Tag Archives: Structured Environments

Course Takeaways: Looking Forward to Aaron 2.0

2 Replies

Awareness is defined as knowledge or perception of a situation or fact. The definition of self awareness, is conscious knowledge of one’s own character, feelings, motives, and desires. The combination of these two concepts, is becoming increasingly paramount to the success of today’s learner, as individual agency is facilitated through the integration of technology in education.

As stated in The Arc of Life, the goal is to “take the outside in, make it part of ourselves, and recreate it”. This movement is the basis of a never ending cycle that begins from the day we are born, and continues until the day we die. Whether or not people are aware of this, is a different story, however it is our duty as educators to facilitate this great awakening not only in others – but in ourselves.

Before this course, I understood that there was no universal learner. Utilizing technology as an alternative to the classroom, admittedly, has always been a personal point of contention. By eliminating traditional face-to-face interaction, there is the potential for inadequacies to emerge in the development of the tacit skills necessary to function in an offline world. People are enamored by the concept of learning online, and while it is important to convey enthusiasm in this budding field, such unbridled tendencies can easily overshadow deficiencies in implementation. We must be cautious, and always question our underlying motivations, for as Voltaire once said, “With great power, comes great responsibility”.

Emerging Web Technologies and Learning, marks a personal milestone for me, as this was my first online class. Early on, I found that tools were the biggest differentiator between online and offline learning, and as such, have been the focal point of this course. These tools act as mediating artifacts, which regulate how we view and interact with our world. Because of this, it is important to understand the motive-object, in order to utilize tools that will help one reach a specific goal. Going back to the concept that there is no universal learner, we also must extend the same courtesy to the Web 2.0 technologies that we decide to adopt in the classroom.

Understanding that tools are an extension of the learner, allows them to derive individual meaning as a result of these interactions. Just as a hammer can have multiple roles depending on the hand that wields it, so can Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. Twitter for example, can be used solely to monitor trends, question influencers, collect thoughts, or share insights – or generally speaking, all of the above. The flexibility of such tools, allows for not only a unique platform identity to emerge, but for the identity of the participant as well.

Coupled with self awareness, Web 2.0 tools have the advantage of providing a fluid testing ground for exploration, experimentation, and implicit learning. While it is the learner’s responsibility to realize where they want to go, this is contingent upon their ability to evaluate what they need to know, in order to get there. Through advancements in online learning tools and their potential to navigate traditional roadblocks, the capacity to move from point A to point B, manifests itself in the form of questioning. By allowing us to get beyond learning curves associated with usability, additional emphasis is thus given to thoughts and ideas vs. the construction of mental knowledge-bases.

This concept was especially evident in Week 8, and the Theory of Knowledge class. Through utilization of a Socratic circle, all individuals were given a chance to participate. Even though experience with Twitter varied greatly, outsiders were able to glean valuable takeaways and directly engage in the learning processes. The same experiences became evident over the course of working with my blog group. Our shared knowledge made for a functional dynamic that allowed for everybody to participate in learning processes, while showcasing knowledge in our respective areas of expertise.

In the beginning, I couldn’t help but feel like I missed out on getting to know other members of the class. By the end however, I realized how much time was spent in order to understand the individual perspectives of those in my blog group. The concept of small group work, was one that I was not expecting, as my own assumptions surrounding online learning focused on large class sizes, impersonal interactions, and an emphasis on deliverables. The organization however, provided a certain level of consistency that helped facilitate increased interaction, and a mutual respect of our individual standpoints.

By learning to understand different applications of familiar tools, I was allowed to question my original assumptions, and derive new meanings as they pertain to learning environments and beyond. In this way, each participant was able to switch between taking on the role of the learner and the teacher. This concept was mirrored in becoming a networked learner/teacher, emphasizing the importance of becoming a life-long learner in the ever-changing world of Web 2.0 technology. If we one day hope to educate others through these tools, we must be able to facilitate the growing number of ways in which they can be utilized.

In my previous class, I feel like one of my biggest takeaways was experience, and how it is uniquely different from person to person. Such an emphasis on the individual is challenging within interpersonal relationships, let alone acknowledging such differences in education. This course however, effectively built upon this principle by demonstrating a working model of individual agency within a learning environment. By demonstrating that it is not necessary to conform to traditional dynamics, Web 2.0 technology is affording us the ability to re-write the rules, and create curriculums that challenge and advance the learners of tomorrow.

 

Book-filled Places for Makerspaces

7 Replies

Libraries have always had a special place in my heart. As an elementary school student, I always remember weekly trips to that magical place where our class would peruse the Caldecott Medal-winning authors, attempt to understand the Dewey Decimal System, and sign out books that lined up with our interests. Unfortunately, our librarians failed to fully realize the life lessons that could be extracted from The Far Side comic collections, but nevertheless, I found a way to thrive.

As the years went by, those leather bound walls became nothing more than a backdrop for flashy multimedia devices. Entire volumes of encyclopedias were reduced to a CD-ROM. Librarians went from stamping books to stamping hall passes, so students in study hall could access computers in order to keep up on the latest sports news, celebrity gossip, or spend 40 or so minutes toiling with the latest games that Shockwave had to offer. I believe it was Bob Dylan who once said, “the times, they are a-changin’.”

This is why I found it refreshing to learn about the concept of a makerspace. In what I would describe as a conscious move toward reclaiming these hallowed grounds, libraries are finding new meaning in the face of a digital world. Much like the public utilization of fire halls for banquets and receptions, libraries are adapting to the needs of the public by embracing the inevitability of change.

While the articles primarily focus on application of makerspaces within school libraries, we see such tactics being similarly implemented in corporate entities across the world. The emergence of War Rooms, which are designated areas that have been established to carry out a specific goal, are often employed to bring key players across all departments into one location to brainstorm, analyze, and ultimately implement an idea or product. Not only does this provide an opportunity for team building, but it also facilitates questioning through the merging of several different interests and perspectives.

Much like Colleen Graves outfitted a conference room for small group collaboration, these areas provide a more intimate environment vs. the learning commons which can facilitate a much larger audience. These nimble structures allow for increased participation through the ability to conform to particular tasks at hand. The colorful description of interactive spaces adorned with movable furniture, whiteboard walls, and chalk-top surfaces; reminded me of offices at Facebook or Google. Much like the ideas wrought from such entities are meant to change with the times, this same approach is now being routinely applied to the workspace.

Along with the allusion to co-working, these communal domains can play host to makerspaces catered to specific applications, such as fab labs and hackerspaces. Tod Colgrove highlights the versatility of these spaces, in that they can allow for the potential integration of technology, therefore having the ability to unite satellite locations from across the street or across the globe. Even the role of the librarian is changing, as a diverse repository of knowledge must now be called upon, in order to facilitate the dynamic needs of these movers and shakers makers.

The extension of makerspaces to public libraries, is an especially exciting concept. Often relying on funding from local taxes, fundraising, and donations from private parties, these seemingly archaic institutions seem to have a chance at survival, and an opportunity to make a legitimate comeback. Though the emphasis may have shifted away from “print literacy”, I feel that Carolyn Foote said it best, “we are about understanding the world we live in literacy”.

 

Think What You Think, but Learn How You Learned

Leave a reply

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.

Wikipedia: Weighing the Worth of Wikis

6 Replies

Conduct a web search of a person, place or thing, and there is a good chance that you will be served a listing from Wikipedia in the top three results. Only surpassed by search engines Google, Yahoo, Baidu, and social giants Facebook and YouTube – Wikipedia is ranked 6th by Alexa in overall traffic. What is most amazing about this accomplishment, is the format by which it came to be the content colossus that it is today.

Wikipedia represents the potential of wiki sites to become a viable content management system (CMS), and as a budding resource in today’s emerging learning environments. The subject matter of a wiki can literally be about anything, but what differentiates these properties from traditional websites, is the ability for users to edit and collaborate on shared content. Paired with the option to make wikis public or private, the full potential of these communal CMS sites is limited only the the boundaries of human interest. These properties leverage groups of individuals, facilitating the acceleration in the content creation process.

meme-comic-wikipedia

As I mentioned in my introductory blog post, Hello World Campus, one of my favorite pastimes includes “going down the rabbit hole” of Wikipedia. This comparison always reminds me of the popular 1999 sci-fi film, The Matrix. If you didn’t see the movie, imagine that you were raised to believe that Wikipedia was a collection of all knowledge that is known in this world. If you couldn’t come to accept this statement as fact, could you provide any evidence or indicators outside of Wikipedia.com to prove the contrary?

This concept is explained through the meaning of the word matrix. From a mathematical standpoint, it implies an organizational structure in which two or more entities function within the confines of the established architecture. Applying this concept to the real world, such arrangements suggest boundaries and rules dictated by societal constructs, meaning that our actions are ultimately limited by what we perceive to be possible – based on the belief that these rules and boundaries indeed exist. In the movie, the world that most people view as reality, was simply a computer manufactured simulation. Because of this, it was not actually bound by an actual set of rules, but rather a shared acknowledgement and self-imposed limit on what was, and what was not possible.

Going back to the question, I am reminded of a time when the newest edition of an encyclopedia was viewed as the supreme authority in the library. Over time, content was digitized and accessed through CD-ROM, but ultimately, contained the exact same information, spliced with some choppy multimedia content. In both cases, these sources were self-contained and incapable of being updated, yet highly regarded as trustworthy in their day. At first glance, when compared to Wikipedia, these seem to more accurately embody the false reality that The Matrix represented. However, when attempting to employ Wikipedia as an educational tool, we uncover more elusive dilemmas that must be considered.

Content, whether digital or print, has one common drawback, it is created by humans. Connected to the system, humans contribute that which they can understand. Looking at personal experience and the attempt to find objectivity in research, we find that everything is ultimately subjective. The difference between Wikipedia and the dusty pages of Encyclopedia Britannica, is that wikis allow multiple people to contribute their edits, providing an arena for more perspectives to flourish. With an increased number in the potential points of failure, wikis in general allow for more universal knowledge construction by exploring multiple viewpoints as they pertain to a seemingly endless number of topics, across larger populations.

This does not imply that all edits and additions are impartial. In fact, Wadewitz raises concerns over the fact that only 10% of all editors are female, and that there is an even smaller concentration of feminist contributors on Wikipedia overall. While I agree that this is a shortfall that tends to perpetuate gender-bias in education (and countless other sectors), it also awakens people to the existence of these issues, allowing one to challenge the context of societal norms in a publicly recognized forum. This tends to reduce the likelihood of alienation and irrelevant discourse, in favor of crafting a quality, all-encompassing online entity. Much like waking up from the dream of The Matrix, and realizing that there is no spoon, the current limitations of wikis must be realized in order to tip the scales in nobody’s favor, so that all learners are able make the most out of the medium. While the feminist perspective is important, the uphill battle is no doubt representative of much larger sentiments, so such attitudes must always be considered.

Wikis in this case, provides an opportunity for increased equality, even if it is something as simple as changing pronouns to their gender-neutral form. Just as Wikipedia began with a single entry, subsequent edits are significant to the success of the community, as it strives to maintain global influence. The tacit nature if wikis in general provide a model that appears future-proof. The breadth of content offerings, allow for self-guided learning to occur by breaking down otherwise complex concepts. By applying existing expertise, internal linking strategies create a navigable sea of knowledge, by which one is allowed to stumble into related areas. Since the entire catalog of entries, for the sake of argument, is based in reality, it is possible to create an infinite number of connections in order to derive context. The relationship between hyperlinked entries, further develop meta-perspective, as one can trace the cultural-historical context of specific topics, and how they relate to others. At the risk of information overload, private and tightly focused wiki initiatives can help increase the likelihood of bringing about discernible and scalable change, within realms of immediate interest.

The organization of Wikipedia is set up in such a way, that it appears to be a self-governed environment, and it just so happens that one of its greatest flaws, also happens to be one of its greatest strengths – people. Through out participation, we inevitably provide perspective, and our online personas are meant to extend the ideas and values that drive our offline existence. When we realize that wikis are nothing more than socially constructed entities, we are able to turn sites like Wikipedia into machines for transforming subjectivity into objectivity. In this way, we see the promotion of opposing viewpoints that span spheres of influence, and not just circles. This multi-directional approach provides a democratic aspect to wikis that is otherwise limited to the comment sections and forums of other sites.

Drawing Boundaries in a Connected World

3 Replies

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.