Heli on Connectivism

I greatly enjoy the definings of residents or visitors in the web, given by TALL blog (Online education with the University of Oxford). It is not about academic or technological skills, it is about culture and motivation. I am not a digital native, I am an immigrant but I love the openness of web culture and I am motivated to participate online. I am an online teacher with no classroom teaching. So, am I a resident in the web?

The resident is an individual who lives a part of her life online. The web supports the projection of her identity and facilitates relationships. She has an persona online which she regularly maintains. This persona is normally primarily in a social networking sites but it is also likely to be in evidence in blogs or comments, via image sharing services etc   She will  use the web to socialise and to express herself. She is likely to see the web as a worthwhile place to put forward an opinion. In fact the resident considers that a certain portion of their social life is lived out online. The web has become a crucial aspect of how to present oneself and how to remain part of networks of friends or colleagues.

The Visitor is an individual who uses the web as a tool in an organised manner whenever the need arises. They may research a specific subject. They may choose to use a voice chat tool if they have friends or family abroad.  They always have an appropriate and focused need to use the web but don’t ‘reside’ there. They are sceptical of services that offer them the ability to put their identity online as don’t feel the need to express themselves by participating in online culture in the same manner as a Resident.

I am definitely a resident in my professional life as a teacher and developer. I have a permanent blog in Finnish and a network around it. I participate in Finnish networks of social media and follow happenings also globally. I have an identity as an online teacher, it is a part of me. But I am not a resident in my private life, I only follow my daughter and her friends in FB but I don’t tell about myself there. I recieved some congratulations on my birthday, it was nice of course.

I am open in professional questions, I allow others to learn about my mistakes and I don’t worry about criticism. It is voluntary to read my blog. I have no spam or nuisance in Finnish, we have a language  that nobody can follow My teaching materials are open to colleagues but the learning environment of my institute is closed, I cannot change it. My blog is open and I have nothing against open teaching. Freedom is important to me, I hate schedules and orders..

I am a visitor in Twitter , I haven’t found my role there, only follow CCK09 via Google Reader. I am a visitor in FB, I like to see videos that my networked colleagues put there but I am not active myself. I have goals and I select my tools, I do not live in the web all the time. My focus is in learning and educational culture, not in technology.

Transparency is related to openness. Openness is most often related to content. Transparency involves making our learning explicit through forums, blogs, presentations, podcasts, and videos. Throughout CCK09, George Siemens made the statement that “when you are transparent in your learning, you are teaching others”. He continues: Most people, however, are uncomfortable taking the risk of posting half-baked ideas publicly. Trust and personal sense of security is important for learners. Learning is an act of vulnerability.

Yes it is, I could say. When I began blogging two years ago I was vulnerable and I had stopped if I got strong critique but I recieved positive comments and continued. Now I do not bother myself with this vulnerability question, I analyse happenings and ask feedback if I need. Sometimes I ponder why it is so hard to build connections in for instance CCK09? All my friends are from CCK08 or real life, only Frances that I began to follow this year and some outside the course but links found there. This is normal network life, isn’t it?

I continue my studies in CCK09 week 7. Power is always an interesting theme. I liked the papers given to us:

• W.H. Dutton: Through the Network (of Networks) – the Fifth Estate

• Network Logic: who governs in an interconnected world? edited by McCarthy, Miller and Skidmore.

I printed two papers dealing with teachers work: Ann Lieberman and Diane Wood (National Writing Project, USA) and Hargreaves answer to them. Actors are always enthusiastic about the development they feel and see around – and the researcher proves that nothing is sure.  We don’t know the cause-and-effect threads. – Nice to read but very common if you have done the same last 20 years.

Then I read Howard Rheingold’s Smart mobs. He describes  Netwar – and sees both Bark and Light in it. We hope that ‘good guys’ will lead the new forms of organisation but there is no guarantee about this. It’s important to follow discussions about swarm intelligence and the social mind. Global brain? Smart mobs are unpredictable and for instance I have learnt to be worried about this, new technology is not in the best hands of human mankind.

Manuel Castells  Afterword, why networks matter concludes the book. Castells believes in networks, I could say, in an astonishing way. Networks have developed because techology enables it and we live in a network society (not in an information society or ja knowledge society). Networks know no boundaries. The networking logic explains the features of the process of globalisation. Sociability is transformed in the new historical context: human need and desire for sharing and co-experiencing influences it. Societies exist as social forms of shared experience.

World is changing and nobody can tell us the focus. I appreciate Rheingold and Castells but they are not my gods We can see that technology gives us new devices and media tries to update itself, and networks have taken power (I am not sure about this). We need values not only new social media. I want to belong to Globaldignity movement, they have the dream I want to believe and work for better world for all humans. There is no simple way to take the power and leave all authorities behind, it is hard and permanent daily work and living with dignifying attitudes to other human beings.

Now I am enjoying some papers guided by CCK09 week 6 Complex adaptive systems. I found the wonderful sites of  SantaFe Institute, really easy and motivating to use. They will be my favourite sites…

Another source worth of reading in my opinion is Francis Heylighen, Free University of Brussels. He deals with complexity and information overload in society: why increasing efficiency leads to decreasing control. It is possible to predict causal effects but not human behavior. The amount of information in society and the speed followed by open publications increase and we get data smog that covers real knowledge. We have tools to organise flows of informations but here is again the overload, the overload of opportunities. I don’t know how to find any valuable from my Google Reader or iGoogle or Twitter, but I find a lot of data smog all the time.

It is a paradox that the only way to use complex and open systems is to make them more simple and restricted. So I build a system of  ‘people I can trust’ in my mind and choose what and whom  to follow. But if I have never time to read or think I can follow many wrong prophets. One of the problems is that those who now only technology have a strong voice in social media and others can follow them quite blindly. This is a bubble of social media that is good to see, I opened my eyes while participating in a discussion in Finnish last week. Young guyes take the power with poor understanding of substance things, they have done it some years because it seems normal to other participants. This means losing control and unpredictable influences. There is no friction in tweets, nuisance is open to everybody so let’s use it to be postmodern up-to-date people 

To understand developmental dialectics is needed again: every property and opportunity turns to its opposite and you should be careful and open all the time ,which is impossible. Thanks to F. Heylighen who deepened my thinking and gave me devices to see what’s happening. And thanks to open CCK09 which seem to be an excellent orienting course (source?) to knowledge and connections needed to .. what? to live and learn and participate today.

Last week I was not so much interested in themes given (groups and networks), I feel that I have nothing to learn from our course, the situation there is all the same than a year ago. So I had time to reflect the situation in the course, what is happening. I prefer my blog and clarify the mess in my brain here, not disturb others with sharing it. They, who are interesting in my thought follow this and I appreciate them greatly.

My intention was to tell about an important help I got last week. Google Alert gave me Tom Haskins question about CCK09 connection problems. That’s what I have lived through, I fail to find or recieve  the ‘great new idea’ offered to us. There are many ways to interpret this as Tom says. I don’t know yet what my answer will be. I do not believe that neuroscience is a solution of learning sciences’ open questions. It is only part of it.

Pondering on the far out idea also resonates my thinking. It is true that nobody can see the new learning theory needed to intepret new learning possibilities around us. Is it a theory what is needed or a new frame or ..? I saw West Side Story in TV (in Finland) yesterday and I had no problems in enjoying it. After the movie there was a programme of Bernstein and Kiri Te Kanava and Jose Carreras and the orchestra and I admired their great expertice. Fifty years ago and now: people are still people. – Is it worth a new theory if we nowadays listen only 5 minutes videos and follow fragments .. develop excellent vehicles for rapid streams of whatever (nonsense).

Kuhn’s The Structure of scientific revolutions is in my mind, too. Do we really need a revolution of learning theories? And how to do it? I am interested in testing new ways to learn and I appreciate CCK courses because practice is the needed prove, a natural experiment. Continuous follow-up about our reflections is necessary. Or is connectivism a movement for better open world and  we can find each other in CCK courses. So every new network connection is result and we don’t need any else evidences.

Dilemma is an interesting psychological concept, Tom wrote about it already and there is a comment of cognitive therapy. And then forward to different process connections… now I have found a blog to follow -  thanks to CCK09 tag.

I participated CCK08 a year ago (this blog is made for it) and I have followed research about happenings during the course. Most of them deal with external actions: how many connections, discussions, writings and so on. It is not an easy job, you have to develope new methods for it. We have much framework knowledge about our course. Thanks to Google Alert it has been easy to follow :

• moodle forum discussions in graphical network models are more effective than scanning forums
• presentations about all the vehicles and an example of products given by Mike Bogle slideshare

Mike presents Wendy’s video about networked student, I suppose we all liked it very much. But now I see that it deals only with external actions: student does this and this etc. An interesting attention to me was now the concept American Psychology, I did’nt notice it earlier. Do they really study American Psyche only?

I am waiting for results about the research (questionnaire and interview) made by Jenny M, John and Roy. They are comparing people who chose to use a blog or Moodle forums, what are the factors behind those choices. I liked to answer their questions myself and it was a good opportunity to learn to understand better. It is not simple to say what I was waiting for when I decided to participate in a global course like CCK was .. and what happened to my focus during the course period.

External factors are good to know but they are not enough – I am interested in what happens in human minds, what is  learning actually. I found an dissertation Passion at work: blogging practices of knowledge workers  and it helped me to understand my decisions: what are the needs that make my blog necessary. Blogging means  ‘everyday grounded theory’. The cultural schift is great:

• personal passions have a legitimate place at work ( I love this, I need this)
• transparency is here to stay
• everyday routines matter (it is stupid to say I have no time to write a blog)
• authority becomes fluid (I love this, too)
• visibility can turn into information overload (but this is nice  I suppose and helps to develope further)

This is the way I want to proceed in my research and my thinking. Lilia Efimova who wrote the dissertation, had one workplace and Knowledge Management bloggers community  in her research .. I am perhaps interested in case studies. The entity must be a human being if I want to understand what happens inside human mind.

I appreciate the possibility to global interaction again, CCK09 is beginning and I have to decide how to participate this time…

On a beautiful Saturday I am coming to the end of the European Project EDINET - started here (in this blog) in January 22nd. I had dreams about deep understanding about engineering students and teachers.. I always have dreams .. but what did I learn? I had one excellent discussion with my son, he spoke honestly and I learnt that ICT-students learn many languages for programming. I also had one trip to Bern for further planning, it was good place to learn to me.

But the Edinet project, what did I learn? I have analysed students answers (N=128, from seven universities in seven countries). I am convinced that it is wise to open laboratories to foreign students and it happened. It is great. And more: the implementation and pedagogical principles are OK. For deeper understanding I should work more, and really collaborate with engineering teachers and laboratory workers. I participated only the last part of the project and did what I could (oh, how clever). Pedagogical principles seem very good but they work on a general level.

I was happy to begin  and I am happy to stop. I will return from Europe to global level. I have dreams again…

I like to take photos and play with them.  I had a nice Sunday constructing my final work in Power Point dias beginning from photos and then writing some thoughts with my vocabulary. If someone can follow, I’ll be happy. Here it comes:

cck08 (pdf)

I have studied psychology more than educational or societal sciences and psychological knowledge is my focus. It should take more space in connectivism.. or should it? I have worked in adult education all my live (and it is long) and I have seen the problems people meet in this changing world. And I’ve met those problems myself.

In this “final with images” I tell about my thoughts and experiences more than our course. I cannot influence Stephen or George or Connectivism, but I can influence myself, so analysing myself makes sense. And a survey is coming about the whole course, I will take part in it.

Thanks to facilitators, this has been an adventure. I should have had more time to it but we will continue..?

We have first beautiful winter day in my town in Finland today as you can see:

It is fine to work at home and look at that view while thinking. I have an ugly room in my institute, new but ugly.

Today I have the opportunity to study and I will stay at home. It was Sia who had links to inspiring learning spaces and so I became conscious about the importance of beauty. If you compare this winter photo with my september 20th autumn photo – you can see how wonderful it is to live in Finland.

The nature has seasons and it can change, how about educational systems? Our topic this week .. change in human mind or only a system, often only on papers? How an I stay optimistic? Let’s study…

This is paper 3 in CCK08

Reflect on the opportunities and resistance found in society and organizations in adopting different approaches to teaching and learning.

Why is it so difficult to change the practice of education?

All institution aim to stay as they are. Teachers have got priviledges and they want to keep them and perhaps more. We have school buildings and classrooms – so we have to use them effectively. Certification systems are the way forward to universities.. to high salaries and so on. Show must go on, you know. In this blog a friend of mine is pondering “What is wrong in ..?” We have a lot to do, I suppose.

What kinds of opportunities can we embrace if we are able to make fundamental and systemic changes?

That is a tough question. I don’t know, really. Can embrace? .. is wise to embrace? is possible to embrace? I see fundamental and systemic changes need changes in human consciousness. Political decisions are always surface compromises. Changes in consciousness happen very slowly if they are deep. The best in last week was the video of Howard Rheingold (Ted ideas worth of sharing, 19 minutes). That video was just what I needed, it gave me back the Hope of Better Future. He has been working with these issues some 30 years and he still believes in mankind. Thanks for it.

What can we learn from voices of resistance?

Voices of resistance force us to consider deeper, to argument better and to be persistent. Not bad?  But I have to confess that often I am tired about resistance, I don’t love it

Can our current world of weak ties and easy connections produce the depth of learning required to meet the complex challenges facing our future?

This is most important and tough to answer. Howard gave me hope. He saw the Way: new collaboration. We need next economy form after capitalism, new forms of well being. We already have certain kind of sharing (Linux, Google, Wikipedia) . We have projects of collaboration, so it is possible. We don’t know enough yet.. what the basic principles will be, but we have to think about it. Get the co-operation project started, said Howard Rheingold to us.

There are projects, indeed. You ain’t yet, says Pekka Himanen, great young Finnish philosopher, at the end of “The Finnish Dream.” I am already a member of Global Dignity. Welcome there! These projects require effort and collaboration!

….

Reflection: I am astonished about writing, I had taken a break in CCK08 because I had to write an article in Finnsh and I was busy and full of stress and my English was sleeping totally. But here I am, gathered some thought, sharing them. Sorry that haven’t read others’ blog posts and can’t link to them. But some day I will. And I am in time, it is three hours to midnight in Finland just now when I publish this. So I am not a bad student, yeah?

Should I write something .. I am asking myself, my motivation isn’t clear just now. The theme of this week is instructional design and it is something I have been working last 20 years. Periods then or stages or what ever they are:

1988 I began in my current workplace and it was ‘time of process oriented’ curriculum – very few people understood the idea .. but now it is true. Ok then some said that we turned to project-oriented curriculum, it meant that students had authentic projects. All these years we have worked learner-centred, developed self assesment, portfolios and so on. Then it became time of big organisations in Finland ..and we are part of  byrocracy. We try to save our beautiful ideas inpite of all the rules. We are very tough, we stay optimistic.

Today I have studied in this course. I liked Grainne Conole articles ( Isuppose both were her or her teams). It is good to recognise that we have tools that align good pedagogy. It makes me happy. The only problem is that I cannot use those good tools, I have to use those that the big organisation gives me, I cannot bother my students to use open free tools, it is too difficult. Oh I sound cynical today, but I am not. Remember : I had a cloud in my first blog post

Earlier I had listened Georges’ 23 minutes lecture 2-3 times. It got me think about context, I didn’t tell that we have contextual curriculum, really we have.  And I offer space for students’ learning in all my courses. Pattening, wayfinding, sensemakig – that is the way. It is easy to agree with George.

I could’nt open Conole session (and Manitoba didn’t open yeaterday) , but I repeated Couros session which dealt with open teaching, too. Second listening means that I can follow better and slides help a lot. And it was interesting to listen last night’s Ellumination, it opened – I felt myself a spy from Europe when you talked Canadian jokes. Culturally rich course – but the pedagogical thought are all the same and it is nice.

So: last 2o years I have lived in the middle of “world is changing very fast” talk, so what? Why all this talk? Is there somebody who doesn’t know it, yet, or to whom do we speak? Action is better that talking, so:

I should ask: How could I better collaborate with my students in order to …. what? I hope it is next week’s theme Teaching and learning culture has developed in described direction ( I mean CCK08) and it is good to change experiences of succesful pilots. You can see our curriculum for international group in English here