CCK08: Final Assignment: Connectivist Comix

Well, this assignment took far longer than you might imagine, which is why it is not as in-depth as it might have been. But I had a lot of fun working on it, and I think I am leaving CCK08 on a positive note. Thank you all for a wonderful course. I have learned even more than I can possibly realize, I’m sure…connectivist-comix4

CCK08: Concept Map

 

I enjoyed this one much more than the last one

CCK08: Assignment 3

Who are the real voices of resistance?

Ordinarily, we consider anti-establishment perspectives the voices of resistance. Who, however, are the voices that are resisting change most vehemently? They are largely the instititutions whose stakeholders desire that the mechanisms of accountability, order and control persist over time. The most powerful agent of social engineering is that of education.

I believe that there are systemically dysfunctional attributes in the education system, largely because those same dysfunctional attributes are core values that inform how we as individuals lead our lives. Speaking in general terms, we are molded at an early age in a world where desirable behaviours are praised, and undesirable behaviours are punished. Risk is discouraged, and making mistakes is frowned upon. We learn to feel good about ourselves on the basis of external valuations, and take this as the only de facto means by which self-satisfaction can to be realized. The tradition is reinforced in schools through coercion in the form of praise, stickers, useless dollar store trinkets, sweets, free time, field trips, movies and marks (Kohn, 1999).

Many, many students who are successful in school end up wishing to become teachers, often because their own teachers have been an inspiration to them. Some teachers were formerly bad apples in school, and somewhere along the line they had a teacher who allowed them to believe in themselves where they otherwise would not have. For the most part, however, I would speculate that most teachers understood how to play the educational game, and were justly rewarded in turn. In teacher education programs, the cycle of transmission teaching and the stranglehold of a marks-driven economy continue to perpetuate the cycle.  We must learn how to model a different kind of education for our children, which includes parents assuming greater responsibility and involvement in the education of their children, in collaboration withteachers.

Checks and balances that ensure a high level of accountability in institutions do not lend themselves to encouraging experimental teacher training programs. The risk of these programs is necessarily higher, since any such program would require tremendous unlearning on the part of students, and especially teachers! Self-discipline would replace extrinsic motivation; inquiry learning would replace required texts. Reading selections would no longer be dictated by the canon. Learning would occur by way of personal interests, in much the same way that individuals learn via—the Internet! Open courses and open software would be an option for educators and learners alike. Learners would seek out mentors in the areas within which their interests and passions lie, toward the end of engaging in specialized instruction, either individually or in small groups, rather than via introductory classes with hundreds of students and multiple choice exams to assess student “progress.”

Thankfully, mass consumption of new technologies in the marketplace is necessitating the introduction of these applications in educational settings. However, the fear from within educational institutions seems to be that if the means to adopt these technologies to an educational setting is not discovered, the relevance of education is placed in question.

In the abstract to Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing roles for Educators and Designers, Siemens (2008) asks:

How do we design learning when learners may adopt multiple paths and approaches to content and curriculum? How can we achieve centralized learning aims in decentralized environments? (3)

In response, I would like to ask, Why must we continue to design learning? and Why must centralized learning aims continue to be achieved in decentralized environments? To ask these two questions is not to preclude that there are not good answers to these questions. In all likelihood, however, the answers will vary depending on the specific context of the training in question.

To the extent that private enterprise encourages innovation in the workplace, it can be a driving force behind change and innovation. The bureaucratic quagmire of at least some educational institutions can be avoided by visionary venture capitalists who are able to support extensive research and development initiatives with a minimum of red tape and funding restrictions. Consider the following:

As an interesting motivation technique (usually called Innovation Time Off), all Google engineers are encouraged to spend 20% of their work time (one day per week) on projects that interest them. Some of Google’s newer services, such as Gmail, Google News, Orkut, and AdSense originated from these independent endeavors (Wikipedia, 2008).

Depth of learning arises from providing learners with the time and resources to engage with material extensively. That means abandoning forty or seventy minute periods, and creating the space for learners at an early age to daydream without interruption. It means giving kids the tools to learn about themselves through false starts and unexpected diversions. And it means trusting that we do not have all the answers.

References

“Google: Innovation time off” Wikipedia. Retrieved Nov. 16, 2008 at:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google

Kohn, A (1999). Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 

Siemens, G. (2008a). Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing Roles for Educators and Designers. University of Georgia IT Forum. PDF document. Available from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

CCK08: Assignment 2

“Conducting” Instructional Design

The origins of the word educate hearken back to the Latin root of the word, educare, meaning “to bring forward.” Instructional design (ID) is typically defined along the lines of “the systematic process of developing effective instructional materials.” Web-based technologies are transforming the educational landscape in both formal and informal learning environments. If the courses that instructional designers build are to remain relevant to learners’ needs, then the instructional designer must assume the role of conductor, allowing for the bringing forth of knowledge and learning in addition to the dissemination of information. However, at least in the K-12 system, the realization of this goal remains next to impossible due to the practical constraints placed on distance education teachers. Mandated curricula and the absence of time and support for teachers to gain expertise with new technologies limit the ability of teachers to explore alternatives.

Siemens (2008a) has identified a variety of “networked roles” (1) that educators may assume in the course of instruction: among these “metaphors of educators” are teacher as master artist (15); teacher as network administrator (16); teacher as concierge (16); and teacher as curator (17). In addition, Siemens also suggests that in accordance with these new roles, instructional designers are best described as educators of educators (18), providing technological and pedagogical support and suggestions to teachers.

In the initial stages of the ID process, teachers and subject matter experts do need to be educated about the guiding principles used to inform instructional design. In course development, one may also work with writers, editors, multimedia and graphics coordinators, graphic artists, programmers, production technicians, IT support staff and network administrators, among others. Bringing the talents of all of these individuals together is a way of making pedagogical music.

Instructional design can offer tremendous flexibility (Cain, 2008). There is no reason that ID cannot accommodate “clusters” of course attributes or components that might constitute learning ecologies, as described by Siemens in his Instructional Design and Connectivism presentation (Siemens, 2008b, Slide 16).

Traditionally, assessment has focussed uniquely on assessment of learning (summative assessment and evaluation). Policy-makers (WNCP, 2006) acknowledge the importance of also conducting assessment for learning (differentiating instruction) and assessment as learning—“the process of developing and supporting metacognition for students (13). The task remaining for instructional designers and educators is to identify the means to implement these strategies. Slowly, policy-makers are also introducing metacognition into curriculum frameworks. However, measuring metacognition in instruction will remain a challenge.

The adoption of new social software technologies for collaborative learning, alternative lesson plans, suggested supplementary resources, assessment rubrics, and alternative assessment strategies can all be provided as part of the instructional design process.

For online course delivery, Open Source LMS’s such as Drupal and Moodle are proving to be economically viable alternatives to using proprietary LMS’s such as Blackboard/WebCT. Moodle’s design, however, makes it most useful to teachers who are using a social constructivist approach to explore thematically-based material. Tinkerers may enjoy the flexibility of Drupal and Moodle, with their extensive selection of custom plug-ins; the reality, however, is that at least in the K-12 system, many DE teachers are challenged enough just maintaining the everyday management of student workflow and course delivery, given that DE schools typically offer continuous enrolment to students. In addition, “the class size and class composition limits defined by legislation explicitly exclude distributed learning from those provisions.” (BCTF, 2006, 7)

There is little in the way of ongoing professional in-service offered to these teachers, and they are often teaching high numbers of students in many different courses at once. One advantage of proprietary LMS’s is that customer support staff are readily available for DE teachers, technicians and administrators in the event that they run into difficulties.

Open content initiatives such as Curriki and WikiEducator may provide alternatives to proprietary courseware, but information mining is required to find the instructional nuggets that may be included in any given course. If a course has been developed for a curriculum other than that which is locally mandated, then areas of overlap and divergence must be identified. When a course has been specifically designed to align to a local curriculum, teachers needn’t be concerned with these issues.

So long as the “industrial mindset” (Alger, 2003) remains the driving model behind K-12 education, little will change for instructional designers working to support teachers in the field.

 References

Alger, Brian (October 14, 2003). “Re: Is Instructional Design Becoming a Commodity?” Posted comment. Stephen’s Web. Available from http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/page.cgi?post=6100.

British Columbia Teachers’ Federation (2006). BCTF Research Report: Distributed Learning in British Columbia Schools 2006-07. PDF document. Available online at: http://www.bctf.ca/publications.aspx?id=5630

Cain, Geoffrey (2008). “Instructional Design in a Connected World.” Blog post. Brainstorm in Progress. Available at http://cain.blogspot.com/2008/10/instructional-design-in-connected-world.html

Siemens, G. (2008a). Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing Roles for Educators and Designers. University of Georgia IT Forum. PDF document. Available from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Siemens, G. (2008b). Instructional Design and Connectivism. Articulate presentation. Available from http://elearnspace.org/media/InstructionalDesignConnectivism/player.html.

Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Education (2006). Rethinking Classroom Assessment with Purpose in Mind. PDF document. Available from http://wncp.ca/media/40539/rethink.pdf

 

 

CCK08: Concept Map

 

A first and incomplete attempt. This was an intriguing and frustrating exercise.

CCK08: First Assignment

Connecting the Dots

Strongly suggested through the readings is the view that information growth, technology, developments in social learning theory, and advancements in our understanding of minds and cognition require a reconsideration of learning theory (Downes and Siemens, 2008).

I do not disagree with this assertion. However, I am less convinced than ever before that this reconsideration requires the replacing or reformulating of existing learning theories with a new one.

Terry Anderson’s presentation for the Online Connectivism Conference includes the following realization:

…Put your thinking caps on for a moment and talk about what educational research has really made a difference for you as an educator or as a learner. I got asked this question in Hong Kong one time when I was on a panel at the International Council of Distance Ed. about what’s the one thing that really education research has contributed. I was blindsided. I thought, here am I, big researcher, and I can hardly even think of one thing that has really made a difference (Anderson, 2007, para. 7).

In my own experience there are many educators who express disdain towards theory in general for its lack of practical, pragmatic applications in the classroom. Formal theory can inform practice, but especially with informal learning, it does not always.

In response to criticisms levelled by Bill Kerr on George Siemens’ Connectivism blog, Siemens states:

…I don’t imagine too many theories today gain value based on philosophical grounding. Our world asks for proof…evidence…history…or in the term you use, “practice”. I don’t imagine too many people will be satisfied with me saying “well, connectivism has merit because it’s what bloggers and social networkers are doing all the time.” Intuition doesn’t sell well as a theory . On this front in particular, more formal research and publication is needed…At this stage, I know I’m providing an unsatisfactory answer to an important question (Siemens, 2007, Comment #5, para. 7).

Certainly more discussion has ensued since Siemens first posted this reply to Kerr. Is the Connectivism & Connective Knowledge course an example of connective practice? Undoubtably.

Is Connectivism a new theory of learning?

In the paper Connectivism: Learning Theory of the Future or Vestige of the Past? [Hill and Kop, 2007, pp. 4-5; pending publication] Connectivism is characterized as best fitting the description of a developmental learning theory. That having been said, I agree with Mathias Melcher, however, that

Connectivism would, IMO, suffer from restricting definitions such as being a learning theory, which has to obey traditional criteria of an empirically provable but very narrow scope of application (Melcher, 2008, para. 3).

Connectivism, as formulated in the course, is a living curriculum to the extent that the Connectivist stance resides in the “diversity of opinion” (Siemens, 2008, para. 8). Earlier position papers on Connectivism and connective knowledge are relatively succinct. For example, the principles listed on Siemens’ Connectivism blog [Ibid], and Downes’ (2006) delineation of the properties of effective networks are useful points of entry into an understanding of knowledge and learning in Connectivist terms.

Now that such a huge number of people are grappling with what Connectivism might be, a whole range of positions are informing what Connectivism looks like. This is consistent with a networked view of knowledge, and it lends itself to a decentralization and redistribution of power, since for each learner the Connectivist model will look different. This is a strength in terms of the stranglehold with which traditional knowledge brokers have approached the development of curriculum and canonical thinking. I also think that it is a weakness in that this approach to teaching and learning may lend itself to confusion, though confusion can lead to important breakthroughs in learning.

Connectivism absolutely resonates with my learning experiences. I am a student of philosophy, and speaking broadly, the associations that can be drawn between Connectivism and Continental philosophy and critical theory, as well as Buddhist philosophy, are numerous.

The two questions that I would like to continue to try and answer in this course are:

• What might a Connectivist ethics look like?
• To what extent can work on the biology of cognition (namely, the principles of autopoeisis, structural coupling and natural drift) inform an explanation of Connectivist philosophy in terms of evolution?