Mathematics of Life

 We solve problems and create solutions with maths together – we add our “understanding” by networking, we subtract our “weaknesses” by collaborative thinking, we multiply our “knowledge” by emergent learning, and we divide our “happiness” by sharing. That’s the + – x / of our life with maths. How about yours?  Does attitude count?

Creation and Creativity in Connectivism

Is creation and creativity an important vocabulary in learning, education, metaphors and Connectivism?

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?

PEOPLE? KNOWLEDGE? LEARNING? EDUCATION?

Towards a Theory of Connectivism – Learning Principles

This is my response to Ulop and Roy on our Community Network on Connectivism:

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…

Learning metaphor – understanding of an elephant based on Instructivism, Constructivism and Connectivism

This is my response to the stimulating and interesting post  Instructivism, Constructivism or Connectivism by Ryan Tracey.

Ryan writes:

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.

Comments?

Learning Metaphor – Our Digestive System

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.

I have also posted this onto our Community Network in http://connectivismeducationlearning.ning.com
Comments?