Connectivism Mindmap

TWeaver Mod-4: Connectivism

My network is illustrated above in the mind map and shows four different categories of networking that I use.  The least used network for now is in the professional domain.  AESOP is my job search engine and correspondence Web-site that supports my current position as an interim teacher.  The other three include my education, social/friends, and personal/private networks that continuously evolve as I continuously use them.  Now for a bit of history. 

I learned K-12 studies in the late 1970s through the mid 1980s.  In the early 1990s, I finished my undergraduate studies.  95% of my learning during this time was done independently for efficient channels of communication and collaboration, other than f2f, really did not exist.  Cellular telephones and the Internet were not developed enough for consumer usage back then.  My how things have changed in such a short period of time (only two decades, c’mon).  ;) 

In 2009, I had decided to further my education in an online format.  I opened my first social Facebook page and began exploring online universities.  After picking one out, it was soon clear that participative technologies for communication and collaboration were already common and becoming more popular by the day (Siemens, 2008).  Furthermore, it was clear that continuous participation was the key to success in this format of learning.  I had to be actively engaged with content- search, communications, and collaboration with the use of the Internet and the Web tools that were available then.  Most of the communication and collaboration happened in the university portal.  Today, the Walden University Library and Google are currently my primary networks for the search of content.  Most of the communication and collaborative efforts currently are accomplished using online social-multimedia in and outside the university portal.  Elluminate, chat-rooms, Wikis, blogs, and Skype are the primary web tools for these efforts. 

With the use of all of these tools, I can get the necessary correspondence from a community of learners with similar issues.  Additionally, it is necessary to point out that course facilitators do not offer up much information.  Instead of teaching, they are more inclined to help explain, provide context, make meaning where necessary, and evaluate the information researched (Prensky, 2008).  All of the digital tools mentioned help alleviate pressures of the unknown best in different ways for they are quite contextual by nature very similar to the nature of the learning.  Basically, whoever has access to the same technology, we will probably use it in some way and for some reason. 

I learn new knowledge today by researching data networks, developing sound questions, and bringing something to the table of a learning community via one of the five Web tools mentioned earlier.  Don’t forget Email either.  I still use it plenty in my cyber university, Google/Verizon account, and even more discretely for Facebook.  How ironic.  I don’t really think it would be possible for me to go back to learning strategies of 1992.  What a scary thought.  Could you imagine the frustration?  Yikes!!


I posted to AJs' blog @ http://anethaj.blogspot.com/2012/04/johnson-module-4-blog.html?showComment=1335706584759#c2831076524547222651


I also posted to Raymond Coxs' blog @ http://raycoxphd.blogspot.com/2012/04/module-4-posting.html?showComment=1335708001477#c1976065806273262590
                                       

References

Prensky, M. (2008). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 40–45. Retrieved from the Walden Library using the Education Research Complete database.

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

TWeaverMod-3: Collaboration Instincts

I would say that since the beginning, humans have indeed had to rely on interactions between each other.  The sense of community relies on this very primitive nature of us all.  With the birth of western civilization, competition took precedence over the sharing of too much information.  American K-12 sector of education was soon to follow in these footsteps of competition.  Traditional learning promotes a competitive nature for student success and failure that is believed to have major, predictable implications for higher learning, career earnings, hierarchy in the society, etc.  Instead of categorizing student potential, wouldn’t it be best to give all students opportunities to flourish in undergraduate studies and real world opportunities?  I do think it is healthier for students to interact and work in groups with common goals for solving significant problems.  The problem in the past was the dynamics of the differences in young individuals in a face-to-face (f2f) collaborative activity.  Student involvement and participation largely depended on social influences.  Technology delivers the necessary opportunities for all participants to have equally significant inputs.  Beyond this, technology gives equal and ample opportunity for all students to take responsibility for their knowledge and take it as far as they deem necessary.

Constructivist principles rely on inquiry-based learning strategies.  Both individuals as well as groups of learners learn by reflection of their own experiences (Driscoll, 2005). Typical learning outcomes are critical thought and reasoning, practical use of knowledge, self-regulation, and mindful reflection (2005).  In collaborative activities, constructivism principles get much more contextual so therefore, K-12 blended-learning groups need more than just the allotted time in the classroom to allow for critical thought and response.  Technology is capable of supplying the means to organize group activity, deliver content, communicate and socialize amongst members, and present authentic presentations that can be used for assessment.  Furthermore, it can be monitored relatively easily by instructors.  All in all, the home, classroom, and mobile computer devices have desktops that can be considered broadcasting stations, social communities, market places, storing places, or even a printing press if need be (TED, 2008).  All that is really needed is a social arena (wiki, blog, Facebook) to facilitate the organization, deliberation, and presentation of collaborative assignments.  Computer and Internet evolution is certainly increasing in velocity (2008), so there are certainly plenty of online collaborative platforms to choose from.

                      

This is a study completed in 2010.  It is appropriately called:

Blended Learning with Everyday Technologies to Activate students’ collaborative Learning. http://web.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=7293739c-00ed-4eb9-934d-6d84b589bf23%40sessionmgr13&vid=4&hid=14

According to the authors of this study, it can be assumed that younger students are firmly interested, capable, and willing to use different technologies (Vesisenafo, et. al., 2010).  Furthermore, a much larger percentage of K-12 learners are equipped with mobile technology devices that can edit social software anywhere and at anytime.  The dilemma is whether or not these devices are appropriate for new tools for learning or if they are a distraction (2010).  In my humble opinion, I agree with the researchers there are many challenges on the horizon for collaboration.  Contrarily, I also believe that the possibilities overwhelm the hurdles.  The researchers elaborate more by claiming technologies and social software allow for the capture of collaborative student contextual, unique ideas and interpretations and using them to advance learning even more (2010).  Let’s see K-12, f2f, student collaborations do all of that in the confinements of the traditional classroom and with the use of conventional tools.  I don’t think so. J    

I commented on the blog by Jill Lewis @ http://technibug.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/module-3-blog-3-collaboration-4/#comments

I also commented on the blog by Anwar Mohammed @ http://anwar-mohammad.blogspot.com/

I further commented on Pamela Loders' blog @ http://ploderlearningtheoryandedutech.blogspot.com/2012/04/module-3-blog-collaboration.html#comment-form

References

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction. (3^rd ed.). Boston, Mass: Pearson Education, Inc.

TED: Ideas Worth Spreading. (Producer). (2008, February). Howard Rheingold:  The new power of collaboration. [Video webcast]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Vesisenaho, M., Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Havu-Nuutinen, S., Hartikainen, A., & Karkkainen, S. (2010). Blended Learning with Everyday Technologies to Activate Students' Collaborative Learning. Science Education International, 21(4), 272-283. Retrieved from ERIC database in the Walden University Library.