I'm presenting at ONLINE EDUCA in Berlin in December...to extend the notion of a typical keynote, I have started a wiki, created a short Articulate presentation to introduce key concepts, and will host a series of podcasts and discussions (hopefully with Jay Cross, if we can get things organized). The main message I'm hoping to communicate: traditional flows of knowledge and learning have scattered - from containers and hierarchies to networks and ecologies. This change requires a restructuring of our businesses, organizations, society, and classrooms. (An introductory interview I conducted with ONLINE EDUCA is also available).
Will adressess much of what I've been saying as well about the changed nature of learning - The New Face of Learning: "And what happens to traditional concepts of classrooms and teaching when we can now learn anything, anywhere, anytime?...In this new interactive Web world, I have become a nomadic learner; I graze on knowledge. I find what I need when I need it. There is no linear curriculum to my learning, no formal structure other than the tools I use to connect to the people and sources that point me to what I need to know and learn, the same tools I use to then give back what I have discovered...How, as educators and learners, did we respond? Did we embrace the potentials of a connected, collaborative world and put our creative imaginations to work to reenvision our classrooms? Did we use these new tools to develop passionate, fearless, lifelong learners? Did we ourselves become those learners?
Or did we cling to old ideas, old models, and old habits and drift more fully into irrelevance in our students' eyes?"
I've uploaded the presentation I delivered to PTDEA: ppt file and audio (I simultaneously presented to a handful of remote participants from across Canada (who were unable to physically attend) through iVocalize).
I'm in Iqaluit in Canada's arctic territory of Nunavut. My expectations of internet connectivity need to be revised. The territory, which covers 1/5 of Canada's land mass, is home to 30,000 people, dispersed across 29 communities. Many of the communities have populations of 100-300 people. These small communities make it very difficult to provide education to Inuit (some classrooms run K-12 groups). As with much of society, education is the pathway toward healthier society, opportunities for youth, and personal achievement. Connectivity is a big problem here. Traditional telephone companies shy away from large, dispersed communities...it's too difficult to 'make money' or recoup investments.
As is often the case, the lack of service from external providers resulted in a local "community champions" putting together a solution on sheer effort and perseverance. Enter Nunavut Broadband Development Corporation. Through an RFP process, they selected a northern service provider (SSI Micro)...and created the Quniq network - "The Qiniq network is an advanced satellite and wireless network, delivering Broadband Internet services to all communities in Nunavut, Canada."
Within the first year, they received over 3000 subscribers...by offering a low-cost broadband service...enabling educators, learners, and family members to connect. It creates a hopeful atmosphere of business, education, politics, and arts. Of key concern, is the preservation of culture and language (when an isolated community enters the global virtual space, the voice of 30,000 people can quickly be overwhelmed). I'm impressed with the thoughtful balance of technology, access, and culture. Local artisans are now selling items on eBay, resulting in an emerging economy for individuals.
Short list of ways to extend learning beyond the laptop/desktop: Getting students to use their mobile phones as learning tools - "One thing you can almost guarantee is that pretty much every student you come across will have a mobile phone. In my school they’re not even supposed to be in school but - as you can imagine - they are used surreptitiously in between lessons. In what follows I’m going to try to outline a few ways in which we can use the technology students already have to motivate them, make life easier, and enhance their learning!"
See also: Quality in an E-Learning Course featuring Mobile Learning
A short review of the history of the web: 15 years. It really seems like the web has existed much longer - like it's always been there.
I'm looking forward to the Global Summit in Sydney in October - and interacting with the great list of speakers. I was recently interviewed for a podcast...it's available here (bottom of the page).
As I merrily write about learning, networks, and technology, I'm often presented with questions of "but is it practical? Does it work? What does this look like in real life?". I have a new favorite example of the connective properties of well-conceived learning/technology implementation. As I recently posted, I accepted a position with University of Manitoba (Learning Technologies Centre). Peter Tittenberger and others have created the Virtual Learning Commons (background: Forget Myspace, try a little VLC: "“We wanted to develop a site that recognizes that a student’s personal development is not separate from his or her academic development, that informal learning plays a crucial role in academic development, and that learning is a process of social participation,”).
VLC allows students to identify areas or subjects of interest...and then connect with others who have similar interests. It's a great way to enhance social dialogue around learning activities (like 43 Things).
Obvious questions arise - how does this impact learning? How does this equate with learner success (and how do we define success?)? Are students who are socially connected more likely to succeed academically? (Tinto's research seems to suggest this).
After only a few weeks, over 500 hundred students are doing over 100 things. Students are able to access "pre-seeded" to do's tied to learning resources (writing an essay, fine tuning a thesis, using commas properly, etc.). At first glance, the project looks like a collection of various school tasks. But it's much more. It sets learning in a conversational spaces...knowledge as a pathway through connections with others...learning as a constant in life. I'm confident that this implementation of social learning (integrated with institutionally provided academic support) is a first indicator of more prominent trends. Learning not as an explicit task...but as a constant action. (Additional resources are available as well - a calendar, online writing tutor, and assignment manager).
Looking at the main VLC page (only U of M students can post "to do's" as an ID is required), it's obvious that students don't go to university only to learn (that’s axiomatic, but we have structured on courses and orientations on the assumption that learning is their main reason for attending our institutions)...students want to: make new friends, drink more espresso, make a meelion dollars, etc. The changing structure of to do's - especially when a project like this is done on a large scale - can provide educator's and administrator's with valuable insight into student needs and interests.
Stephen nails it perfectly: "Groups require unity, networks require diversity. Groups require coherence, networks require autonomy. Groups require privacy or segregation, networks require openness. Groups require focus of voice, networks require interaction. The group I am with right now is very intent on being a group. That doesn't interest me. I have no wish to lose my identity and my freedom, my empowerment. Because a group is subject to this very objection - backlash, groupthink, the works. But a network is not."
I have struggled with this theme in my own writing for the last several years. I like the individuality that a blog affords - my writing, my thoughts, my space. I don't mind collaborating with others...but only if I don't lose my voice and identity in the process. Our education system is based on groups...but it should be based on networks. Groups don't scale, and the urge to focus and move a group forward in one direction results in marginalizing certain voices in order to pursue the "common good". I'm not comfortable with that. A network (as I've been saying with connectivism) imbues individual nodes with personal voices...and finds it's value in aggregating, not overwriting (marginalizing) nodes not in line with the thinking of the majority.
Numerous people have pointed to this valuable discussion - A brief history of arrangement: "Simplicity and standardisation paid off for the science of the time much more than recognition of complexity, context, and multiple ways of looking at things...Too much attention to the category infrastructure represented by your taxonomy can obscure proper attention to the contexts of use for the information and knowledge assets you cover."
Why people don't use collaboration tools: "When faced with the choice of learning new technology and chatting to colleagues on the phone and email to get a job done, if it can be done with what they already know they will go with that; Collaboration tools work best when your collaborators are geographically distributed and in other time zones..."
In my experience with collaboration tools, I can comfortably say that 90% of my projects have failed (or not met my expectation). Collaborative tools often don't work for two reasons: 1) we haven't worked that way in the physical world (so it's a social/change issue)...and 2) we balance time saved/time spent/value afforded when we approach new tools.
Many tools require a significant shift in work habits (which is always a barrier to adoption) and a high time investment to learn the functionality of the tool. Most people see technology as a tool that assists in the completion of specific tasks. Not everyone cares to blog, contribute to a wiki, podcast, read RSS feeds...blah, blah, blah. And they shouldn't. The ed-tech space has become a complex, jargon-filled space. This really struck me recently as I began instructing an online course - I sent out my introductory email, and received a reply "What's WebCT and how to I find it". That's reality for many. The digital skill divide will increasingly impact how we move froward with learning technology. If those of us who think we know what's going on, don't pause and see if anyone is following, we will quickly see our currently limited influence dwindle.
More organizations are becoming aware that conversation, not content, is today's strategic value point in the learning process. Yale is making select courses available online: "While MIT’s OpenCourseWare model has been widely emulated, Yale will be the first university to tap the potential of digital video by combining course architecture with essentially complete sets of lectures from these courses, as presented by its faculty."
Information Fluency: "Information literacy competencies are process skills. They will grow with students, even when current search tools and platforms are obsolete, when we move beyond Web 2.0. These skills have legs. They will serve learners even when they forget how to balance a chemical equation or how to solve for X. They prepare students to learn to learn."
Citizendium Project: "citizens' compendium of everything," will be an experimental new wiki project that combines public participation with gentle expert guidance."
While this is causing irritation for many die-hard wikipedians, others note that this is a needed step to taming the commons of wikipedia. Academically, I think it's a useful step forward in credibility. But any time, gatekeepers are added (non-democratically) possibility for abuse arises. Perhaps the real question boils down to how much democracy we are willing to give up for information classified according to certain standards.
See Toward a New Compendium of Knowledge for more info on the project.
Dave Snowden offers his opinion: "Its rather like Luther saying OK boys thats enough of the reformation, lets set up our own curia and start selling indulgences"
The world really doesn't need more George Siemens' blogs (a good case could be made for the world not needing any :))...but here is a list of where I spend my time writing and reflecting:
Here (elearnspace) - general learning, technology, and network trends.
Connectivism (currently updating the site to movable type) - focused on the development of connectivism as a learning theory for the digital age.
Knowing Knowledge - focused on the changing nature of knowledge (with a bit more of a corporate slant)
Learning Technologies Centre Research Blog (University of Manitoba) - focused on research in the learning and technology field.
Update: Scott Leslie sent me a link to blogdigger with all four sites rolled into one RSS feed.
I've put together a list of presentations I'll be doing over the next several months.
In order to do away with the traditional "speaker knows all" mentality of many conferences, I've decided to add a wiki component to keynotes and presentations. When approved by conference organizers, I will post a rough overview of my presentation in a wiki (in advance of the event), and ask potential participants to provide their views, questions, and input into the session (I will be doing this with ePortfolio 2006 and Online Educa). Not sure if conference participants want this type of dialogue with speakers, but it's a simple experiment that may yield valuable learning experiences. If you expect to be at eportfolio 2006 or Online Educa, I would appreciate your input (I'll make more information available on both conference in the next week or so).
Hopefully, this will result in sessions that are more focused on the interests (and context) of particular audiences.
Anyone attending the conference circuit knows that things are changing - dialogue is occurring prior to and following a conference. The hard "start/stop" view is giving way to a conference model that permits greater discourse.
Be Provocative: "The secret is to be more provocative and interesting than anything else in their environment."
I'm of mixed mind on the whole "who's job is it to make sure the experience is engaging" in the learning experience. I appreciate the work and ideas of Kathy Sierra - her enthusiasm reflects in her writing. As an instructor, I provide only part of the motivation for learners - I am not an entertainer. While the onus is on me to be aware of how people learn (and how the human brain works), entertainment and education are different experiences, arising from different needs (and intentions). Despite all of the game-based hype...and talk of edutainmnet, I think we sometimes mistake that attributes don't apply cleanly across different domains. A video game designer has different priorities (and objectives) than an instructional designer. Needs and intentions, not only an understanding of the mechanics of a situation, influence implementation. For example, we may know how combustion works for creating power in moving a car forward (the mechanics of the situation). Someone designing a sports car will put this knowledge to different use than someone designing a mini-van. The objectives influence how mechanics of a concept are implemented. A marketing director will use knowledge of the human brain differently than an instructor in a classroom.
This sums up my concerns with learning technology tools: DRM thoughts:: "Your home and life are increasingly full of devices that seek to control, rather than enable you".
The Craft of Connection (via elearningpost): "Despite the huge potential returns, few managers adequately invest in developing these kinds of networks and deliberately designing them to foster measurable business results. One reason for this is the misperception that networks, which are essentially self-governing communities, draw their energy from common enthusiasms and a shared sense of purpose and thus cannot be managed. Furthermore, some academics argue that communities of practice are emergent systems that must be allowed to form and evolve without direction."
I certainly agree with the value of networks and ecologies...but from my experience, most communities/networks/ecologies (especially those with a defined purpose) require some type of guidance and direction. The challenge of "clear aims through decentralized means" often benefits from some direction (the real question, however, is where we put our design efforts - on achieving the outcome, or on designing the space in which we expect the outcome to occur. My view is that we should be focused on the latter...).
I you don't follow Clarence Fisher's work in practical implementation of technology in the learning process, I strongly encourage you to do so: Remote Access. Over the last week, he has been posting his experience ramping up with a new group of learners - for those interested in seeing how "this stuff" (blogs, wikis, video logs) actually works, this is a wonderful view of how pieces come together.
I Said, 'Not While You Study!': "There's some impressive new scientific research on your side when you tell your kids they can't possibly do their homework with the TV blaring, instant messenger crawling or MP3 player pumping."
I'm a "moderate multi-tasker" (skype, IM, read email, listen to music). When I deliver online presentations, this is important (i.e. present, follow comments in text boxes, reply, advance slides, etc.). But this approach has a downside for learning. Many "experts" have told us that kids are multi-taskers...and we generally have assumed that's a good thing (or just a part of who they are based on the technology they have access to). Over the last few years, I've discovered that my greatest challenge is not managing multiple sources of information/distractions, but to focus on the items that are important. Running after "shiny things" seems quite natural for children (and for me - take that for whatever it's worth!). To achieve a particular outcome requires managing distractions, not yielding to them. For youth, however, the distractions are their focus. They want to absorb - experience - as much as they can. When it comes to learning, that mindset (based on emerging research) may need to be moderated.
This is a conference I would love to have been invited to attend: The Future of Learning in a Networked World. Smaller, open, more discussion-based conferences are tremendous learning opportunities for the presenters, not only participants...looks like some of the conversation will be happening online, and given the participant list, it will be worth following.
Graham Atwell offers his 7.5 minute take on personal learning environments (PLEs). He makes a great point about how policy discourse is at odds with social trends.
On a related note - lately, something about PLEs isn't sitting well with me. I can't quite place what it is (I'm working through my issues in a PLE article...I'll post sometime in the near future). Leigh Blackall has provided one end point of the continuum of my concern with PLEs with his statement that we don't need LMS' or PLEs because we have the internet...and the other end of the continuum is held by the reality that all of the PLE discussion is currently happening with a very small percentage of the population (the edu-tech-geeks). 90% of people don't care much about blogs (ok, that's a random figure, but it's high)...and are even less concerned about mashing-up a series of services to share their learning, pictures, podcasts, etc.
10 Ways to Think about Innovation: "Successful innovators are famously untroubled by the prospect of failure."
The 19 Best Elearning Blogs: "From learning theories to content design, metadata to LMSes, survey data to industry trends, these blogs have it all."
Dave Snowden captures a key challenge in dealing with groups ("Mass validation of truth has generally being exploited by tyrants in the past and a tyranny can be collective as well as individual."), and links to What's Next: The Idiocy of Crowds: "The effectiveness of groups, teamwork, collaboration, and consensus is largely a myth. In many cases, individuals do much better on their own. Our bias toward groups is counterproductive. And the technology of ubiquitous connectedness is making the problem worse...Bernard Nijstad, a psychologist at the University of Amsterdam, explains that if you take a group of 12 people and have half brainstorm together on a topic while the other six go it alone, all 12 will usually agree that the group experience was more productive--even though those working alone almost always end up with more good ideas."
These comments are reflective of my own experience. For groups to be of value, each individual must be an individual. Aggregation (or the forming of groups) is valuable when we bring together unique people. If we bring together like-minded people, we may end up with the joys of group-think. That's why I enjoy reading blogs. I can aggregate diverse perspectives, and form a representation of the whole...based on many individual opinions. Groups and collaboration are not the problem. The problem arises when a group thinks/acts/speaks with one voice...silencing the unique views and opinions of individuals.
Why Colleges Are So Hard to Change: "Higher education has, unfortunately, had a long history of calls for significant change and of efforts to improve the quality and efficiency of what we do...And yet, despite all the data, all the recommendations, and the many efforts to improve higher education that have been undertaken, little has changed for the better. In fact conditions may have even become worse."
Chris Sessums summarizes a debate he recently attended on whether transformations in learning should be a function of evolution or a revolution : "Should change evolve incrementally over time or is a more radical approach required to transform learning and teaching in an increasingly e-world? "
Change doesn't happen by itself...and how we respond is often not directly related to change at all, but our own comfort level and willingness to experiment. In terms of evolution/revolution - I think those lines are being drawn for us (much like they were in the music industry 7-8 years ago, and like they are being drawn in the traditional media/news industry today). Change forces are not about us. They are about large-scale, societal trends. Educations role, in theory, is to adapt or die. The longer we wait to take evolutionary paths (which we should have been taking about thirty years ago when people started exploring changing notions of what it means to learn), the more certain it is that we will be required to take a revolutionary path. Ask TV executives or newspaper editors whether they are adapting through evolution or revolution (it's all about revolution in that space...change pressures built and in a span of a year or two, re-wrote the industry). Our turn as educators is next :).
A bit off my usual path, but in line with how we need to start thinking of information/knowledge overload - Too much information:: "Working out the problems and promise of context-aware applications and services depends on a complex interplay in a moving landscape of technical, organizational, social, and cultural factors. These include what is technically feasible in terms of the kinds of contextual information available; what is practically feasible in terms of assumptions that can be made about the distribution and nature of devices, bandwidth, and cost; what is possible within the constraints of our imaginations; and what will be perceived by users as valuable, as well as socially and culturally appropriate. For this reason, experience with deploying real applications and services at a realistic scale is essential."
Lately, my thoughts have been focused on how we create spaces and structures for working, socializing, and learning. Most organizations have a dysfunctional air about them. Organizations do really silly things to prevent individuals from contributing most effectively to strategy achievement and personal growth. The role of leadership is about establishing a clear vision...and then creating an environment that allows individuals to excel. Too often, leadership is focused on arranging deck chairs, rather than clearing obstacles for individuals doing "the real work". A healthy organization is one where people are committed to making each other better. In ineffective organizations, people are concerned about making themselves better. I found this view of multiple metrics interesting:
Why Organizations Suffer from the Otis Redding Problem : "Leaders who lack such courage might recall the old Bill Cosby quote: “I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.” Otis Redding’s solution was to “remain the same” because he couldn’t please 10 different people. That is a rational response to a bad system."
If you are interested in how wikis are edited (general assumptions are the less than 1% of wiki users do the bulk of the contributing). Aaron Swartz conducted research on wiki edits, and found that the changes (when measured by amount of edits) by the 1% is largely window-dressing type of work (not core content contributions). Who Writes Wikipedia: "The idea that a lot of people have of Wikipedia," he noted, "is that it's some emergent phenomenon -- the wisdom of mobs, swarm intelligence, that sort of thing -- thousands and thousands of individual users each adding a little bit of content and out of this emerges a coherent body of work." But, he insisted, the truth was rather different: Wikipedia was actually written by "a community ... a dedicated group of a few hundred volunteers" where "I know all of them and they all know each other". Really, "it's much like any traditional organization."...and after Aaron's research: "When you put it all together, the story become clear: an outsider makes one edit to add a chunk of information, then insiders make several edits tweaking and reformatting it. In addition, insiders rack up thousands of edits doing things like changing the name of a category across the entire site -- the kind of thing only insiders deeply care about. As a result, insiders account for the vast majority of the edits. But it's the outsiders who provide nearly all of the content."
Diana Oblinger (of Educating the Net Generation fame) has edited/released a new book: Learning Spaces (not sure how long it has been available, but it has been referenced by several edubloggers over the last week). I love this quote: "Spaces are themselves agents for change. Changed spaces will change practice". The bulk of the book consists of case studies of learning space design in different organizations.
Doug Belshaw links to Using wiki in education...looks like a useful resource to follow. Practical implementation ideas are listed here.
Complex Systems for a Complex World (via Anecdote) (free .pdf download is available) - a great resource arguing for a new mode of operating in (or seeing) the world. I haven't reviewed the entire text, but the first few chapters compliment my thesis is Knowing Knowledge; namely that how we encounter knowledge requires approaches tightly linked to the changed context and characteristics of knowledge. In the process, we need to rethink our epistemology and ontology (among other things, obviously).
"...a new kind of science is helping us deepen our understanding of how human ecosystems might grow and change over time. Beyond a mere collation of various reflections and applications, the chapters in this book aim to convince the reader that this new kind of science is worthy of our attention. It is a science that fully embraces the complexity of our surrounding world. It is also a science that addresses the frontiers of interactions between human behaviour and environmental responses. Furthermore, it is a science that challenges our limited understanding and treatment of uncertainty."
Reflection is a valuable part of the learning process...and receives fairly neutral treatment in this article: Upon Further Reflection, a Few Random Thoughts "To back up for the uninitiated, “reflection” as both word and action may be the trendiest trend in all of education. Education students learn how to be reflective teachers in education school...And what, a lay person might well ask, does reflection mean? A reasonable definition would be “thinking about what you’re doing,"".
My main reaction is to the definition of reflection provided - thinking about what you are doing is an aspect of reflection...but not the most critical. I can think what I'm doing, and apply absolutely no judgement that would enable me to make changes about what I'm doing. (For example, I could think about how much I procrastinate on some of my outstanding activities...but if my thinking isn't in relation to something (target, ideal, standard, anticipated direction, then it's no use). To me, reflection is about thinking about one's thoughts and actions and contrasting against some ideal or toward some direction.
I love it! I am filled with much joy :). Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: "Tim Berners-Lee, the individual credited with inventing the web and giving so many of us jobs, has become the most prominent individual so-far to point out that the Web 2.0 emperor is naked. Berners-Lee has dismissed Web 2.0 as useless jargon nobody can explain and a set of technology that tries to achieve exactly the same thing as "Web 1.0.""
I love it! I am filled with much joy :). Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: "Tim Berners-Lee, the individual credited with inventing the web and giving so many of us jobs, has become the most prominent individual so-far to point out that the Web 2.0 emperor is naked. Berners-Lee has dismissed Web 2.0 as useless jargon nobody can explain and a set of technology that tries to achieve exactly the same thing as "Web 1.0.""
Are social web apps here to stay?: "In general, computers and software are taking an increasingly social role for us. Our behavior hasn’t become all that much more social (although it certainly has for some) but we’re learning how to effectively model our social needs in software."