Dewey said, “Freedom for the sake of freedom is a weak philosophy of education.”
This highlights one of the major conflicts in moving from traditional education systems, to the technology-driven advents that we are currently working to legitimize. Many developments are brought forth by for-profit institutions, creating an inherent rush to production. The need to stay ahead, and the competitive nature of such institutions, allow for fundamental components in learning to slip through the cracks. These deficiencies, highlight perhaps, one of our biggest hurdles in moving away from dated structures, and moving toward better utilization of Web 2.0 technologies.
The constantly changing nature of technology, and the difficulty in identifying informal learning processes, inhibit our ability to justify one method over another. Instead, it is suggested that these two schools of thought be merged, thus augmenting learning processes, and allowing them to reside in our every day activities. This is meant to keep us learning, exploring and growing, in a seemingly limitless world where the only constant is change.
The conflict between these two schools make visible the tension between these systems, which is the first step in understanding our abilities in navigating within these arrangements. Much like a video game, it is our job to overcome obstacles in order to proceed to the next level.
We look at the characteristics of each entity, and establish a converging point, in which both can thrive. With an endless sea of resources, information networks provide learners with agency to learn about anything, while structured environments provide a specific framework in which one is given a contextual ability to operate. The presence of these rival systems invariably creates conflict, which is then transferred onto the learner. It is through negotiation of these differences, that the subject is able to apply tacit knowledge and bring about new meaning that is not limited to any one system, but relevant to all. This deeper understanding allows one to eclipse limitations of physical and virtual worlds, in the form of new experience. As stated in the The Arc of Life, the goal is to “take the outside in, make it part of ourselves, and re-create it.”
The relationship between learners and the nodes of the community in which they reside, leads to an improvement on the collection of knowledge. The circular flow, creates a symbiotic relationship that ultimately connects two very different worlds. We do however find a potential drawback, in the form of peripheral participation. While new knowledge can be obtained, the one-way flow of information fails to contribute any new knowledge to the information network. The openness of this structure allows individuals to remain non-participatory members that can come and go as they please. It could be argued however, that they were never members in the first -place, potentially making their existence in this scenario irrelevant.
Participation in emerging cultural communities does allow for an amplification in abilities. By pooling talent, and incorporating wider perspectives, individuals are allowed to unlock certain “cheat codes”, that can fast-track the learning process vicariously, through leveraging the abilities of others. We are married to our own experiences, and divorce is never an option. The social aspect allows for the collection of individual experiences, within the context of a shared interest. By participating in communal cultures, the rules for participation become increasingly clear, and much like re-creation is the ultimate goal, we are able to directly incorporate agency, and actively challenge the traditional constructs of cultural influence.
