Edgar posted on Facebook ”Learning may reside in non-human appliances”, how can you explain this?”
Hi Steve, I have been thinking of this principle since 2008, and still think that it could be up to one’s interpretation. How would you define “reside”, “non-human appliances”? And what sort of learning are we referring to? If we argue that it is the learning stored in our blog posts, then a click retrieves the information that we have stored in our blog. How would we interpret that retrieval? Is learning a product in this principle? Or is it a process? I have also posted this in Google + and would post it here again.
Glad that you raised this. I have questioned and reflected on the meaning behind this too in my previous post. I think it relates to the learning based on non-human (i.e. machine learning, or computer learning – like chess playing, and artificial intelligence etc.). This may also relate to the Technology enhanced learning, where certain technologies are used for “acquisition, storage, and access of information” like the ATM that I have quoted. I am still wondering if that sort of learning – that MAY reside in non-human appliances is relating to that under Actor Network Theory (ANT), with learning “co-evolving” with the actors. I would like to see clarification of this learning – and how this differs from the learning proposed by Stephen, and how it relates to the distributed learning. How about your explanation/interpretation? John
I am thinking of responding to this based on researches conducted on CCK08, CCK11, & PLENK2010. We seem to have raised more questions than answers to the principles as suggested.
Hi Steve, good to learn your understanding about what reside means – as storing our understanding, organized thoughts, and blogs as storage devices. Reside – to have one’s home, to dwell permanently would likely be interpreted differently based on context – does it reside on forum discussion (virtual learning environment)? Does it (learning) reside on personal learning environment (PLE) (i.e. blogosphere, individual blogs & networked blogs, collectives) and or personal learning networks (PLN) (social networks) and or appliances (i.e. mobile devices – mobile phones, ipads, ipods, TV, computer softwares/hardwares) etc.? I reckon “we” need to be specific about what sort of learning (scope, context) we are referring to – such as socio-technological learning as mentioned in ANT, and how human/networked/social/individual/hybrid learning occurs. In this case, the why and what learning can be addressed by some of the principles of Connectivism, but then the how in Connectivism goes much deeper than that. There are propositions of how learning occurs based on George and Stephen’s Connectivism theoretical frameworks. What are the assumptions behind each frameworks? As I have suggested, we seem to have switched our understanding of learning from behavior to cognitive development (or behavioral/cognitive), to social (constructivist/cognitivist) based on COPs, networks and technological enhancement. This begs the question: How has our learning (at cognitive level) been changed as a result of social/technological changes? How would learning be conceptualized under such a changing networked social/technological framework? ACT and Activity Theory, together with COPs and Connectivist learning seems all could provide explanation of how the networks, individual and group learning co-evolve, but there is seemingly lots of assumptions and questions that need to be addressed, due to the complexity and emergence of learning in open complex learning space – in the webs, internet, networks, communities etc. There is simply no way of generalizing the principles involved in networked learning, as each sort of networks called for particular network pattern, development for its sustainability. Besides, the inherent power (that powers the organic networks) seems to play out based on cognition distribution (or distributed cognition), self organizing networks, and its structure would be constrained once it is confined under the WALLED GARDEN (a formal institutional/formal closed course framework). Will continue to explore with a blog post, and a critique on Connectivism and Networked Learning. @Edgar, artificial learning or machine learning, not human learning. So it is network learning? I reckon that is AI or machine learning could be argued as part of the networked learning, and such learning is ubiquitous, and hard to define in human terms, isn’t it?
Here is Stephen’s presentation on How to organise a MOOC? Still thinking about learning when relating to MOOC.