Heli on Connectivism

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.

We are studying groups and networks and I am wondering why just  these concepts. Stephen’s image shows that groups are bad and networks are good and up-to-date.  I can follow the purpose and understand the differences, but I totally disagree with using group in this connection. I am searching  new headings for the description:

• Institution  versus Open virtual community
• Energy diminishing versus Energy fostering culture
• Restriction versus Empowerment
• Normal and realistic versus Ideal world

Groupthink means thinking in same way and stopping critics, but the group as such can be whatever. It is good to remember groupthink in order to avoid it. You have to allow diversity, autonomy, openness and distributed democracy for this purpose. Perhaps Stephen means just this: if the left heading were groupthink I could follow it.

But anyway I miss something about energy or empowerment to the right side: knowledge emerges in open, supportive, respective culture. I use Stephen’s Seven Habits as learning material. Is there something about energy? Flow? But who are highly connected people? They must have all those seven attributes and … what else?

How about groupthink in CCK09 – can we see it somewhere?

Walking in a beautiful autumn landscape inspired me to think metahorically. I need this epistemic style for describing human growing, scientific and whatever knowledge (I’m not exact today- it is Sunday ) . I took a photo about three pines and a climbing plant and the wall (I live in that house, just writing here). I have many ways to use this photo as a metaphor.

networking or connecting

First I tell about our facilitators: Perhaps Stephen is the red climbing plant who has his philosophy wall as his main support but he is flexible and climbs with pines as well ( that is perhaps easier and opens new landscapes). George could be the pines. He has roots in land and uses many sources: educational and societal sciences and people’s experiences about real life. Stephen is more ‘in the air’ and explores  new possibilies, for instance he jumps from neurosciencies to all other levels in human life, for him it is OK. (Just listened last week’s Ellumination, so I have this in my mind).

I have to continue: it is not Stephen and George alone who construct connectivism, we all do. What are my pines and climbings and walls and should I say something about breathing (I don’t remember the right concept for plants).

I have studied mostly psychology, especially developmental psychology and education and societal sciences and I have worked a researcher and a teacher for decades. I know that I cannot follow all sciences that for instance networks are built in. I have to recognize my borders though I am developing all the time , I took that photo with my new mobile and put it here. You have some old ladies here in CCK ( hi Sia!) so please don’t say old people cannot learn computer things

I must be open to diversities anyway. It’s good have partners with different backgrounds and try to follow their odd thinking paths .. it is an adventure. Our ellumination about Network (2nd week) put all concepts in a bowl and then shook it. And what happens in our minds? connectivistic learning? Time will tell.

How to describe and visualize interactions in networks? Static pictures are not enough, we must have flashes or videos. Keith Lyons helped again, I found this video Evolving twitter communities in his last blog post ( I couldn’t link to it, so I linked to YouTube).

“This is a dynamic network, showing what companies the 200 most prolific tweets were talking about. Both people and companies are nodes, and the edges change over the course of the day. Everytime a person tweets about a company, an edge is added connecting that person to the company. After 30 minutes, the edge decays. The companies are labeled, and the individuals are anonymized here.”

I like this. But so what? This is the way we live everyday, all the time and our brains can follow and pick up what is needed from the mess. This is one of the best external visualizations about networks, but… the point is to interpret the happenings inside human mind and external remains external.

Another blog that touched me during this CCK09 week was a young man who said that it is very easy to recieve the concept ‘connection’ because it has always been in the focus of developmental psychology. I agree with this opinion, my way is the same. Developmental psychology haven’t used the concept ‘connection‘ but ‘interaction‘ because it tells about mutual influences. Dialog is an appropriate concept, too. How can I interpret all the meanings of connection: internal and external (my vocabulary gives only connexion for trains or ships). Three levels given buy George (neural, social and conceptual) – this is basic knowledge in psychology, no news in it, easy to accept but doesn’t help me.

Should I re-invent or rewrite in my mind all my knowledge if I already have it? Psychology has produced great amount of knowledge about human actions in groups, teams and networks. Same unperfect people acting in all these social environments and repeating mistakes and perhaps new ones in this rapidly changing world.

I have continued my path by reading again Anna Sfard’s and Etienne  Wenger’s writings and I see many important steps forward. Learning by participation and communities of practice have been meaningful concepts for me. It was nice to meet my old thoughts again and reorganize my mind (what does that mean?) The concept ‘brokering’ opened my eyes (my mind?) some years ago. Borderlines are interesting places: for instance I have come from an old-science-university to an university of applied sciences and I am most interested in practical problems, theories are not enough any more. So my place is nowhere in RL and I greatly enjoy to participate this open global course. I need this for prevailing decent motivation in my daily work (thanks to my friend who said this in CCK-Moodle).

It is obvious that we have to proceed from great amount of knowledge to ways for dealing with it, complex situations in complex world. One human being cannot anymore be an expert and it is better or even necessary to build up networks and projects. And so we have done. My attitude to projects is confused, a project means more ‘a joke’ than ‘a good job’. All projects have not worked as they should and there are unrealistic plays which no one believes in (I hope you can follow my simple English).

But I still believe in networks, why? My networks are honest, I build them for myself and they are open. I love the decentralization of networks, it means dynamics and  freedom to act in different ways and think whatever. I agree with the importance of diversity. Diversity is Ok when I can choose my ways, participate or not. I do not like griefers or trolls in internet, they have wrong diversity in their disturbance actions

Communities of practice (Wenger 1998, Cambridge university) are described as voluntary groups in a work place, people who have same interests. In spite of this, communities of practice seem to  have both good and bad elements in their action. All that is said aloud is not knowledge or true in any way, shared ignorance is not better than one person’s ignorance. I can see the same phenomenom in networks.

My first step in microblogging happened in a case that I followed a conference about research methods and I was very eager to follow what people told, I was in my workplace and could not participate in the conference. But I soon understood that I had waited too much: those who commented by microblogging where newbies and didn’t know much about scientific methods, it was their first time. This opened my eyes that microblogging (and blogging) and networks are as vulnerable as all human interactions are. Trust is needed but it shouldn’t be blind.

Thanks to John, we have a great Ning network for developing our ideas about global connectivity. I am just looking forward to Jenny’s ideas about research (see Jenny M). It is so much interesting to do – how to find time for everything?

CCK08 people will meet in Ellumination to assess the course. George and Stephen will have a new course next autumn, too, so take the time for it if you are interested in global networking.

Here comes wrapup recording made by George. I agree with the Norwegian lurker’s comment

Yesterday I turned this blog to an European project and found the question why it was possible to study globally but harder to work in small groups of different universities. And today I found a discussion about the same theme in elearningeuropa pages (communities> discussions):

“Web 2.0 is about social networking and the impact it has on learning or learning 2.0 is that it supports and enables learning networks. Rather than trying to limit the social networks in the boundaries of educational environments I would sport George Siemens and his theory of connectivism arguing that learning networks need to be open, with the learner in control. Learners should be able to choose networks that they trust and belong to. Web 2.0 is promoting and supporting such openness and connectivity the challenge is for educational institutions to develop a supporting culture of sharing and exist as an ecology not in isolation.”

And following:

“Yes, I think that the topic of “connectivism” by George Siemens is very interesting and challenging too.
I would agree that learning networks should be open and that learner should be in control of their learning and so have the chance to chose the networks they trust the most.
But still as you said “the challenge is for educational institutions to develop a supporting culture of sharing and exist as an ecology not in isolation”…. and this is very very challenging today…. I have no idea how institutions could overcome “competitions among them” and “privacy issues” among users, since in my experience even publishing an individual assignment in the provided course forum was not an easy task for the more shy or introverted student. In my experience it is not easy for any students to share with other peers (imagine if with milions or bilions of people..) their assignments, because they will receive a mark for that….I think this is still a tricky topic which need to be further researched and investigated.”

I love these writings and agree with them mostly. But it is not at all impossible for students to work openly, I have many experiences about success in shared knowledge and shared assessment in my online courses. People can share but institutions have problems in sharing because of continuous competition. So the project must be really useful to all participants? Usually it is, I suppose, otherwise it doesn’t begin.

Sharing is a skill that can be learnt.. and millions of people do it every day. For instance I am shy and introvert

After travelling in global world with CCK08 course, this blog will continue in Europe. I will gather here information and knowledge about EDINET, not only the project itself but all the topics around it:

• networking
• ICT students professional growth
• ICT teachers development in their work
• guidance processes
• online pedagogy

Here comes first material: Designing and investigating pedagogical scripts to facilitate computer supported collaborative learning, dissertation by Raija Hämäläinen 2008, University of Jyväskylä. You can find it as pdf opening “Julkaisun verkkoversio”. This publication was very useful when we planned a questionnaire for students in Edinet pilot.

Elearnineuropa pages gather very much knowledge about projects and happenings in Europe. It is worth following. I must remember the possibility to publish there.

There are other Virtual Campus projects in Europe: ReViCa (Reviewing Virtual Campuses) seems very interesting. After my global virtual study experiences I wonder why it seems to be hard to develop joint courses for many universities. CCK08 was not official, perhaps it succeeded therefore? Projects also report problems in online pedagogy and want a general concept map about it. I have to collect my online pedagogy here for getting feedback.

Welcome all old and new friends who are interested in these themes.

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.