if there has been any researches done on this. If not, is it worthwhile to do so?
When we are communicating with blogs, images and visuals add a different dimension in communicating the tacit knowledge. Such images and visuals often stay the test of time and space in their physical forms. They could, however, be perceived differently by different readers and bloggers. Same images and visuals presented could lead to hundreds or even thousands of interpretation, if it is left alone as a Flickr image or slide show without words or explanation. Such images may also be interpreted differently by the same reader at a later time, in a different space or angle. There is also the saying: “A picture worths more than thousand words”. So, what does this mean?
Would it reveal you with the philosophy of life through those images and visuals, in a different dimension, time and space?
See pictures below and I would like you to share with me what you see:
After a week, would you be interpreting these pictures the same way or differently?
If I were to talk about power in the network, how about this picture?
What do you think about the power of this “crab”? Does it provide you with a pattern or knowledge of power?
So, if we are to consider the notion that knowledge IS THE PATTERN (adapted from George and Stephen under Connectivism), does it mean that by studying, revealing and reflecting on the pattern (images, visual or others such as sound or hearing, tactile, breathing) OR texts, we could gain a deeper understanding of knowledge (both tacit and explicit knowledge) – the PATTERNS?
What could we conclude? Can visual help us in communicating better? Will we be able to remember “a message” or “knowledge or pattern” better? Do we learn better with visuals and images? You decide.
Below is my “revised version” of a story that I received from my beloved one. I share this with you by adapting it to the social network (instead of computers).
A Spanish Teacher was explaining to her class that, in Spanish,
unlike English, nouns are designated as either masculine or feminine.
‘House’ for instance, is feminine: ‘la casa.’
‘Pencil,’ however, is masculine: ‘el lapiz.’
So, a student asked, ‘What gender is ’social network’?
Instead of giving the answer, the teacher split the class into two groups, male and female, and asked them to decide for themselves whether ’social network’ should be a masculine or a feminine noun.
Each group was asked to give four reasons for its recommendation. The men’s group decided that social network should definitely be of the feminine gender, because:
1. No one but their creator understands the internal logic of the network;
2. The language network members use to communicate with other members is sometimes incomprehensible to everyone else;
3. Even the smallest mistakes or criticisms are stored in long term memory for possible later retrieval; and
4. As soon as you make a commitment to one of the networks, you find yourself spending half of your available time in checking on the updates.
(THIS GETS BETTER!)
The women’s group, however, concluded that social network should be Masculine, because:
1. In order to socialise with each other, you have to turn them on;
2. They have a lot of data and information but still no body can comprehend all by themselves;
3. They are supposed to help you solve problems, but sometimes they may BECOME the problem (especially when the network is choked with information overload); and
4. As soon as you commit to one, you realize that if you had waited a little longer, you could have gotten a better one to join.
Who won?
This is to be shared with all the smart women you know…and all the men that have a good sense of humor.
“Society gave power to the individual, but also had absolute power over including or excluding the individual. Collective power was bought at the cost of individual rights and certainties. One of the most troubling aspects of the wired world, with its assault on privacy and its technologies of manipulation, may recreate and amplify this aspect of the world of the ancients.”
He raises the following questions: What will become of the individual? Collectives are great for many things. But any view of society that does not start with the individual is disconcerting.
In response to his questions, I would like to reflect on the different ”forces”, especially the opposite voices amongst individuals within networks, and those between individual and network (or society) as Yin and Yang.
In Chinese philosophy, the concept of yin yang ([yin - simplified Chinese: 阴; traditional Chinese: 陰; pinyin: yīn] [yang - simplified Chinese: 阳; traditional Chinese: 陽; pinyin: yáng] um yang in Korean; often referred to in the west as yin and yang) is used to describe how seemingly disjunct or opposing forces are interconnected and interdependent in the natural world, giving rise to each other in turn. The concept lies at the heart of many branches of classical Chinese science and philosophy, as well as being a primary guideline of traditional Chinese medicine,[1] and a central principle of different forms of Chinese martial arts and exercise,…. Many natural dualities – e.g. dark and light, female and male, low and high – are cast in Chinese thought as yin yang.
The relationship between yin and yang is often described in terms of sunlight playing over a mountain and in the valley. Yin (literally the ’shady place’ or ‘north slope’) is the dark area occluded by the mountain’s bulk, while yang (literally the ’sunny place’ or ’south slope’) is the brightly lit portion. As the sun moves across the sky, yin and yang gradually trade places with each other, revealing what was obscured and obscuring what was revealed. Yin is usually characterized as slow, soft, insubstantial, diffuse, cold, wet, and tranquil. It is generally associated with the feminine, birth and generation, and with the night. Yang, by contrast, is characterized as hard, fast, solid, dry, focused, hot, and aggressive. It is associated with masculinity and daytime.[2]
Yin and yang are complementary opposites within a greater whole. Everything has both yin and yang aspects, which constantly interact, never existing in absolute stasis.
So Yin/Yang reflects the female/male or night/day. We need both sides to make up the world, to achieve the harmony, and the ultimate peace. And wouldn’t life be evolving like that? Even if it’s a coin, it has two sides (at least), but if you take a serious look, there is a third side (the rim- the ring which consists of multiple sides). This represents the multiple perspectives of individuals and collectives. And these attitudes and perspectives are all coded and embedded in the individuals, within the networks, and within the society. And that may be how cultures of a community or society are developed.
Does it mean that an individual and its network are mutually dependent on each other just like the yin/yang or the 2 sides of a coin? Without the Yin (female) balancing the Yang (male), what would this world look like?
How would this Yin and Yang affect the liberty of an individual in a community or network? Sometimes, an individuals’ voice might be weakened by the network (the Voice of the Crowd), especially when there are misfit between individuals’ opinions from that of the network. The power of the network could be imposed on the individuals. Such conflict, if unresolved, will lead to individuals’ dissatisfaction on the network or participants of the networks. When there is an overpowering of the individuals such as basic rights from the society (or network), then the individuals would be resentful to its reign. History is the best teaching for us. How did revolutions arise? Why? How did people respond to the imposition of undemocratic rules and regulations?
So, it’s a natural phenomena – where an individual has to comply with the rules and regulations (the laws and legislations) set by society, which forms part of the basis of civilization. But without the individuals’ contribution to the network, how will a network or society grow? Some networks or society fail because of the domination of a few “strong voices” over the weak individuals, the power issue.
The Lord of the Ring – Return of the King exemplifies how the power of the dark force has turned the world upside down, with evils overruling the “Kingdom”, and where the Return of the King overturns the dark force and restore peace. This is also the case of Star Wars, where the two opposite forces (Yin and Yang) have their important “roles” to play in the world. Though these are fictitious stories, don’t they teach us very good lessons on the impact of power and forces over individuals in a society? And that there are always Yin and Yang evolving in our networks and society.
How would we interpret these in our networks? Which are the networks that could enable us to learn? Who decides on what to learn and how to learn in a network?
In reflection, I had shared learning with Catherine on Moodle Forum of CCK08 on various occasions. I think we had a fruitful conversation and discussion on the Network SARS example. I realised that SARS did represent one of the most life threatening virus network in recent decades. And she kept on reminding me on the danger of virus spreading. And I valued her comments and criticism.
In retrospect, without such a SARS virus attack, would we be aware of the need of community or network responses to any virus epidemic or pandemic? That was also a point that I would like to raise: any meme or virus could be spread without our awareness over the network. Sometimes, we may benefit from such a lesson, if we could learn from our mistakes. But at other times it may become a burden, and we might have lost control over the spread of virus. The result could be disastrous.
A balance between yin and yang is needed (just like the individual and the society/network). Individuals efforts are limited in solving systemic issues. One needs a collaborative network efforts to solve systemic or social problems. But we also need to nurture and empower the individuals to grow and develop in the network or society. That’s why education of individuals is important in any society. And we need to value both individuals’ and networks’ voices.
Do we need to balance the Yin and Yang in an network?
Jenny, That’s an excellent summary of some of the major reasons of blogging. As discussed, there are many others which could only be revealed via private chat. And I suspect that we could only reveal some “truths” even through formal research, based on “privacy”, and “cultural reasons”.
Here are some of my thoughts on Skype conversation (hope that it could echo with your conversation on whether blogging is distinctive):
I am delighted that we have opened up another way of connection – the Skype tele-conferencing (or over the phone). I greatly appreciate your wonderful sharing of views over Skype. As it is a synchronous two-way communication, I have gained a deeper understanding of your perspectives as well as my own thinking. This strengthens our connections significantly. I am wondering if such Skype conversation could be an alternative “private” blogging that people would like to consider in future connections. Instead of writing, we talk and listen, and actively exchange views. Is such action learning more effective?
We could agree on actions promptly, and ask questions to clarify our different views. At times, this could be a challenge for me, as I have to remind myself in focusing on certain topic ( based on a “professional approach”). You might have noted that I prefer an informal approach in the chat, as this is our first one. And I was both excited and eager to share nearly everything with you. Just can’t wait for that conversation to slip away. Such experience could hardly be gained from a blog.
So, I found this an interesting experience in that all the myths, assumptions and mysterious character and appearance of a person may be revealed gradually in such a tele-conference. Whereas in blogging, you could still keep it as a suspense, for months, or even years. Curiosity to know about a blogger may be another important motivation towards reading a blog too! By the time when you talk and meet with the blogger face to face, what will be your impression? Ah Ha! Guess my age! That’s how you look like! (This is added here on this blog, not left in Jenny’s comments)
Don’t you think so?
Again, what a great chat we have! Million thanks.
John
Hi Jenny and Lani,
Great to learn about your views here. I have just listened to the recordings, and would like to reflect on the details later in my post.
The suggestion of using legitimate peripheral participation rather than lurking(from a social networking point of view) appeals to me. I have once read that educators or bloggers would like to lurk (read and observe) first, when they join a course or network, or a community, and see if they would be interested in before becoming more active in the “participation”. As Jenny has mentioned, lurking is legitimate. I think it is also part of any social networking and e-learning “induction”.
I resonate with you (Jeny and Lani) on the discussion of intervention and facilitation. In that teaching seems to have assumed that the “teacher” is teaching the learners some knowledge and skills. In facilitation, the facilitator would encourage participants (or learners) to become “active teachers or mentors to each other” in the e-learning process (learning as sharing), peer e-mentoring as you may call it. Facilitation seems to be more effective in community of practice and social networking, or even in Elluminate sessions, whereas teaching may sound appropriate in lecturing and traditional face-to-face lessons, where the purpose is to “transfer knowledge from teacher to students”.
I will need to reflect more deeply on the notion of course versus networked learning before responding to assessment.
Thanks Jenny for your stimulating post and Lani for your insights into facilitation.
John
Only great minds can read this quickly
This is weird, but interesting! fi yuo cna raed tihs, yuo hvae a sgtrane mnid too
Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.
i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno’t mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is t aht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it
I have responded to George’s post on the network and individual’s liberty here: http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/the-network-and-individuals-liberty/
My observation is: It may be worthy to think about knowledge not just in terms of connections, but the Yin/Yang or connections/disconnections followed by re-connections of another kind. The CCK08 well demonstrates some of the Yin/Yang effect in terms of how knowledge is co-created, consumed, re-defined and re-created. If we are to classify people under the concept of Yin/Yang, we would always find the strong opposite voices revolving in the interactions. As everyone of us is made up of the Yin/Yang in our mind we would also be sharing our Yin/Yang (positive and negatives) perspectives with each others. Also, the Yin (off or disconnected) would also be balanced by Yang (on or connected) depending on the how, when, where, who and what you want to be connected to.
If you are connected to me, and we both share common interests, the Yang takes effect. However, if you don’t think this connection is worthy, then the Yin (disconnection) takes effect. So the notion of knowledge = connection could be subject to a strong human dimension and personal preference (this includes intrinsic motivation, likes and dislikes, shared interests and emotions out of interaction). Would this be one of the primary factors in determining whether people would comment on other’s blogs or not?
This could also be the case when we are learning through the artifacts. We like or dislike a book or an article based on whether we could resonate with the concepts, understand the underpinning logic, and verify the validity of points, and gain values behind the ideas or facts presented by the author or blogger. If the contents are based on opinions rather than “facts”, then we would check the source and reasons of those opinions before we make a judgment on its value.
Based on the Yin/Yang concept, disconnection over the net (Web or Social Networks) may not be a bad thing, and could even be a good thing in some cases. This applies to those people who prefer to maintain a healthy balance of their life, by actually learning through personal meditation, prayers or the few close or strong connections only. For some people, too many connections may cause distractions, physical or mental discomfort or pain. This is based on my observation and notion that some people dislikes the use of internet, virtual social networks as a source of knowledge, but would prefer to be connected to their selected real world, the real people, and the real artifacts instead. The few real strong personal networks that could add value to their life.
This concept is validated to some extent with some of my strong connections (friends, relatives).
Would human elements play an important role in the perception of knowledge?
So does knowledge also come through some disconnections and re-connections (of a different kind)?
Wide variation in strategies and actions between the universities
Sangra makes several important conclusions here:
• campus-based universities tend to leave the evolution of strategy for ICTs to individual faculties and departments; the virtual university had a unified strategy
• change needs to be managed: change management strategies include the development of a well disseminated and shared vision and strong and capable leadership.
• it is easier to manage changes in smaller universities (between 20,000-35,000)
• all the universities felt the need to establish a centralised, specialist support unit to facilitate the integration of ICTs for teaching and learning
Common problems
Despite the variation between different institutions due to their different contexts, a number of problems were common to them all:
• problems of organization: lack of clear communication of intentions regarding ICT strategies; lack of commitment to strategy at the executive committee level of the university resulting in too many changes in direction and organization and no commitment to sustaining a particular strategy; a consequent lack of adequate time for faculty to prepare and implement ICTs in their teaching
• problems related to funding: because of constant change in technology, infrastructure is often underfunded and technical staff underpaid, resulting in a high turnover of technical staff
• problems related to culture: a high resistance to change from the front-line staff, in particular faculty, due to low levels of knowledge about both technology and pedagogy and lack of reward for innovation and change in teaching.
I think these sort of problems are common not only amongst some Universities, but may be common in many educational institutions such as those in the Vocational Education and Training sectors. The rapid emergent changes in technologies and a paradigm shift from teaching to learning may not have been fully realised in higher and further education. The teaching pedagogy and a fixed curriculum are still thought to be the golden pillars of education. The question may be: What should be the teaching and learning pedagogy related to a technology mediated education? Who are the change agents? And how could we convince or influence those who are resistant to changes to embrace the changes, especially in the use of ICT in teaching and learning? What change management strategies would work? How could we adopt a transformational leadership? Would every educator need to take ownership of their learning and drive the change towards a learner-centred education and learning vision?
I think most questions educators would ask include: for all these changes, what is in it for me? What sort of support will I be given? What sort of staff development will I be offered?
If insufficient support is given, how could those educators implement ICT effectively? A few educators (early adopters and innovators) may be comfortable with the use of the latest technologies in their teaching and learning. However, would the majority of educators be still waiting to see the changes to happen? Or are they are still grappling to learn the Web 2.0 at work?
I agree with you that “Aren’t the end-users, such as faculty and administrative staff, the people who really know about technology and its usefulness for their work, rather than senior managers and decision-makers, who are far too removed from the front-line? Shouldn’t the front-line workers be making the decisions, and thus driving bottom-up, emerging strategies?”
So, I think it is imperative for the senior management and education leaders to consider the systematic strategic planning and implemenation in the integration of ICT within their institutions. And to develop their workforce to cater for the teaching and facilitation of 21st century skills for their learners.
Renewed thanks to Tony Bates for his inspiring post.
John
Hi Jenny,
Great that you have summarised what we (you, Matthias, Roy and I) are up to in the research project. If you think it is appropriate, would you mind posting your post onto our Ning Network at http://connectivismeducationlearning.ning.com as well?
I agree with your views that research may need to be conducted with a certain degree of “openness”. I think it is not just to ensure the validity of the research, but to ensure that any data collected from respondents are kept in confidence.
Researchers are also required to conduct themselves in a professional manner – (a) by preventing and minimising any risks that may be associated with the research process, in order to protect the confidentiality and interests of the stakeholders (researchers, respondents, and even the instructors), and (b) by behaving in an ethical manner throughout the process.
Like you, I am still pondering on how “open” it should be when it comes to learning and research projects in professional communities or social networks.
As for some professions such as lawyers or doctors, a breach of professional conduct could lead to litigation, especially if it is relating to some complaints or serious misconduct that may be due to the negligence or ignorance of the professionals, or the copyright (or copyleft) issues arising out of the research practice.
Besides, in a global network and community ecology, I think it may be especially difficult to come up with some agreed protocols on learning and research, that relates to the professional standards.
So, I share your interests in raising those questions.
This is my response to Viplav’s Connectivist Metrics.
I like your approach to this Connectivist Metrics. I think this is important for us to consider within our CCK08 Ning Community. As I stated upfront when we established the Community: the Community would be formed based on the individual needs of the members, and would be run for the Community and by the Community. Each of our Members are welcomed to share and contribute there, so as to steer the Community towards some common vision and specific goals.
I also think your Metrics will pave the way in objectively evaluating a Network and Community of Practice.
This may stimulate us to reflect on the network/community dynamics and life-cycle characteristics. I also hope that this could help us in developing strategies in achieving a sustainable Community of Practice or Learning Network.
I just wonder if you would be interested in posting this on our Ning Community Network?
I also think that this may be an important area to research. What do you think?
Many thanks for your stimulating insights in your post.
John
de Laat (2006) highlights the current paucity of understanding: “More systematic research in the role and perceived role of the teacher in networked learning environments would be desirable” (p. 174). Until this research is conducted, metaphors, as suggested above, which approximate or suggest potential roles may serve well as interim guidelines.
Would you be interested in conducting research into the role of the teacher (or educator) in networked learning environments? How about conducting a research and discussion on this within our Community http://connectivismeducationlearning.ning.com ?
Two monks were walking in the early morning. They approached a river which had been swollen by the melting snows into a torrent. The torrent was sweeping right over a small wooden footbridge.
A frightened beautiful young woman stood by the new bank. Sighting the two monks, she pleaded tearfully with them to take her across.
Without saying a word, the first monk took her into his arms and held her high as he waded across the footbridge and set her down on the far bank.
The two monks continued their journey in silence until sunset, when their vows of silence permitted them to speak.
The second monk turned on his brother and asked angrily, “How could you have picked up that woman? You know that our vows prevent us from even thinking about women – let alone touching one. You have disgraced our whole order!”
“My brother”, replied the first monk, “I put that woman down early this morning. It is you who have been carrying her around all day!”
If the two monks were teachers, and the beautiful young woman was the learner, what would this story or metaphor tell you?
Would torrent and bridge mentioned in the story be -
Torrent – learning barriers?
Foot bridge – connections, technology?
Comments?
My philosophy of learning is like the digestive system of our human body.
I digest and assimilate the food (ideas, resources – books, articles, on the net, artifacts, knowledge and information) and absorb those nutrients (which become emergent knowledge) out of it into my body through the blood stream (through plan-do-check-act learning reflection cycle in my connections – nodes and networks).
I will ensure that I take a variety of foods (learning network at neural, conceptual, external – communities, social levels and information sources) to maintain a healthy body and mind.
I will egest any by-products of learning (those obsolete knowledge, SPAMS, distractions, overloading of knowledge and time wasters) to keep my body clear of toxins and wastes.
The ICT and Web 2.0, PLE etc. could act as catalysts (or enzymes) for the digestion.
I would also take extra physical, spiritual and mental exercises (external support, experts’ advice, courses, community or network participation and involvement, action research and learning projects) to ensure a proper balance of my health.
From a practical perspective then, is the popular “evolution” of instructional design from instructivism through constructivism to connectivism a furphy? All three pedagogies build on one another to provide a rounded theoretical toolset for the modern professional to exploit.
Therefore, I propose to replace the traditional left-to-right gradient with a new representation:
This diagram acknowledges the chronology of instructional design theory, with the earliest pedagogy occupying the centre circle, and the later pedagogies occupying the outer rings. Yet it does not suggest that one pedagogy supersedes the other; instead, they complement one another.
Ryan concludes that if someone asks me “Instructivism, constructivism or connectivism?”, I say “All three, where relevant”.
Let me share with you my metaphor of the understanding of an elephant by learners (people). Four persons were blind folded and were instructed to approach an elephant. They each approached an elephant’s particular parts of the body, sensed them and reported back what they thought an elephant looked like. (1) The one touching the feet thought an elephant was like a trunk of a tree, (2) the one touching the nose thought that an elephant was like a hose filled with fluid, (3) the one touching the tail thought that an elephant was like a string with hairs, and (4) the one touching the body thought that the elephant was like a huge body of mass that is embroidered with tough skin and sticky hairs. They all claimed that they know what an elephant looks like, and they were sure they were right.
If you were an educator, a facilitator or an instructor, how would you assist the four persons to arrive to a “logical and rational” conclusion?
Under instructivism, the instructor will explain to the four persons why and how they learn about the elephant, just as one is exposed to the different knowledge or information in the artifacts, books, articles, networks, etc. Mistakes are allowed, and needs to be corrected or intervened by the instructor (teacher, or mentor, or professor). Under instructivist approach, the key may be teaching JIT (Just in time – using the right method (lesson plans), right course, right time, right cost (cost effectiveness with minimum time – efficiency is important), right channels (communication, media), right environment, and instructional design with the right teacher is the critical factor to success. Mass education is preferred.
Under Constructivism, the four persons will communicate with each other, and share their understandings, feelings, and knowledge, experience, and then come up with new knowledge based on the re-construction of the knowledge each possesses. Under a constructivist approach, the teacher may become the facilitator, and the four persons are encouraged to interact, exchange views and experience and co-construct meaning and knowledge that is based on their needs (still with the teachers’ intervention) under a learning environment (LMS or e-learning in a course)
Under Connectivism, the four persons will connect their thoughts, their understanding at neural, conceptual and external, social level with information sources, formally or informally. They will also link with others who have experience with elephants – communities, networks and experts. Under a connectivist approach, the pipe (the connections) is more important than the content (as content may keep changing, and needs to be updated to ensure “correctness” or “validity”). The four persons (may act as peer teachers and learners) encourage each other to be involved in networks, internet surfing and navigating, and make use of their sensemaking (metacognition skills – thinking how to think) , patterning (knowledge recognition), and way finding (identifying their goals and mission through those networks and community involvement) and realising the emergent knowledge (ontology – learning to be) through an integration of informal learning with their formal education. This assumes that the four persons are motivated to learn the skills required to communicate, collaborate and cooperate over the net environment.
I fully agree with Mike’s views on “Engage Brain Before Opening Mouth“. This resonates with the motto:”Think thrice before one acts”.
Communicating on line means that one is already exposing his or her identity there. Every single move or behavior might be monitored under the “surveillance” of the different search engines or RSS. One could check using the Google search engines (Google Reader), RSS, Delicious, or the social networking tools – twitters, FB, MySpace, YouTubes etc. One could also be checked by his/her weak connections, strong connections – close friends or relatives. Any comments left on a blog, Ning, wiki, FB, YouTubes could stay there for “life”, and there is no way of “deleting” them permanently. Even the ones that I am writing to you could be traced easily with Google, as long as Google is available.
May I adapt from the lyrics of the song? Santa Claus is coming to town“You better watch out, you better not cry(or lie), you better watch out, I’m telling you why, internet surveillance is out there for you!” So, is the internet surveillance the Santa Claus? Are you both an educator and a Santa Claus?
Carmen mentions: “adults/educators/facilitators/etc. have a responsibility to fully understand and model social media use themselves in order to mentor well.”, so true.
Are we risking ourselves when posting on-line?
What are the implications of leaving messages in your connections and interactions on-line?
This is my response on our Community Network on Connectivismeducationlearning
Saroj, Frances and Roy,
Thanks for your comments.
Saroj, I understand your concern about the digestive system metaphor – which may relate only to constructivism or connectionism, and not connectivism. I will explain it below.
Frances, I resonate with your struggling with the biological metaphors, as it is only part of the learning solution.
Roy, It’s great to learn your enriched model of learning. I will reflect on it more fully and would like to discuss it further here.
The metaphor of learning that I raised refer specifically to human learning. We may have different types of knowledge and learning
From Wikipedia:
Knowledge acquisition involves complex cognitive processes: perception, learning, communication, association and reasoning.
Learning is acquiring new knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, preferences or understanding, and may involve synthesizing different types of information. The ability to learn is possessed by humans, animals and some machines.
Basing on such “definitions” of knowledge and learning, would it be important to relate knowledge and learning to our own biological system(s) – such as digestive system, neuroscience when it comes to Human Learning – and individual learning in particular?
The primacy of learning is on the connections. In the digestive system metaphor, the blood streams are the connections. Emergent knowledge (the nutrients) need to be transported through such blood streams (connections) and eventually be absorbed into the body through the various organs. And so when viewed as an ecological metaphor, it could explain how the various components (organs, hormones, enzymes, nerves etc.) interacted to process the food. As digestion is a complex process which is controlled by several factors…, so is human learning as a complex process within and amongst human (if viewed as an adaptive human system).
Such biological and ecological metaphor also takes into account the age, sex, genes, chemicals, hormones, organs, brain, the emotions, the senses, and its environment – the net, the food chains, the other humans, the nature etc. So, this metaphor could help us in understanding why we have difficulties in learning (indigestion due to taking too much food – information overload, stomach problems due to poor secretion of enzymes (not able to access technology), poor eating habits (dis-organised learning habits) and ageing of organs – old age etc.) and how we could improve our learning (by taking a variety of foods, having adequate exercises based on our age, physical fitness, and maintaining a healthy body and open mind etc.)
I think this could help to complement and supplement some of the principles in connectivism which might not have addressed knowledge and learning under different situations or contexts- such as the learning issues that relate to individual human learning – the age, time, situation and context upon that learning is based upon and the access and skills levels that may be associated with technology and tools.
So is connection a Sufficient and Necessary condition of Learning?
Is Knowledge a Sufficient and Necessary condition of Learning?
Based on my suggested metaphor on digestive system, connection is necessary but not sufficient for learning. We need to absorb the nutrients (emergent knowledge) through the blood stream into body (that is learning as a process) to complete that part of the digestion. Further chemical reactions inside the body and the brain (connections, interactions and metabolism etc.) is required to ensure a complete “digestion” (or a complete learning cycle).
Do we need to re-visit the statement of primacy of learning is on the connections? Do we need to include the interactions, the time and ageing factors of human (life cycle concept – growth, development, maturity, decay etc) in such connections?
Based on the digestive system metaphor, connection and interaction is necessary but not sufficient for the building up of emergent knowledge. We need to consider other factors (like the enzymes, catalysts, hormones – or the technology and tools, language, social and cultural cues and dimensions, psychological implications and emotions out of the interactions, and the embedded “beliefs and perceptions” etc.) to ensure such connections and interactions are meaningful and fruitful for the learning to occur – at least at a human level. In summary, connections, interactions and adaption with the inclusion of emergent knowledge would be necessary and sufficient condition for learning.
It may be necessary to re-visit the statement: Learning occurs in non-human appliances.
You could expand this metaphor to other biological systems in our human body, and surely the one relating to the brain falls under connectionism and neuroscience. However, until we have a complete understanding of the interaction and mapping of how the various biological sub-systems works, we are far from constructing a “learning theory” that explains how each of us learn.
Conventional approaches for fostering research productivity, such as recruitment and incentives, do relatively little to develop latent capacities in researchers. Six promising unorthodox approaches are the promotion of regular writing, tools for creativity, good luck, happiness, good health and crowd wisdom. These options challenge conventional ideas about research management.
Martin concludes:
Finally, it is worth noting the side-effects of different approaches to research productivity. Selecting for talent and providing incentives fit into a competitive mindset, with the negative consequences of stimulating envy and discouraging those who lose out (Kohn 1986). In contrast, regular writing, techniques for creativity and using crowd wisdom are more likely to encourage a sense that everyone can be a valuable contributor. Good luck, happiness and good health are worthy goals in themselves.
I am sure that our research team is having regular writing and good luck. For me, happiness and good health is of great importance to keep me moving on with the research. I surely benefit much from the crowd wisdom of our research team.
Great that we have come to some common themes on learning.
I think it’s imperative to distinguish human learning from the learning “that may reside with non-human appliances”.
An example is when you go to ATM to get money. The ATM has “learnt” how to issue the correct amount of money you have keyed in and issue you with the money with receipt. So the ATM processes your order based on an algorithm and a process run by the machine and computer, and that is taught by human. Such processing of money for you is similar to concepts adopted by artificial intelligence. Now, what happens if someone put fake money into the ATM. So you will also receive those fake money when you use those ATM. For the ATM, it has “learnt” to give you the money you have requested, but it hasn’t learnt to check if the money stored was fake or not. So, if you receive the fake money, it isn’t the “fault of the ATM” and the ATM is 100% accurate in learning and “highly intelligent” in accordance to our human initial design.
Once you realise such problem of fake money, you may then re-design the ATM so that it could check for fake money. So, you would then teach the ATM to check the fake money (bank notes) before it issues any money. Through this process of learning by you and your re-design of the ATM, the ATM is learning through you as human how to ensure that only real money is issued to the customer. The ATM itself can only learn how to do the job through human intervention. By itself, it isn’t as smart as human. And sometimes, the ATM may fail to check whether the bank notes are fake or not if there are changes in the design of the bank notes or there could be mistakes made due to the malfunction of the “ultra-violet” detector (say due to failure of the detector) of the ATM. So, you may then rely back on human to check if the money is fake or not.
The above metaphor is again trying to illustrate how smart human are as compared to machine. Similarly, I don’t think there has been any machine that is built which could similate our digestive system so far, as we could cleanse any toxins through our body organs and egest waste which are useless for us. I would like to learn if such a machine exists in this world which could do all these!
This ATM example illustrates that:
1. Human learns through a biological and a neuro process with the brain (just like the digestion metaphor), and it is different from machine learning in that the machine can ONLY learn when the human teaches it (even if it’s artificial intelligence). You may claim that a machine can do some “learning” by itself, but as the above example illustrates, it must start from human. And a machine may fail to learn if the human doesn’t teach it to learn properly – fake money will be issued to customers without notice or warning, though the ATM is functioning 100% effectively and efficiently.
2. In human learning, there are some common learning principles with non-human learning (animals or even appliances). These include the observable – the Stimulus-response classical conditioning by Pavlov. Classical conditioning is the study of learning which involves reflex responses, in which a neutral stimulus comes to elicit an existing reflex response. Please note that Pavlov’s work on the physiology of digestion, begun in 1879, earned him the Nobel Prize in 1905. He first became aware of reflexes by reading Sechenov’s work while still at seminary, but his own research on what became known as classical conditioning did not begin until about 1902. At this time, while still studying in digestion in dogs, he noticed what he called ‘psychic salivation’ – a dog would salivate before it was actually given food. Since Pavlov believed that digestion involved series of reflexes, he set out to determine what controlled this anticipatory response. Ultimately, his work on conditioning overshadowed the research which had earned him the Nobel Prize.
3. I try to distinguish the human from non-human learning to avoid the confusion arising out of the studying of the non-human appliances, ants, spiders, pests in their life cycle, its ecology from human, especially when we are referring specifically to learning over the digital ecology, the net, virtual networks, and communities. There may be a lot of learning embedded in such social and ecological studies, and so I will leave it to the Biologists, Sociologists and Social Scientists or YOU to investigate. Sometimes, there might be a similar pathway in adopting the “behavioural” approach by observing the behavior of those creatures and generalising them on human. Would this be what Pavlov had tried to do? However, I do think we have overlooked his work on the physiology of digestion. I have now used digestion as a metaphor on learning. I must admit that I don’t know all his work on signal conditioning (and have forgotten what I have read years ago) until you asked me now. Please see Approaches to Psychology by William E. Glassman 2000 (that I bought more than 8 years ago).
Ulop and Roy, I am interested in learning how these could be further explored. I think it could lead to a great concept map which deploy all the learning components as cited by Roy and your critical analysis of learning. Let’s continue…
ATM – denotes Computers – hardware/software, etc any internet, ICT, Learning Management Systems (LMS), Search Engines, Web 2.0 tools – blogs, social networking tools: Youtube, Myspace, wiki, Ning, Delicious, Twitter & Tweeter, FB, and many others emergent technologies or tools like Cloud computing, Mobiles, (non-human appliances).
Money – denotes the resources resided on the internet or social networks (or even our own networks (brain?, conceptual networks?) if there are connections and interactions of these networks)- information, links, articles, extracts, aggregates of “knowledge” or any artifacts – on-line or hard copy of books, e-portfolios etc. So fake money could include fake information, incorrect information or spam.
However, you could also use abstract concept of these like virtual ATM, virtual money (such as internet banking) to represent the concepts behind learning – the immersive virtual learning ecology and SL with Linden as the Money etc.. This could be linked to all the learning concepts as introduced by Stephen Downes – where learning is ontology, non-propositional, emergent, and a continuous process that DOES NOT MEAN the acquistion of knowledge BUT merely as a networking process….which to me would be another way of looking into learning, from a more CONNECTIVIST and philosophical point of view.
Would this be a “connectivist” approach towards connectivism where all different approaches (all the metaphors suggested as per the posts, including Roy, Ulop, Frances (ANT), and many others from Instructivist, Cognitivist, Constructivist, Connectionist approaches and those of Stephen and Georges’ Connectivism principles are connected and interacted to reveal an emergent pattern of knowledge and learning? I don’t know!
Though there may be a lot of uncommon or “seemingly conflicting” views amongst them, I could see a lot of common grounds connecting them together, just like the metaphor of the digestion system in our human body.
This is my reflection on learning based on connectivism – learning through networked learning. I have written this post a week ago, but would like to reflect more before my posting here.
If we are to base upon each of our current “rational and logical” and “patterning of knowledge” thinking pattern in the initial discussion (the left brain critical thinking, metacognitive skills, and right brain sensemaking of pattern recognition and way finding), then you (as a reader) and I are likely basing on the cognitive processes of learning. Our behavior and how we learn is not only a function of the environment, but also involves mental events, mental representations (mind maps), our beliefs, expectations, emotions and intentions.
So are we employing a mixture of behaviour, cognitions? This would be starting from me or from you, responding by you or me, then bounce back to you..and so on etc., construction and co-construction (under constructivism in this conversation), exchange of ideas or interaction with you, resulting in the co-construction of “knowledge patterns” or ontological sensemaking (critical thinking and pattern recognition together) all summed up with the connectivist synergy – wayfinding, sensemaking and patterning with Complexity and Chaos Theoretical principles all embedded. You could call such “process” of pattern recognition and sensemaking the basis of emergence theory.
I think the adoption of a connectivist approach could exhibit some of those behaviours of “I think this is right, and you think this is right, or no this is not, let me share with you what’s right, and then let’s be connected and let’s interact, discuss and explore” under behaviorism – cognitivism – constructivism and connectivism. I think most of connectivism (so far) carries a lot of educational philosophical concepts in its package, and a heavy overtones of what we call philosophy in general (no one single answer, it depends on interpretation, and perceptions) – a complete opposite to behaviorist learning models which focused on associative (or classical) and instrumental learning (or operant) learning (or the traditional teaching on a didactic /uni-directional/expert teaching approach).
Effective communication and strong relationships are keys to a healthy learning ecology:
Communication transforms a collection of individuals into a strong, mutually supportive team. Communication builds the important ties that bind people together-inside the organisation as well as outside (Webber 1993, p7)
A key process to facilitate communication and to build relationships is the art of conversation. Conversations involve the exchange of ideas, view and information between two or more people in a way that is non-confronting, egalitarian and open (Stewart,2001). They are a vehicle for generating, sharing and processing knowledge. Conversation is therefore a core business activity for knowledge work:
Through conversation, knowledge workers create the relationships that define the organisation. Conversations – not rank, title, or trappings of power – determine who is literally and figuratively ‘in the loop’ and who is not (Webber 1993, p7).
Conversations are integral to daily organisational activity and a source of rich learning.
In some respects, these align well with the right brain ” thinking and learning”, the emotional and social intelligence that are encouraged in the global networks of communication, cooperation and collaboration. These are critical intelligence required for development amongst people, and especially the leaders, through networking, community of practice and team working over the net and organisation. Tacit knowledge and emergent learning may be the emergent outcome of the conversation and interaction. In other respects, these align well with the left brain “thinking and learning” where scientific analysis and logical thinking is the basis of explicit knowledge construction and cognitions. This is also the basis of verification of knowledge using scientific and empirical methods throughout formal education and research (within the University courses in higher education in particular).
I think an empirical approach to connectivism will also be examined under such a microscope, since the experimental or survey approach is really testing the hypotheses set up, then collect data from a cohort of people, analyse them and generalise them as possible. We may still have to go through the interactive discussion and cognition processes with further participants (based on individual reflections and group sensemaking and patterning – like what we are doing in small group), then in larger groups…. then all these in continuous cycles in order to forsee the patterns. Again, this is only seeing the patterns of the patterns of the patterns, as I have explained in other areas – where learning is just one pattern of the whole education, and education a pattern in the whole development of people, society and civilisation. Is this a meta-theory of every learning?
Relating to the induction and deduction methods mentioned by Daniel in his post on computer science researchers, since I have written this post last week, I would like to post my views here.
So, is this also a cycle of induction and deduction followed by induction and deduction etc.? See my other posts on the cycle on Complexity and Chaos Theory. This start off with the I statements followed by the induction (a method of logical reasoning that obtains or discovers general laws from particular facts or examples)- the survey, and deduction (the process of reasoning from general principles to a particular case)-the literature review and action research, that it’s what I or we (or each of us in this group) think the world thinks, then the world (samples of the population) reflecting back what I or we think (through our survey research here) and this is then followed by induction plus deduction with a larger cohort or others – bloggers, academics, researchers etc, and continue on and on….Is this the Folksonomy approach combined with the Taxonomy of knowledge and learning under the adaptive digital learning ecology?
Are we also exhibiting those butterfly effect and behaviour in our blog postings? We are now all flapping our wings, and who knows when, where and how the tsunami or hurricanes will happen? Do you feel the turbulence? Will this take us to another virtual flight to meta-connectivism?
I think this is a fundamental question that most people would like to know the answer but rarely dare to ask.
What is intriguing is that individual networked learning could be in conflict with the organisational learning. This is especially the case at this time of financial crisis.
Ethics:
During the 2002-04 period, it seemed as if most days brought to light another case of corporate lying, misrepresentations and financial manipulations. What happened to managerial ethics?
This important aspect of managerial behaviour seems to have been forgotten or ignored as some managers put their self-interest ahead of others who might be affected by their decisions. Take, for example, the ‘Enron Three’ (former chairman Ken Lay, former CEO Jeff Skilling and former CFO Andy Fastow). All behaved as if the laws and accounting rules did not apply to them. They used greed, manipulation and collusion to deceive their board of directors, employees, shareholders and others about Enron’s worsening financial condition. Because of these managers’ unethical actions, thousands of Enron employees lost their jobs and the company stock set aside in their retirement savings became worthless.
Although Enron seemed to be the pivotal event in this corporate ethics crisis, executives at a number of other large companies were engaging in similar kinds of unethical acts. In Australia, there was the HIH collapse in 2001 which ultimately led to HIH directors Ray Williams and Rodney Adler being found guilty in 2005 of criminal charges in relation to the collapse. Ray Williams was found guilty of considerable abandonment of duty and was jailed for a minimum of two years and nine months. Rodney Adler was found guilty of making false or misleading statements which the sentencing judge describe as displaying an appalling lack of commercial morality. …
What would you have done had you been a manager in these organisations? How would you have reacted? One thing we know is that ethical issues are not simple or easy! Make one decision and someone will be affected; make another and someone else is likely to be affected. In today’s changing workplace, managers need an approach to deal with the complexities and uncertainties associated with the ethical dilemmas that arise.
Source: Robbins, S Management 4th edition 2006 (p57-58)
As an educator and learner, are we also facing similar ethical issues in the learning ecology? What are those ethical issues? As a blogger, what are the implications if the information that we are sharing with others were originated from an incorrect information source? Are we able to discern those sources with lying, misrepresentations and manipulation of information? Are we responsible for the provision of accurate, up-to-date information in our blogs? What learning ethics do we adopt in our communication and interaction with other bloggers or readers?
What happens if our learning practice is not aligning with our organisation’s mission and vision? Examples include when organisations have banned the use of social networking tools such as Facebook, YouTubes or My Space, whereas you as an educator is continuing to teach your learners using those tools. Is it a concern to you? Is it a concern to your organisation or institution?
How would you deal with the ethical issues in networked learning and organisation learning? If you have found some ethical issues that are in conflict with the organisation practice, how would you deal with them?
Enter a blog
The writing style reflects the persona used by the blogger.
New: what archetype is that blogger? and the secret agenda behind this research!
http://
The analysis indicates that the author of
http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com
is of the type:
INFJ – The Protectors
The thoughtfully creative and empathetic type. They are especially attuned to thinking up new and better ways of helping people get their needs met. They can be fiercely independent and can work tirelessly to achieve their goals. They often need a friendly reminder not to take themselves too seriously and enjoy the process as well as the achievement.
They like working in an environment where they can set goals and help people grow. Since they often are so good listeners and have strong integrity they often end up very appreciated leaders.
Is it me? You are the judge!
Thanks Jenny’s Researching in a Team, you mentioned yourself as a Thinker. Have I made the right guess?
This sort of games using technology are just amazing. I just wonder how they did it? Are there any one who knows how it works? Who could crack their secrets?
Let me guess: when I tried the MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicators) you need to pick the key words and then you could be identified with a particular style. I think this software is doing a similar job by checking the number of times those key words appearing on your blog posts and your own comments. This will then deduce the style based on the frequency of words that appear to match for a particular style. Another trick is to check the number of links included in the blog posts. The more links there are, the greater is the possibility of a Scientist (who used to link up all resources). The thinker are more inclined to raise questions, so by checking the number of questions (or qustions marks), one could identify those thinkers. As for the protectors, the search of words like imagination, goals, needs and the counting of number of comments left in one’s blog could be another way of identifying them.
In this post A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed. As a direct result, markets are getting smarter—and getting smarter faster than most companies.
What are the implications of such global conversation, especially on our personal learning and our organisation or institution learning?
During the 1950s and 1960s in Bulgaria, psychologist Georgi Lozanov conducted extensive research on the process by which people learn and permanently record information. He was intrigued by examples of “superlearning” from around the world.
As his research progressed, Lozanov become interested in the idea that each of us actually has two brains, a right and a left hemisphere, and they perform different functions.
The left hemisphere is the logical, linear, practical brain. It is responsible for reasoning, analysis and calculation. It is the mathematical, verbal, sequential, pragmatic and skeptical side of the brain. It is responsible for language and for processing facts and is concrete and straightforward. It is the “no-nonsense” or engineering side of the brain.
The right hemisphere of the brain is very different. It thinks in terms of pictures and stories. It is holistic, dealing with all aspects of an idea or situation simultaneously. The right hemisphere is intuitive, musical and creative. It is the artistic, abstract and imaginative side of the brain.
The left brain seems to be stimulated by intense, logical, linear presentation of information. The right brain seems to process information best in a state of relaxation. What Lozanov discovered was that it was when both brains were working in together harmoniously that rapid learning took place.
Lozanov discovered that if you could put a person into a deep state of relaxation, into alphas (the relaxed or meditative state), and then present new information while gentle classical music played in the background, the right and left brains would synchronize and learning would take place at a rapid rate.
The work of Lozanov demonstrated that rapid learning is possible – not only for facts and information, but also for new behaviors and new mental habits.
Have you tried the playing of music while learning new tasks?
I am wondering how one could leverage the use of multimedia in Web 2.0 tools to enhance and accelerate learning under Connectivism.
I could only upload this Questioning and Discussion after Stephen’s main presentation on Connectivist Learning and Personal Learning Environment – on 3 April 09 at University of Wollongong.
The main presentation video is available but could not be uploaded at the moment (1.1 GB)
Today we have launched our research survey and sent this message by email, to as many CCK08 course participants as we could find email addresses for.
Dear CCK08 Participant,
Did you prefer to interact in the Moodle forums or in the blogs during the CCK08 course? Or did you do both? Or neither?
We warmly invite you to respond to this survey, in which we investigate these choices.
Currently few online courses allow participants this type of choice. The CCK08 course offers us a unique opportunity to explore the reasons for these choices. We would be extremely grateful if you would help us to do this by completing the survey.
The survey is relevant and open to all CCK08 participants whatever your level of engagement with the course. All responses will be regarded as confidential and your anonymity will be preserved. Please click on the link below to access the survey.
In order to ensure that only CCK08 participants complete the survey, we have not included the link on this open site. If you have not received the link to the survey by email and would like to take part in the survey, please contact John, Jenny or Roy. We will provide the contact details by early next week.
The survey will remain open until 12.00 pm (GMT) on April 30th 2009.
With many thanks in anticipation of receiving your response.
Collaborative team research bears a number of similarities to the different stages of pregnancy, starting with the embyro, then the mum feeds the new life with nutrients, and taking care of the womb with great care. Then there comes the time when the baby inside starts to move, and the mum feels the joy and pain of her every move.
It takes time and patience to carry the baby. The mum normally would let the baby womb listens to the music, the Mozart effect. This allows the baby to listen. With the love and care of the mum, the womb is ready to join this wonderful new world.
Finally here comes the birth of a new life – a baby. Like the rainbow, it shines!
It comes with great pain, and I could understand how difficult it is to bear a baby. That may be the scarest but happiest moment in a mum’s life.
A mirror neuron is a neuron which fires both when an animal acts and when the animal observes the same action performed by another animal (especially by another animal of the same species).[1] Thus, the neuron “mirrors” the behavior of another animal, as though the observer were itself acting. These neurons have been directly observed in primates, and are believed to exist in humans and other species including birds. In humans, brain activity consistent with mirror neurons has been found in the premotor cortex and the inferior parietal cortex.
Some scientists consider mirror neurons one of the most important findings of neuroscience in the last decade. Among them is V.S. Ramachandran,[2] who believes they might be very important in imitation and language acquisition. However, despite the popularity of this field, to date no plausible neural or computational models have been put forward to describe how mirror neuron activity supports cognitive functions such as imitation.[3]
Diagram of the brain, showing the locations of the frontal and parietal lobes of the cerebrum, viewed from the left. The inferior frontal lobe is the lower part of the blue area, and the superior parietal lobe is the upper part of the yellow area.
It is not normally possible to study single neurons in the human brain, so scientists cannot be certain that humans have mirror neurons. However, the results of brain imaging experiments using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) have shown that the human inferior frontal cortex and superior parietal lobe is active when the person performs an action and also when the person sees another individual performing an action. It has been suggested that these brain regions contain mirror neurons, and they have been defined as the human mirror neuron system.[21]. However, a recent study shows that the signal measured by fMRI from human ‘mirror neuron regions’ is not necessarily generated by true mirror neurons (that is, individual neurons which respond only to the same action in self and other) [22]. For this reason, research in humans focuses on the “mirror neuron system” rather than “mirror neurons”.
Mirror neurons have been said to have the potential to provide a mechanism for action understanding, imitation learning, and the simulation of other people’s behaviour.[46]. This hypothesis is supported by some cytoarchitectonic homologies between monkey premotor area F5 and human Broca’s area [47]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_neurons
I found this Suggestopedia interesting in language learning.
Suggestopedia is one of the teaching methods developed by Bulgarian psychotherapist Georgi Lozanov based on the study of Suggestology. The method has been used in different fields of studies but mostly in the field of foreign language learning. Lozanov claimed that by using this method one can teach languages approximately three to five times as quickly as conventional methods.
The theory applied positive suggestion in teaching when it was developed in the 1970s. However, as improved, it has focused more on “desuggestive learning” and now is often called “desuggestopedia.” [1] Suggestopedia is the latest of the six major foreign-language teaching methods known to language teaching experts (the oldest being the grammar translation method.) The name of Suggestopedia is from the words “suggestion” and “pedagogy.”
Is being connected via the internet more difficult for introverts? Does being connected via the internet mean being uncomfortably over-exposed? Can only extraverts take full advantage of the affordances of technology for being internationally connected?
I would first examine the questions based on Jung’s psychological types.
Mode of relation to the world
E EXTROVERT TYPE Oriented toward external world of other people and things
I INTROVERT TYPE Oriented toward inner world of ideas and feelings
Mode of decision making
J JUDGING TYPE Emphasis on order through reaching decision and resolving issues
P PERCEIVING TYPE Emphasis on gathering information and obtaining as much data as possible
Mode of perceiving
S SENSING TYPE Emphasis on sense perception, on facts, details, and concrete events
N INTUITION TYPE Emphasis on possibilities, imagination, meaning, and seeing things as a whole
Mode of judging
T THINKING TYPE Emphasis on analysis, using logic and rationality
F FEELING TYPE Emphasis on human values, establishing personal friendships, decisions made mainly on beliefs and likes
The use of a connectivist learning approach emphasises the importance of learning as network formations, and that learning refers to the capacity in navigating and traversing over the network, and the emergence of knowledge is based on patterning identification, knowledge construction and re-construction, sensemaking and wayfinding. “Knowledge is to be organised in a certain way. Knowing is like ‘recognizing’, i.e. pattern matching “(Stephen Downes, 3 April 09, Connectivist Learning and Personal Learning Environment)
I would interpret that people who exhibit the following types may be able to take more advantage of such networked learning:
Extrovert, Perceiving, Intuition, and Feeling Types
On the other hand, people who exhibit the following types may be more reflective in their learning process, and they could benefit more from the networked learning substantially:
Introvert, Judging, Sensing, and Thinking Types
I would avoid the stereotyping that extraversion as social and interpersonal ease, and introversion as shyness and social awkwardness, which is unfounded, and could be fundamentally flawed.
An educator/scholar could be an introvert in his/her private life, but an extrovert when attending a party or social function, or when working in collaboration with others over virtual networks or communities.
An educator/scholar could be an extrovert in all aspects of life, but might prefer to live in an introvert manner when he or she is alone.
There are educators who exhibit all traits of introverts, due partly to their University education and their own personality. However, in order to broaden their knowledge and update their skills, most educators would be motivated to immerse into networks for networked learning and thus exhibit the traits of extroverts.
So, it would be difficult to classify people (educators) based on their traits or extrovert/introvert styles only, as one would exhibit those traits or styles depending on the context or circumstances, and profession.
Hence, one could be both introverted and extroverted depending on the circumstances or context.
The adoption of a connectivist approach in learning would be leveraging the benefits of those technology affordance with our intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, our preferred style of learning and the learning affordance (open education courseware, open sources software, and the concept of everyone becomes an “educator” and a “learner” ) and the learning ecology.
See my other post on Learning Metaphor for the connectivist approach to learning:
Under Connectivism, the four persons will connect their thoughts, their understanding at neural, conceptual and external, social level with information sources, formally or informally. They will also link with others who have experience with elephants – communities, networks and experts. Under a connectivist approach, the pipe (the connections) is more important than the content (as content may keep changing, and needs to be updated to ensure “correctness” or “validity”). The four persons (may act as peer teachers and learners) encourage each other to be involved in networks, internet surfing and navigating, and make use of their sensemaking (metacognition skills – thinking how to think) , patterning (knowledge recognition), and way finding (identifying their goals and mission through those networks and community involvement) and realising the emergent knowledge (ontology – learning to be) through an integration of informal learning with their formal education. This assumes that the four persons are motivated to learn the skills required to communicate, collaborate and cooperate over the net environment.
Here are my responses to Jenny’s questions:
Is being connected via the internet more difficult for introverts? May be, initially, but it depends on the degree of introversion of the learners too. There have been numerous case studies revealing this situation. Let me quote a special case:
In this http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/nswinnovationwiki/054E -learning for the Aspergers Community, communication skills is the main area of difficulty for people with ASD in forming relationships and gaining employment. Overcoming the isolation of autism is seen as the primary need for ASD sufferers. As people with ASD (mostly introverts) are generally not comfortable in groups of people, presenting the learning and skills practice online is aimed at ensuring them their privacy and reduced stress levels. Many people with ASD socialise and learn about the world and how to be involved in it through the Internet.
I think that there is no simple answer to this question, as some introverts find it easier to learn via the internet (especially with the Second Life group learners, once people have mastered the basics).
Does being connected via the internet mean being uncomfortably over-exposed?Yes, it could be the case, especially for introverts, if they are using their real identity, instead of avatars. No, if people like to socialise and would like to be identified. Sometimes a “mini-celebrity” could be achieved with over-exposure.
Can only extraverts take full advantage of the affordances of technology for being internationally connected? I think it depends on the situation. Both extroverts and introverts could take full advantage of the affordances of technology, as I have cited in the examples above.
Newton was a typical introverted scholar.Would it be possible to remain as an introvert and still be able to keep abreast of knowledge and become a scholar - like Newton? How?
Will “introverts” be converted into “extroverts” as a result of networked learning?
Will “introverts” likely behave like “extroverts” in networked learning?
“The crucial concept of decision also explains how a domain expert may be worse off: If he decides to apply past knowledge that is no longer appropriate due to novel structures.”
I resonate with x28’s view and think it is not easy to be a domain expert and be creative all the time within that domain without resort to help from experts from other domains. Isn’t it why Folksonomy is getting its prominence, where the domain experts could learn and share experiences with those experts of other domains.
Under a networked learning environment, it is also a challenge for introverted experts to express their creative thoughts in a closed community setting. This is similar to the situation when experts are restricted in learning under a bureaucratic setting in business organisations. It may be especially difficult for experts to be creative in a group when they are constrained to learn or research in a “closed group” environment, when both autonomy and creativity of individuals could be stifled. This is also a common phenomena when experts such as autonomous scientists and scholars are bound by rigid administrative system rules or have to work under an autocratic team setting.
If Einstein had trained as an artist, would he have been as creative a painter as Van Gogh? How about if Van Gogh had trained as a physicist—would he have been as creative as Einstein? One feels, in answering questions such as these, that the answer is probably “no.” But why? Certainly there are people who are multitalented. William Blake achieved great renown as both a writer and a painter. Leonardo da Vinci showed great talent in painting and invention. Richard Feynman is known primarily as a physicist, but his popular books achieved great renown. Is creativity the same or different across different domains, and why?
Albert Einstein was one of the greatest scientist whose creativity and imagination set up the perfect model for other scientists or scholars to follow. Einstein was multi-talented too. Issac Newton was another greatest scientist and mathematician who preferred autonomy over team working. He was also one of the greatest creative thinkers in history. I would argue that there is no boundary in creativity amongst these big thinkers, as they had gone beyond their own domains in their development of theories.
Is creativity measured in the same way from a scientific and artistic point of view? Can creativity be nurtured in one domain under the auspices of another domain?
If we put a creative expert artist under the auspices of a scientist, the outcome is that the artist’s creativity would then be measured by the scientist’s performance measure. On the other hand, if we are to measure the creative performance of a scientist based on the artist scale, it is likely that the scientist might barely be able to meet the minimum “competency standards” or performance measure of the artists in terms of creativity. The issue is that scientists have been educated to see the world based on their critical thinking skills, not primarily on their creative thinking skills. The artists have been educated to be creative, to go beyond the reality towards imagination.
If we are to reinforce the importance of creativity amongst expert scientists or educators, do we also need to ensure that education be based on the development of both critical (or metacognition skills) and creative thinking skills? See my post on the transformational thinking on how those skills could be further developed with networked learning.
So the climate of learning (and working) environment might have a significant impact on an expert’s ability to be creative in learning or at work too.
I would think that the learning ecology (with Web2.0 and the learning networks) could be an potential incubator for nurturing creative experts that could transcend beyond ones domain.
Are independent (or autonomous) experts encouraged to be creative in social networks?
Would connectivism shed light in releasing the potential creativity amongst domain experts, especially with Web 2.0 and the technology affordance?
Thanks x28 for his stimulating Experts vs Creativity and valuable insights into creativity.
Just type in your network (blog/ning etc.) URL and it will show you your network graph. This could be a way to measure your network performance. Would you like to have a try with Stephen Downes’ OL Daily http://downes.ca ?
Creativity is now high on the agenda in education, especially at this difficult time of our financial crisis.
Why?
Watch and enjoy the following videos.
As mentioned by Tom Peters, our current education systems are based on grades. What do they mean to us, our potential employers and society?
Also mentioned by Ken Robinson, we need to encourage creativity in education.
Are there any novel solutions in ensuring that creativity is nurtured in our education system – in particular the higher education ?
What are the roles of educators in creative education?
What should educational institutions do to respond to those needs of creative education?
With Web 2.0, technology affordance and education affordance (open education), do you think we could transform our society into more creative communities?
Will Personal Learning Environment and Edupunk (Do-it-yourself DIY education – especially in Higher Education) be part of the solution?
Based on this Sociology and Complexity Science, it’s interesting to realise the development of Network Theories and their impact on society.
Connectivism is the integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories. Learning is a process that occurs within nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing. George Siemens, 2004.
Connectivism builds on the knowledge of various fields including Complexity Science and Emergence Theory.
Enjoy these videos on emergence.
In the case of a flock of birds, a school of fish, it seems that there is no direction, no one in-charge. Organization comes from bottom up. Is it also true for this informal complex learning environment and virtual complex learning ecology ? Are these behaviours also exhibited amongst human in social networks? Is a network of people behaving like a flock of birds, or a school of fish?
Behaviour of whole is more than the sum of the parts. To what extent is it true when it comes to networked learning?
How does it help in our understanding of learning under Connectivism?
I am interested in reading both Tony’s and Stephen’s views on knowledge.
How about?
The primacy of learning is connections (adapted from George)
Learning is about creation of knowledge via those network connections, where
EVERYONE BECOMES A CREATOR OF KNOWLEDGE,
AND LEARNING CREATES A SYMPHONY OF KNOWLEDGE
That’s what I have found from the application of connectivism and networked learning.
My concept of learning is this: if we are supporting the notion that learning allows for mistakes – even in our interpretation of each others views, then we could be innovative and creative in exploring about learning and learning theories, without worrying about criticisms, comments, control and judgment, which often leads to arguments and unnecessary ill-feelings between academics and non-academics.
The concept of academic knowledge versus practical knowledge lies also with the value one attached to his/her life experience. So, for an educator with a theorist’s perspective, academic knowledge is highly important. For an educator who has to facilitate a course with a group of learners, with the learners’ first in mind, a pedagogy that works with that group of learners is more important to the theory itself. In other words, a theory that doesn’t apply to that context will not be proved useful or successful. Another example is the use of andragogy versus heutagogy. It seems that heutagogy would offer a more practical solution when applied in informal social learning – especially with Web 2.0.
When everyone becomes a creator (such as a blogger, a writer, a poet, even an actor (in the early ages)), then learning is fun, and learner-centred, and that explains how learning occurs individually and socially (especially when people are given a free choice in how, when, what, where and who to learn with under our current ecology).
There are implications with such mode of learning – security issues, confusing knowledge sources and misinterpretation of knowledge, the injustice, the prejudice, loss of identity associated with such “applied knowledge creation process towards learning”, loss of control from the instructor’s perspective, loss of “students” by the institution, loss of a common education foundation (especially if people are educated at home or unregistered virtual school etc). So, the implications could be huge – on the individuals, the community and the whole education system. What will be the role of higher institutions? What will be the role of educators – professors, and administrators?
I resonate with Tony’s views that:
Most importantly, they widen the participation in the creation of academic knowledge, and help to speed up its dissemination, but this still depends on those participating following the values and principles of academic knowledge.
I think the knowledge creation process could define the learning process to some extent, whether we value the knowledge created could also be scrutinised under the lenses of the people, of the community and the academic circles. But would that be part of education in the 21st century for everyone? This would allow for people to learn through mistakes, and not blindly believe in the presence of pure academic knowledge or “in search of excellence” in knowledge, which is having a short life span, and would result in ephemeral academic knowledge. Rather, we could be educating ourselves through an emergence process, with the creation of emergence knowledge which keep us creative and innovative, so we could prepare ourselves and next generation in tackling the challenges and complex problems – like the financial crisis that we are facing.
I have discussed these further in my blog and http://connectivismeducationlearning.ning.com
Here we have creation of connections, networks, information, knowledge – learning, education, social, political, financial and economical, religious, business, political and government networks – under global complex adaptive networks and ecology.
We also have creators of connections, networks, information, knowledge – which include each of you.
We have creation and creators of communication and information technologies – Web 2.0: Blogs, Wikis, Nings, Twitters, Facebook, Delicious, RSS, Mobile technologies, LearningManagement Systems, e-learning, etc.
We have a creation of learning and instructional models, formal and informal learningsystems and models, formal and informal education system, corporate training systems, models and networks, and global multi-domains networks, all interwoven and interacting under a complex dynamic emergent environment or ecology.
What are we missing? Creativity? Metaphors? Communication? Interaction? Contribution? Collaboration? Cooperation? Networks? Communities? Communities of Practice? Access and equity in education? Human values? Humanity? Sustainability of our economy? Management? Power and control? Leadership?
Great to learn about how your class is run – using a collaborative research project as a basis. Very innovative and inspiring. Would like to learn how your group develops their learning throughout their project.
1. How has the group identified themselves in the research project?
2. Were they seeing or perceiving themselves as a closed group or network or community in the University course?
We would like to share our experience with your group if you like.
Our research team is working on a research project using a collaborative research approach too. We started off in Feb 2009 and has completed the first stage of the survey. You could find further details and members involved in my blog http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com or http://connectivismeducationlearning.ning.com
Our research pbwiki will be open to members for viewing soon (by early May).
Our research is based on a peer researchers methodology, and there is shared leadership and facilitation in the research – every one is a facilitator and researcher in the research team. This research team was formed after the Connectivism course CCK08 was held in last fall 2008.
“I agree completely. But let’s go back to what drives academics, and that is research rather than teaching. The fact that academics in Faculties of Education are rewarded for publishing in a journal that is not easily accessible to practising teachers says it all. Currently, the Ph.D. is a training in research, not teaching …… Virtually every occupation that requires people to use technology in their work requires training in the use of that technology – except for post-secondary teaching.”
I agree.
I don’t see much emphasis in the pure training in teaching to doctorate level, and even Doctor of Education is based on research in education. Research has long been hailed as the creation of knowledge, not the teaching I suppose. But I would think that nowadays, every teacher (professor) and learner are either creating the knowledge or co-creating or facilitating the creation of knowledge using Web 2.0 tools – via blogs, wikis, Nings etc. Such research and learning creation are happening in billions ways under an adaptive complex learning ecology.
The heuristics are complex, and to a great extent the learning is based on the learner centred principles, especially for adults. These form the basis of learning under a social environment – the social learning, where people interact not only with resources, but people and artifacts. These also form the basis of Education Networks, Social Networks and Communities of Practice, where learning is not confined to any single individual, but is embraced by ”networks”, ”groups” and “teams”, and in certain circumstances mediated by information and communication technology and education technology.
They are ephemeral. They are ubiquitous.
Learning and research is multi-faceted, and has become an emergence phenomena.
There are also different perspectives from educators, where we could see a “spectrum” of ideas ranging from the teacher-centred approach to the student-centred approach, with blended learning, technology mediated learning, on-line learning and distance learning all in bags of choices for educators and learners to mix and match, and mashup to their needs and expectations.
Culturally speaking, with the advent of Web 2.0, the “traditional classroom” with one speaker and many listeners is now an oddity, a throwback, a form that should represent 15 percent of undergraduate interaction with faculty, not 85 percent as it does now. With so many ways to create knowledge now very rapidly and collaboratively, we are freed from the necessity of a singular approach to teaching. It no longer makes sense. If you are a faculty member and you are still walking into the classroom with a lecture in mind and “the points to cover,” as I did for many years, you are living in the past, a past that is now obsolete. Granted, your job is easier and the students love it if you just talk, but do you feel right about what you are doing?
So, will education be virtual?
Are you teaching for it?
I think we have come to a convergence when education means learning, and it will be virtual.
Learning is the creation of knowledge and information, individually and over the networks. And education is a life-long and life-wide process where learning takes on different landscapes and technological platforms, and is morphing in an emergence manner throughout our life.
How far do you think we are approaching a Web 2.0 teaching and learning paradigm in our Higher Education? I wonder!
Biologists talk about adaptive landscapes. In these metaphorical places, species climb uphill towards optimal fitness. Going up is a struggle. Climbing takes energy. Optimal peaks can be hard to attain. …
Thanks to Stephen for his reference.
I am passionate with Mathematics – Differential equations, Complex Numbers, and Complex Analysis. This maxima minima and local inflexion is my favourite. Games Theory and OR are very exciting….
How could all these ideas, concepts and principles be connected, and applied in our life of learning?
I have written a paper on real and virtual life (contacts) where it could be represented by the real and imaginary part of a complex number which means the actual contacts and virtual contacts we have through the connections. Using the concepts as shown in the diagram, we could connect the complex number using different strategies – the shortest (distance) path, along the profile of the complex plane. How will it work? Would you like to explore?
As educators, we don’t want to focus on developing test takers and rote repeaters of information; we aim to develop individuals who can think for themselves, find new information, work with others toward a unified goal, and utilize all resources available to them in their endeavors.
For instruction to move front and center of the process, teachers should walk into (physically and virtually) any learning space as a collaborator in that environment, aware that learning must take place, and thinking about connection and networking rather than lecture and silence. Additionally, if instruction were really to become front and center of learning space design, students would be as responsible as the instructor or the school janitor for how the room is set up based on the work that is to take place rather than the work that was to take place yesterday, last week, or back on the 1950s. Teachers and students would not know exactly where the process would go but would be excited to be involved together in such a constructive endeavor. Classroom or learning space management (or control) becomes less of a focus than learning management and facilitation.
Free Design Concept
So what does the physical or virtual set up of learning space have to do with students feeling empowered and involved? The reality is that environments are important when it comes to influencing perceptions and expectations (Nancy Van Note Chism, Deborah J. Bickford, 2002).
Chism and Bickford cite Blackett and Stanfield (1994) as offering the following basic list to keep in mind when designing an instructional space: Plan for the full range of teaching modalities; plan for change and flexibility; and focus on the exchange of ideas and the acquisition of knowledge. The authors also cite Jilk (1998), who adds the following to the list of desirable qualities for a collaborative learning space:
Strong identification with the institution;
Integration within the wider community to take advantage of community-based resources;
Flexibility or adaptability;
Interaction support (creating a sense of smallness to foster work on common goals);
Access to technology; and
Support for research and service, as well as for teaching.
A collaborative learning space coupled with teachers being the collaborators may provide an alternative learning paradigm for learners to exercise more control over the learning process, with teacher being one node of the multi-nodes learning networks.
How does this sound under an institutional teaching and learning environment?
The above concepts have been applied in the CCK08 course that I have taken last fall 2008. In this teaching as transparent learning by George says
Last fall, during CCK08, the value of transparent learning became more apparent to me. Stephen and I structured the course to augment the role of networks for assisting learners in making sense of subject matter. We encouraged blogging, discussions in Moodle, language translations, cohorts in Second Life, and so on. As the course facilitators, we were active in sharing our ideas and views, but we were only two nodes in multi-node network.
The real value of the course was in fostering connections between learners and concepts. We haven’t follow up to see if the networks formed during the course continue to exist. I’m aware of several clusters of learners that are still involved in dialogue on Twitter, some who are conducting research on the course, and others who are active in commenting on the blogs of learners they met in the course. For each of these learners, CCK08 was important not only for the content discussed, but for the relationships and connections that were formed and continue to provide a source of inspiration.
He argues that if we make our learning transparent, we become teachers.
My learning experience in CCK08
In the CCK08 course, there were changing roles in the teachers and learners throughout the course. As the learner of the course, I often found a shift of learner’s role towards a teacher’s role when the course evolved. Active and transparent learning means that one has to create a learning space for yourself as a blogger and or forum poster and participate in different learning spaces – the blogs, the forum, the Elluminate and Ustream, and others like Wikis, Facebook or Second Life etc.
Besides, the search of new information and navigation via networks, via OLDaily, Delicious, Social Tagging, various blogs, institutions website, research articles and URLs were important in the development of metacognitive and sensemaking skills. Pattern recognition and wayfinding were fostered through connections, communication, interactions and discussion with facilitators, guest speakers and other co-learners. The collaboration with facilitators and co-learners on blogs and forum could greatly enhance ones’ learning experience in a massive open on-line course like CCK08.
Resonance is the amplification of sound through sympathetic vibrations.
To resonate means to correspond closely or harmoniously.
Resonance occurs when the vibrations of one object come into alignment with another.
Resonance evokes a feeling of shared emotion or belief.
I like her explanation on resonance.
May I resonate with a metaphor?
I like to use the magnet as a metaphor in team-working, and bloggers interactions: unlike poles attract, like poles repel.
We have even got animal magnetism. Enjoy.
In the blogosphere, unlike bloggers will try to learn what each has got in their posts. And like bloggers who are posting always the same themes won’t get too much attention.
If you are interested, see my post on A symphony on Connectivism and you may wonder why resonance could be a challenge, if each musician plays their own music, or without a “conductor”. Would that lead to a dissonance?
You may find this video on resonance of interests.
Would mirror neurons also play a part in this resonance phenomena too?
If people in a team always think in the same way, not much learning will occur. But if people in a team have different mindsets, they could share and make good use of the strengths of each other to solve any problems. The challenge is resonance doesn’t always happen in peace, it may happen after some strong interactions, or even a storm. How about having a reflection on our own team formation and development?
Would this apply equally to bloggers in a community, when every blogger thinks in the same way, not much advancement of learning would occur – or even a dissonance.
Bloggers are looking for new, exciting and challenging ideas and information from the blogs.
So if bloggers have diversified views, they could share and make good use of the synergy – mix and match the information, check whether they align with each others’ values, perspectives, habits and reality. Such Wisdom of the Crowd could create emergent knowledge that make sense to each others. Would that be the crunch of learning and research in a community of bloggers?
Would that be the magical bullet that could spark the resonance phenomena?
Would resonance relate to a blogger’s personality, likes and dislikes, experiences, social skills and relationships with other bloggers? Just wonder!
My experience with my learners and co-learners was that content would not create new or emergent meaningful values and knowledge by itself. We need to create valuable content through people’s interaction, discussion and collaboration.
It’s difficult to collaborate with others in a classroom environment, as John Connell has asserted. A lot of students have been brought up under a society which favours individual elitism. Individuals who excel academically are offered the scholarship or given a preference over others in the University or job placement. Even the top 4.0 scored students would be hailed as the highest achievers in colleges and universities. It is perfectly appropriate in developing elites in societies to fulfil the aspirations of our younger generation. We still need to develop scholars and “knowledge” workers who could adapt and work effectively in our society.
However, what do all these mean? I have posted a video presented by Tom Peters about creativity in this Creativity with Connectivism. He emphasised the importance of developing people with creativity, not just another elite who could put down what the teachers have taught back onto examination papers. It’s not the content that the learner could remember that counts, it’s what the learner could contribute to the business, the organisation, the community and society that would eventually count. And this means collaboration with people in ones networks, communities and organisations. These could be achieved starting with ones personal learning network PLN or environment.
Collaboration amongst learners needs to be nurtured, like growing of a plant. Under a networked learning ecology, collaboration could only happen if people builds up communication channels, networks, trusts and relationships with others. It is challenging, especially for the younger generation when each has their own goals and ways of life. People have their own aspirations, and will create their own PLN which catered for their needs and expectations, but not necessarily interacting with others. Besides, each of us have different values and perceptions, and that makes collaboration one of the most difficult tasks in reality. So, though learning platforms are great ideas, I would think it requires more than such platforms to make collaboration a reality.
This may require a total re-wiring of the way our society would value. We need communities and networks created with a learner-centred mindset. We need our educational institutions’ (Universities and Colleges) support towards those networks and communities. We need business, government and politicians’ support to networks which favour the growth and development of education, learning and social networks and communities.
These will encourage individuals to contribute to the networks and communities with an altruistic attitude. Without altruism, collaboration in networks simply won’t work.
Would we need to start with the education of individuals at an early stage of our life, where an egalitarian approach towards education and learning is emphasised? This would ensure our coming generation could appreciate the importance of collaboration in the communities, where digital literacy and social competencies are highly valued by the communities and business organisations. This would prepare our young ones ready to collaborate in their studies in universities and later on with their colleagues at work.
The recent open education movement and open educational resources are just the catalyst accelerating the changes and reforms in education. The blogging, facebook, twitter, wikis, works, and delicious are just some of the tools which could help in the creation and building of new communities of collaboration.
I enjoyed learning the example cited by George here – the building of airplanes which requires expert knowledge of different domains, where no particular experts could even master.
Learning would no longer be effective in an isolated ecology. Collaboration with others could greatly enhance one’s learning experience, and accelerate one’s development of metacognitive skills and sensemaking.
Learning successes rely greatly on how well and adaptable we are in connecting with accurate, up-to-date information sources, technologies and people.
Individual may also require the re-wiring of how one is connected with others, through existing or new connections, communication and collaboration with emergent technologies. This requires an effective personal learning network to foster the learning process.
Emergent learning could come through the effective use of Connections, Communication, Interaction, Collaboration, Cooperation, Creativity, and Community. Such learning are often mediated by ICT (Information and Communication Technology) under a Web 2.0 environment.
Diamonds
You are welcome to share them here.
caution!
![[[yes]]](http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/moodle/pix/s/yes.gif){kind=small}
as a why-why questioner (always ask why?)
Is it moving or stationary? 
It comes with great pain, and I could understand how difficult it is to bear a baby. That may be the scarest but happiest moment in a mum’s life.
George, great to learn about this taxonomy.
Your taxonomy prompted me to reflect upon Bloom’s Hypothesis:
1. A normal person can learn anything that teachers can teach
2. Under favourable learning conditions the effects of individual differences will approach vanishing point, while under unfavourable learning conditions the effects of individual differences will be greatly exaggerated
3. Individual learning needs vary greatly
4. Uncorrected learning errors are responsible for most learning difficulties
Under Bloom’s model, instead of trying to bend the learner to suit the method of teaching, Bloom’s approach sees the task of educators being to tailor the teaching process to suit the learning needs of the individual.
Since I learnt the above model in 1985, I witnessed great changes in the learning approaches, and that most of the hypothesis set out by Bloom needed modification if we are to consider a similar behavioural approach in teaching in this digital age.
For instance, hypothesis 1 doesn’t fit the on-line learner, as any normal person can learn anything even without the teachers. In hypothesis 2, Bloom contends that the most important factors influencing learning in the individual child are the interactions that occur between the child and its parents on the one hand and between the child and the teaching process on the other. Again, such hypothesis is no longer true in an on-line environment where the emphasis is no other just on the teaching process, and that the learner is not merely relying on the teaching process, rather the learner will consider his/her learning style in his learning(David Kobb’s learning style seems to be more useful in an on-line or connectivism approach).
Also an experiential approach is often preferred amongst adults in an on-line environment.
In your connectivism taxonomy – you have proposed a staged view of how learners encounter and explore learning in a networked/ecological manner (the taxonomy begins with the basic and moves to the more complex).
My comments are: As connectivism is operating in an open system model, would such a simple taxonomy approach be good enough? I am doubtful if learning could be viewed in a linear manner in a connective environment, and am unsure if one could describe a staged view of how learners and explore learning in a networked/ecological manner that reflects the reality?
Once we define such staged views of learners, we may have assumed that a learner is learning in distinct stages, and that we can measure competency in a discrete manner – i.e. there are units of competency, elements and performance criteria clearly articulated.
But if I reflect on the chaos and fuzzy dynamic environment any learner is facing nowadays, the reality is that competency of an on-line learner can no learner be based on those defined units of competency. It must include a fuzzy set of continuum variables which are attributes transcending beyond the semantics, or linguistics – this includes emotional elements (i.e. EQ – emotional control, self awareness, self confidence, motivation, social skills and interpersonal skills, social elements (social awareness, ethics, intellectual property awareness etc.) which are very difficult to define in terms of competency. Even if can define all these emotional, social elements, there would be difficulties in drawing a map between all these dynamic factors or competencies, which could all change due to other factors such as culture, equity and learner’s access to technology.
In this respect, it would be imperative to develop hypothesis that are robust enough to take all those factors into consideration.
1. So what are the hypothesis behind this connectivism taxonomy?
2. Will such hypothesis be fluid or static? I would be interested to know if a further change in some of the technologies or learning environment would change the hypothesis.
3. Is a taxonomy good enough reflection of the staged views of learner.
4. Is such a taxonomy able to generalise under different learning circumstances?
In conclusion,
I am uncertain if a rigid taxonomy would be appropriate in building up a model on connectivism.
My suggestion:
I think a dynamic n-dimensional (or mxn matrix) model of taxonomy would be more appropriate and reflective of the reality. An adaptation of a Quality Function Deployment approach may be useful (ie. the voice of the learners on the left columnn and and the enablers and process of learning on the row of a matrix): i.e. With a matrix of What versus How in the the learning hierarchy/taxonomy. The “what” aspects would include What the learner’s needs are in a hierachical form and the How’s aspects would include the teaching/learning process, the enablers such as the technologies (Web 2.0 etc.)the networks,and other important enablers of learning such as support, mentoring, etc.
3. This might also take the form of a network, though such network may be in the form of a mind map superimposed by the what and how aspects of learning.
I would be interested in conducting research in this area to further explore about the theory of connectivism. Please contact me if you think such an approach might be useful to you.
I could be contacted via:
suifaijohnmak@yahoo.com.au
http://suifaijohnmak.wordpress.com
Looking forward to learn your views.
Posted by Sui Fai John Mak | September 27, 2008 10:23 AM
Posted on September 27, 2008 10:23
As I have now completed the course, I have learned that there is a folksonomy developed versus taxonomy.
I also learned the Chaos and Complexity Theories applied in learning situations, and so a linear taxonomy approach may not provide the answer. But, I think this is an important area for research
I am still reflecting on my original suggestions to George Connectivism Taxonomy, but would like to explore such framework based on the survey (both qualitative and quantitative findings), and analysis.
I greatly appreciate George’s initiative in creating the model. And would like to learn from our colleagues in CCK08 on how George’s model could be further built upon, based on our experience in CCK08.
George: What do you think about this research?
For our colleagues in CCK08:
Are you interested in this further research?
If yes, what approach would be appropriate? A network approach? Individual research? Or a survey research?
Can we explore this based on the survey results of CCK08? How about the inclusion of hypothesis in the research questions of the end of course survey? Is it appropriate?