For a GREAT lecture on Connectivism and Web 2.0 by George Siemens, here is the podcast. Warning: it is not short! A powerpoint slideshow accompanies the podcast. As an aside, it is fascinating to see how this social computing tool works.
First, Siemens examines the other learning theories and some of the nouns (i.e. constructs, schema, underpinning) used to describe learning which he finds to have too much of a boundary of what knowledge is.
He explores what has changed – context, the interplay of learner and society, societal needs and the rapid growth of information.
Here, in brief, are some of his points. I have bold-faced those of particular interest to me.
• learning as a network creation model – cognition can be distributed – knowledge can exist in a group of learners
• Meaning-making in collaboration – collaborative meaning-making
(I feel I am attempting this with the four online collaborative projects with five other schools around the world – will it work? I hope so!)
• Learning is no long “in advance” of need – we need a different model.
• Most educators are still trying to get new technology to do the work of the old (I ask myself, how much am I guilty of this? how do we replace the new learning approaches? This is the most important issue. Learning to use technology (i.e. software, Internet tools) is relatively simple. Changing one’s pedagogical approaches is much more complex and difficult.)
• We are still trying to duplicate what happens in a classroom in an online learning environment
• Are we failing to see new opportunities because of old constructs? (How do we see these new opportunities? Do we discover them through collaboration in networks? Do we discover them ourselves? My experience is perceiving new experiences is usually because of my initiative in reading, researching and developing meaningful relationships with my teaching colleagues abroad. For example, it was my good friend Reuven Werber who passed this podcast along to me. He does this often and then we talk about our takes on it when we meet for audio conferences or in our emails.)
• “thoughts exist in space and time” I am not the network, but am on my own network – we can see one perspective from our node in the network
• network view of knowing – we are not as logical as we think we are – cognitive dissonance abounds
• complex situations are impossible to view in entirety (uses Iraqi war as an example)
• we are undergoing a paradigm shift – we must move to a different node on the network in order to appreciate a different view – we need to shift
• it is pattern recognition, not info processing, that is important in a digital world
• perspective is not a framework; perspective is seeing a network from one particular node
• self-organization – the capacity with which we have to connect to others who are similarly inclined – can result in a robust community – without design
• Established notions of learning and what is happening in the classroom is chaotic
• Siemens examines Snowden’s ontologies
• Ed. Tech. educators need to give greater levels of control for the end-user to form greater connections with each other and other users and experts; it is through this process we may stay current (George Siemens does not seem to be a huge fan of learning/content management systems for the establishment and perpetuation of online connections. While I love the way moodle allows me to build and support a community of learners in order to establish online relationships, I can see that not enough user control is given to the ordinary student. Perhaps by having the students have greater control of the course area will they truly become engaged in the process of learning. Blogs do give much more user control to the users but it is difficult to get over the issues of privacy for K-12 students. How can educators get around this?)
• Knowledge exists in multiple domains – impt for ed. Tech designers.
• Transmission model has been predominant model – although should be a secondary model
• Learning as cognition and reflection – constructivism, cognitivism – schools don’t do a good job of promoting this
• Acquisition model – learner-motivated
• Accretion model – should be primary model of teaching – knowledge is complex, no longer one-dimensional – connectivism is the learning theory to promote this
• His podcast makes the link between learning theories and Web 2.0 trends
• Ability for us to connect with ideas that previously existed in isolation is important
• Refers to open source movement
• We are witnessing relational internet experience – really connecting to people – tag content based on our interests, social networks which can create robust communities outside of a designer’s intention (Hear, hear! And this asserts one of my own main principles to teaching and learning – we learn through relationship – particularly adolescent learners.)
• Connectivity between people and with content – this requires openness
• Interplay with internet, people, and technology
• Convergence, divergence, collaboration, decentralization
• Web 2.0 permits this – changing environment online
• Web 2.0 is about Content-provider, content-user
• End-user who is control
• Making new meaning with others
• Aggregated perspective – he cites Downes – we take our own perspective and we throw it into the pool of others
• We form rel’ps online then ground them in face-to-face contact (this has implications for a blended learning approach)
• Web is a platform which allows end-user to have different degrees of control – we can create and participate
• He also examines the challenges facing these trends in web 2.0
• We can only listen to people with whom we agree
• Personalization of internet information
• Process can be begun
• All this does not align with current views of learning with technology – we are still focused on content, not on connections.
• The challenge is for educators to bring in connecting tools that permit connections to be made – with a focus on the end-user. (This permits one of the buzz words in current pedagogy: student-centred teaching and learning)
• Blogs, for example, allow continual learning and growing
• Acknowledging the opposing views exist is an important part of connectivism as a learning theory. (This is so essential in today’s movement toward globalization!)
There are quite a few new concepts here to me. At this point, I am interested on the implications for my own students as well as for my teaching colleagues as they are involved in “tech training” where I work.
I am not sure how much I agree with George Siemens when he states that we need to lose the focus on the content of our online courses and focus on the connections. Would this not depend on the learning goals set for the course unit? And how do we measure or assess success of this connectiveness over content?
Siemens continues to fascinate and challenge me with this new learning theory of connectivism. I hope to hear more from him in the future!