Heli on Connectivism

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.

Something happened in my mind when CCK studies began. I have to reflect myself in order to participate .. I can’t write to colleagues  if I don’t recognize my own perspectives. What am I doing here actually?

I work in teacher education for adults coming from work life. We don’t have fulltime students in classrooms, they are working and they live in different parts of Finland. So we use virtual learning platforms and social media. Our pedagogy has been up-to-date those two decades I have been here. We have been pondering all learning theories all the time and “invented” personal learning plans in the year 1988 and the great impact of networks soon after that. Students are organized (or they organize themselves) to learning circles with peer feedback etc.)

I have developed my online teaching since the year 2002 and I prefer it. I have a blog in Finnish as an online teacher and I take part in Finnish social media community. I participated in CCK08 in order to follow global discussions about connectivism. And I am here again, I cannot stop coming

This time I try to be more conscious about my perspective: I am asking questions about the “best online pedagogy in the world” and I suppose something like that can be found in CCK09. My orientation is practical, theories are not enough.  In my previous post is dealt with conceptions about knowledge and epistemic styles. In practice you must have skills to all epistemic styles and the ability to choose and combine them:

So I intend to use 1) theoretical data, knowing via thought, 2) empirical facts, knowing via senses and 3) metaphorical, experiental, phenomenological data = knowing via intuition and insight. The criteria fo acceptance as knowledge are in same order:

1. Ist it logical? Is it theoretically sound?
2. Can it be experimentally proven?
3. Does it fit to my experience? Does it feel right? Because I am an expert in online pedagogy I can trust my feelings about rightness. (But I had to read that first, I had forgotten it).

I am not studing only connectivism, I am studing all interesting up-to-date theories about learning and networking – and I am not the only one in the course who has this perspective. I added Frances in my blogroll and found Ning and Diigo groups with this broad perspective. So my next problem is to take time, decide where to participate.

Sun is shining just now, I have to go out, it is not allowed to sit all Sunday with my computer when beautiful autumn is outside.

This is my first step in second CCK09-travel. I always try to find my way, not George’s or Stephen’s or others’. I already know some students and I am convinced that I’ll get ideas from them .. so I must have my mind open. But I have to know what there is in my mind that influences me, I cannot be quite open. I have to ask myself about

• my knowledge building, my habits and ways in constructing my mind
• my values, do I have any so important that they direct my thinking and feeling
• what do I already know about human learning and knowledge? What is closed and what is open in my mind?

These are heavy questions, I feel tired at the beginning of the job. Last week I found some good sources that I have studied in 1990’s and I wonder why I have stopped thinking during last years, have I? I believe that basic questions in knowledge acquisition do not change, not all of them, not totally. I read again a Finnish dissertation about “Knowledge in Interactive Practice Disciplines” (A. Sarvimäki, University of Helsinki 1988). I am not interested in all knowledge, only knowledge used in  education or other interpersonal, interactive disciplines (theory-in-practice). Pragmatism is my choice: what is working in practice and why is it effective and so on. Argyris and Schön: Knowledge in Action is in my bookshelf. Knowing in practice is more demanding/difficult that knowing in theory.

Knowledge is divided in “knowing that” = propositional, declarative, language and concepts, models. Knowledge is “knowing how” = procedural, how to do, what are the phases and so on. How about “emergent knowledge”, where does it come, how is it possible? The contextual nature of practical problems … what does it mean? A dynamic aspect is needed:  Skill in reading situations and flexing in interactions…

I am pleased with three epistemic styles: rational, empirical and metaphorical.  When I am rational I conceptualize and think in logical-illogical ways. When I gather empiria, I perceive (and sometimes misperceive). Most interesting is the metaphorical style: that’s why  I have to use pictures, symbols, which are universal or  idiosyncratic. For instance my photo about destabilizing in my previous post, Jenny recognized it at once and Ailsa remembers my images in CCK08. There is silent knowledge (Polanyi) and intuition in expertice.

How in the world we can construct any new theory of human learning? What is a theory actually? If I forget or leave that open how can I define criteria for good practice in my CCK09 studies? Too difficult, I must go out and walk ..

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…

Young engineering students from Austria, Finland, Czech, Germany and Slovakia have participated in a laboratory course managed by universities in six European countries (Switzerland, too). I have been analyzing the results of student questionnaires. Pedagogical principles are my focus and my inquiry tells only about them. I do not understand anything about routing which was the main subject in labs.

I have answers from 99 university students (only five female). Main results seem very good. Students consider practical work, problem solving,  group work and discory learning most important methods of their learning. Students were very well informed about the course and they were motivated, even enthusiastic to participate. Guidance during the course was given by their own teacher or fellow students in the same university. Learning environment, manuals and guidelines and instructions helped, this is obvious and normal in labs, I suppose. Some technical problems are also normal phenomena, I suppose.

Students assessed themselves to be good listeners, good at task solving, reasoning and explaining. Sometimes they gave advices to fellow students. Other students were described as team work facilitators, knowledge builders and team cohesion builders. Only few were over-riders or lurkers or passive in group working. So they are normal and fine European nerds, aren’t they?

Transnational cooperation happened to some extent. Actually all the project was it, but concrete interaction between students was seen in two universities that I could examine more.

I am wondering what are the possibilities to use different pedagogical methods in remote laboratories environment? Participants have seen that quite similar ideas existed at the partner universities-  only implemented in a slightly different way. In the beginning of the project they had sat together and created a common concept. And now I can see the results.

The pedagogical framework is an important part of the Edinet project. Edinet will create International Semi Virtual campus, which is more complex task comparing to already existing solutions. The most interesting part will be the part regarding Learning in Edinet – Practical suggestions.

Edinet project has workpackages about competencies and so on … pedagogy is only one package. Perhaps we have to collaborate inside the project in order to plan and recommend practical solutions for future. My results from student inquiry seem very appropriate in this phase.

Partners have a meeting in Bremen in June – I would be happy about comments.

Just studying the concept SCRIPT and considering if I need it at all. What new does it bring according to online teaching or is it “planning my course well/ planning from learner’s point of view.” I have heard the concept in two dissertations in Jyväskylä (Mäkitalo, Hämäläinen) and now researchers from Oulu University (Minna Pesonen).

A script is a more detailed and more explicit didactic contract between the teacher and the group of students regarding their mode of interaction (Dillenbourg 2004)

There are scripts called macro or micro, external or internal, content oriented (epistemic) or communication oriented (social). I can follow that content oriented scripts = assignments and communication oriented scipts tell about the interaction expected to happen during the course. You need sequencing, too: the order and schedule for happening. And last (or first) you need the group and resources. The script combines this all. That sounds good, I like the concept because it refers to a play or drama in my mind (not only teaching period)

Choosing the appropriate level of coercion is the oldest educational trade-off (Dillenbourgh 2004)

That is very true: every facilitator is studying that question all the time and the solutions need much experience and intuition. Students need guidance and freedom, both in epistemic and social area. How to become a wise fasilitator? Reflection is necessary and feedback and … Over-scripting means too much guidance or too strict assigments and so on – learning becomes boring, I would say. Every teacher can do that, I suppose.

Structuring approaches aim to create favourable conditions for learning by designing and scripting the learning situation before the interaction begins (Jermann 2004)

Oh, I need to say design, not plan. Design reasearch is the right concept nowadays, not action reasearch any more. I tend to be old-fashioned because I have age

This is European research: in Germany Fischer, Koppe, Weinberger, Kollar, in Switzerland Dillenbourg and Jermann and in Finland (names in the beginning). Thanks to Minna Pesonen for this orientation. Finnish researchers travel to Germany, it is our old custom. I don’t remember anybody commented scripts in CCK08?

Script researchers come from educational sciences, psychology and computer sciences – collaboration is needed. I know there is a doctoral study group (educational and computer sciences) in Joensuu Universities too.

Something very interesting in this script theme – I have to continue my studies. I have links but Foxit Reader didn’t open them correctly, so I add them later. And some concept maps or pictures would help.

Our  Massive Open Online Course ended a month ago and I have spent my Christmas time listening to our recordings and reading Moodle discussion and blogs. What do I think about the course now, afterwards?

George said in the last course blog:

“By way of a final analysis, thousands came, less stayed, and even less contributed. Did we change the world? No. Not yet. But we (and I mean all course participants, not just Stephen and I) managed to explore what is possible online. People self-organized in their prefered spaces. They etched away at the hallowed plaque of “what it means to be an expert”. They learned in transparent environments, and in the process, became teachers to others. Those that observed (or lurked as is the more common term), hopefully found value in the course as well. Perhaps life circumstances, personal schedule, motivation for participating, confidence, familiarity with the online environment, or numerous other factors, impacted their ability to contribute. While we can’t “measure them” the way I’ve tried to do with blog and moodle participants, their continued subscription to The Daily and the comments encountered in F2F conferences suggest they also found some value in the course. – All in all. It was fun. I’ll try and pull together more cohesive reflections over the next few weeks. As will Stephen and the numerous participants, I imagine.”

There was a recommedation to look at Wendy’s work. The final “project” for enrolled participants is to reflect on the quality of their own learning networks. Wendy Drexler posted a video of her final project that is (deservedly) getting significant attention: Connectivism: Networked Learner

I agree it is fine. And I found many other interesting visualisations about networking. For instance Maru worked with Carlos and Viplav (Mexico -Spain-India). John told about his flight and Jenny her experiences.

What is Connectivism or what is best in it? I have tried to understand … it must have something to do with networking online. Perhaps it was Rodd who spoke about pedagogy of networks, could it be .. or methodology of online networking or.. Connectivism is not a theory but an approach, point of view or .. Connectivism developers are practitioners and courageous to try new things. CCK08 answered to the question What is possible in a global online course?

Because I have problems in finding appropriate concepts in English, I use George’s writing 12.12. in his blog. Boldings are mine, I am considering those parts.

“In a post expressing ideas similar to Wendy Drexler’s Networked Student video, ed4wb contrasts education as traditionally conceived and as it might develop in the future. Several useful diagrams emphasize the type of control shift occurring in how learners access content and participate in conversations. I’ve been a bit bothered lately by how networked learning is increasingly being conceived – i.e. a function of external and social networks. This is the most obvious way to explain learning. For example, I grow my knowledge as I connect to other people and information sources.

This is, however, not a complete view of learning. If learning is only about external connections, then how can gradients of understanding be considered? Or how can expertise (yes, it still exists…) be described in relation to novices? If our focus is only on the external act of networking with others, have we moved much beyond behaviourism? We can still use a network metaphor to address this concern, however. As suggested during CCK08, learning can be seen as networked in at least three distinct ways: neural, conceptual, and external/social. The underlying structure in each instance is a network, but what is being connected is obviously different in each instance.”

In this chapter we can see the level of connectivism today. The same elements could be seen when we planned research about CCK08 in Moodle: we can follow external connections, perhaps some social happenings, something about conceptual changes. Mostly we follow tools only.

It is much harder to understand learning (or teaching or guiding or facilitating). Much to do …

1. What is the quality of my learning networks: diversity, depth, how connected am I?

A  year ago I began a blog which aimed to network online teachers in Finland. Now I have a community around it. I have seen that network matters, it is necessary. We can support and motivate each other.. development is so slow that if you are alone you can’t always believe in it. I don’t mean that I was the first networker in Finland, not at all, some had done it many years and  for instance, I heard about this course from one Finnish activist Anne Rongas who almost every day tells us good advices. Thanks to her. I had followed George and Stephen and given my colleagues links to them but not last summer when this course was planned.

The quality of my networks is an open question even to myself. I cannot live without networks but very few people are near me or deeply meaningful in my life and my development. If I were more open myself, could I have more deep connections? I don’t know. The quantity is no answer, it’s quality that matters – but without quantity you cannot have any quality.

2. How has this course influenced my view of the process of learning?

During CCK08 I have seen all this happen in a global level and I have enjoyed it. Affordances have been open but often neglected when I have been very busy in my work, I couldn’t change that situation.  I have enjoyed following this large open online course, social expectations and reactions. Very much depends on expectations: if you come to learn with others and from others, so you will get it.  I have got interaction enough for sense making or meaning making ( in my blogging).

3. How can you incorporate connectivist principles in your design and delivery of learning? I take this next and change the question: Which principles do I follow in my design and delivery of learning?

I have always been student-centered in my pedagogical solutions and as an online teacher it has been easy. Just now I have problems with the learning platform my institution has bought.. but my Finnish network is helping me to find good practices. Thanks to Juha.

Students learning is my focus and the three main areas around it are content, pedagogy and appropiate tools for digital implementation. You can follow my thinking here -  I didn’t find the address yet, but instead I found a link to Stephen. This is recommended to all students in our teacher education, perhaps you want to know that   Is that link the best one?

Many questions are open in didactics (was that only German concept, should I say pedagogy?) One of my open questions is: Students collaboration or free schedules? .. that problem I used to  solve by using asynchronous methods, so I can have both, I mean my students can collaborate with a free timetable.
George’s lecture about ‘Instructional design and Connectivism’ – it was easy to agree with, but I did not find any new ideas in it.  Perhaps I could not follow the 4 domains he presented? Should I? I have my own – only one learning object in English and I couldn’t find it myself .. very convincing, isn’t it?

4. What types of questions are still outstanding?

For instance: Continous feedback from my students online – I try a diary of learning platform (a blog, but not open). The quality of learning is always an open question, I don’t know if it can ever be solved. During my Christmas Holiday I will read again CCK08 materials for finding the best ones, best thoughts for me, I know there are many I haven’t noticed yet. So keep this all open, please.

5. I will try to find photos or pictures or paintings to decribe this all, I am not sure if it is possible but I use my Sunday for finding because I want to.

Now I have found the marking scheme for this CCK08 course. I am wondering how to consider the situation. I feel myself as a young Canadian university student Someone said in Moodle (was it Stephen after forcing us..) that this course is NOT ordinary and so we dare to say what we want and unsubscribe if we want. But after reading those markinf schemes – and knowing that Sia have recieved an assessment of paper 1 – I am just wondering.

Does it make sense to assess all participants in similar schemes? Why? I never do so in my online courses to adults, I write feedback individually. I have worked in different universities more than 30 years, how should I become assessed and by whom? I had my conversation with my boss last week (so called developmental discussion) and he accepted my own assessment about goals and achievements. This is how I see myself:

I want to be an online teacher of high quality and I see that I have to understand human learning deeply. I have to be able to work in networks because I cannot be an expert alone. I have to develop my online pedagogy all the time. How could I assess this all?

The only simple criteria for me is to use English; I am doing it. But it is not interesting at Canadian university which uses English all the time. The other area in which I see empowerment in myself is online pedagogy. i have listened both Stephen’s and George’s analyses about this course and I could have done the same myself (I mean it).

I have got an experience about networking and some good presentations of it. I must have learned something and I have become more conscious of the necessity of networking. And I know how difficult it is to network in this course when you come from Finland, this is an important experience. Who regulates the world clock, for instance?

But how about learning? I do not have any feeling of proceeding, not yet. I like Lisa Lane’s picture 18.9. where the new part is “web-based activity makes the most sense through the connectivist lens” . I could not write my position on connectivism in the way required, I gathered all possible associations about learning. I am asking about connections between them: this is my second beginning in this course.

I am not sure if I use concept maps or APA citations and I am not sure how I continue here but I will continue studying human learning – I am sure about it.

I have twice listened to Stephens skype presentation 12.10. (the link was in Daily) – he describes this course: openly planned, open content and open delivery. I am an online teacher myself and I am keen on these questions. Perhaps I learn here mostly about online teaching – facilitating.

This course illustrates connectivism: its principles have to live here, we should see them, enjoy them.

• Diversity is great and it is accepted and supported.
• Autonomy is supported or demanded: self direction have to practice again and again, it’s not easy.
• Openness is true
• Emergency of knowledge is happening. We live in it and try to grasp opportunities. Not easy, not at all.

Stephen told his listeners ( where they in Germany or.. it doesn’t matter) that we have settled down and found our places and we are not so worried anymore. But perhaps worrying goes deeper in this phase:

For instance I am asking myself that do I ever understand “network knowledge ” – distributed knowledge???

When I began this post I imagined to plan an open assessment to my own learning / development during this course, but now I seems too far – a dream… if I do not comprehend the basics, how could I assess any development?

Time will tell. And perhaps you?