Tag Archives: Howard Rheingold

Think What You Think, but Learn How You Learned

After reading Theory of Knowledge, Social Media and Connected Learning in High School, I did a little research on Mr. Howard Rheingold, for I wasn’t quite sure what to take away from his article at first. So in 2002, his book Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution, introduced us to the concept of coordinated groups of people that elevated their efficiency and furthered their cause through utilization and advancements in technology (aka smart mobs). This is however, not limited to organizing actions offline, as the concept of a smart mob is alive and well online.

Enter Amy Burvall, who introduced Rheingold to her Theory of Knowledge course, by having her students @reply him on Twitter, in order to share their reflections on his work. This orchestrated effort succeeded in opening the lines of communication and subsequently, the creation of the article I just read, as well as the blog post that I am writing at this very moment. The Theory of Knowledge course was intended to allow students to “think about their own thinking, the nature of knowledge itself, and what constitutes knowledge in the various disciplines they study.”

This epistemological approach, is meant to empower one to question their very understanding, in order to achieve deeper meaning, and realize a wider scope of application. Though one could argue that such questioning could be brought on in a transformative fashion (as popularized by Mezirow), this case in particular makes use of a framework, rather than utilizing an explanatory avenue. In doing so, Burvall greatly reduces the chances of disconnect between the teacher and the learner, as well as the learners themselves.

Students are allowed the freedom to voluntarily course-correct as they see fit. By shifting focus from the answers that they are expected to learn, they have already gone on to asking “bigger” questions, in order to find out where they fit in to a much larger scheme. This helps to digest concepts that the learner would otherwise be unable to grasp on their own – while still allowing them to contribute in a way that is beneficial to the whole.

In the case of using Twitter as a tool in the classroom, Burvall understood that the platform was not universally adopted among her students, but was able to pique their interest based on what can be achieved. The application of a Socratic circle, allowed those who were less inclined to interact via Twitter, to observe and question the actions of those on the inner circle, thus creating a secondary learning experience out of the primary learning experience that was taking place. These interactions between the circles appear to be representative of a meta-analysis, as a scribe records the process via Sketchnotes, that allow for visual storytelling to emerge, and be shared among all participants via Google+. This allows for a diagram of the processes to develop, and provide insight into the individual contributions of the activity.

Rheingold poses that the utilization of these tools as an extension of the learner, and ultimately determining whether or not they are best suited to a specific application. This structure provides a certain imbalance, as roles emerge based off of the actions of others, ensuring that the social elements of learning are ever-present, despite the potential for disconnect through the use of such technology.

The whole article seemed to resemble the process of constructing our group wiki, in that we were forced to evaluate and understand tools that we may not have been immediately familiar with. For those who are not aware, I do not work in a classroom setting on a daily basis. While some may see this as a handicap as a student in this class, I see the opposite, as I tend to focus on wider application due to this fact. As a result, I gravitate toward questions related to difficulties that surround accessibility and widespread adoption. Much like the scribe records the interactions that occur – so does the wiki.

Building off of what I learned in my Adult Education class, and as seen through my blog posts thus far, I shy away from highlighting applications that are limited to a classroom setting, and this has been done for a reason. If what we learn only applies to a classroom setting, how are we going to make it work for people who aren’t in a classroom? This is not limited to the third world necessarily, as technology is breaking down the walls of the traditional classroom, but more along the lines of individuals who are not aware that they are learning.

Children can be shaped, but adults need to be compelled. As we see too often, learning in aging populations is often the result of motivating factors in the form of money, power, or status. Not even taking into consideration what is required to “get by”, we must strive to make this motivating factor about passion, belonging, and the freedom to explore aspects of our lives where we can make an impact. Once this is realized, we are able to understand “how we know what we know” by taking conscious steps toward asking the big questions that continue to elude us – further developing our individual ways of knowing.