A response to Revamping a MOOC

Lisa has posted an important one on Revamping a MOOC http://lisahistory.wordpress.com/2008/11/29/course-recommendations-revamping-a-mooc/

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.

Advertisement

Connectivism – What are the undesirable by-products of connections?

I have noted numerous intrusion to my blog and emails (in particular) and computer (over the internet): 

1. spywares
2. pingbacks/spams with adult themes (advert. on porno, sex, dating, car insurance, etc.), and others such as construction jobs advert. …(at least 4 spams)
3. offer me with a huge sum of money (from a mysterious account) 
4. 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?

Am I too critical?

Are these also your concerns?