Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Connectivism firstdraft
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Connectivism firstdraft

1,651

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Comment
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,651
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
37
Comments
1
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • This perspective is somewhat challenging to follow – especially for those not familiar with psychological theories – but it offers some unique insights into the Connectivist world. For example, the authors find that autonomy is both the impetus for getting involved in a MOOC and also behind what is seen as a negative force in connectivity – lurking: “We suggest that thinking about networked autonomy in terms of choice and control offers the active “what” of learning; thinking about autonomy in terms of self underlies the motivational “why” in accepting or engaging (or not) with those choices” (p. 130)
  • They demonstrate how the MOOC creates an environment where there is an “apparent paradox of simultaneously pursuing connectedness and interactivity while at the same time offering the potential to support the individual and that which is ‘personal’ (p. 134) The author’s development of the themes of both the inspiration of Connectivism and the and also the conflict within MOOCs is interesting and informative.
  • MOOCs and the theory of Connectivism are both relatively new to the world of on-line learning. They are growing in numbers, and with I tunes University, it is quite likely they will continue to grow exponentially. However, the author’s of this paper write about them as if their whole audience is familiar with this new phenomena. This paper would, perhaps, benefit from a greater explanation of both MOOCS and Connectivism at the beginning Much of the commentary is unclear to the neophyte, which limits the effectiveness of this paper; it seems to speak to a very small ‘inside’ group of people. An example of the narrowness of the references can be seen in this reference: “The presence of a ‘troll’ in the CCK08 forums, for example, evoked varying expressions of anger and discomfort among some learners and was considered a determining factor in participation levels in that environment (Mackness, MaK, &Williams in this paper, p 132). There is no explanation of what a ‘troll’ is or even what ‘CCK08’ is.
  • MOOCs are still very new, and many potential users have not yet become familiar with them.
  • Transcript

    • 1. A critique of “ Connectivism and Dimensions of Individual Experience ” by Carmen Tschofen and Jenny Mackness MARIAN TAUDIN-CHABOT, MARTIN MCKENNA, AARON JOHANNES MDDE601, ASSIGNMENT 2, FEB 2012
    • 2. prelude
      • We decided to examine the article, Connectivism and dimensions of individual experience, by Carmen Tschofen and Jenny Mackness, from the January 2012 issue of The International Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning.
      • The idea of connectivism as it applies to education is fascinating, but new. It seemed to us that there were a couple of ideas that needed explanation before we tackled the “meat” of our chosen essay:
        • First, “ connectivism ” ;
        • Second, “MOOC” – Massive Online Open Course, generally accepted as the current expression of connectivism in education.
    • 3. Connectivism: a learning theory
      • “ Connectivism is a learning theory for the digital age. Learning has changed over the last several decades. The theories of behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism provide an effect view of learning in many environments. They fall short, however, when learning moves into informal, networked, technology-enabled arena. ”
        • “ Connectivism, a learning theory for today’s learner,”
        • George Seimens.
    • 4.  
    • 5. Learning through connections
      • Learning occurs through student interaction as much as with the professors or educational hosting body (if there is one).
      • Students and professors work together in classroom platforms such as Elluminate, where lectures, guest lectures and student presentations occur and also through the use of:
        • Blog postings
        • Twitter
        • Facebook
        • Shared project workgroups
        • ItunesU
        • RSS feeds
        • conversations
      Illustration: “Sense Making Artifacts,” Seimens, blog
    • 6. “ What is a Mooc?” on youtube…
    • 7. Connectivism expectations:
      • Students bring their existing expertise to the table, grow and actuate new learning.
      • New networks of learning communities form, expand and fade, leaving potential for future connection and new connecting skills.
      • For the most part, access to free learning.
      • For the most part, learning without credentials or testing / qualifications either pre- or post- MOOC.
      • The body of knowledge created returns to all participants, including the sponsoring organizations…
    • 8. The text: “ Connectivism and Dimensions of Individual Experience ” Successful networks have 4 properties: Autonomy, connectedness, diversity and openness. This article examines a place for the individual in Connectivism. (p. 124, Tschofen & Mackness, 2012)
    • 9. Autonomy
      • Choice and Control - Connectivism values a freer structure BUT some individuals prefer more structure; as well, a lack of group direction can frustrate some MOOC participants.
      • Psychological Autonomy (ie self-determining behaviour) is a good fit with Connectivism ’ s network autonomy.
      • Lurking as Parasitic is incompatible with the autonomy of choosing to participate or not.
    • 10. Connectedness 1
      • Relatedness in connectivism is often technology based versus a sense of social support valued by individuals.
      • Agreeableness : presenting as agreeable is essential in online interactions.
      • Neuroticism: a “ troll ” can negatively affect on line interaction.
    • 11. Connectedness 2
      • Identity must be built for each different network vs the given family, ethnicity, status identity in real world. Quantity of connections vs Quality of identity (i.e. How much can be/should be built or disclosed?).
      • Extraversion & Introversion: sharing and interactivity is a delight for some but onerous for others; both should be valued online.
      • Privacy, Solitude, Control: Connectivism says learning and knowledge creation do not occur in seculsion vs quiet reflection needed for inspiration and vision.
    • 12. Diversity
      • Connectivism requires high levels of capability in technology and reliability and thoroughness for quality participation.
      • Feelings of effectiveness are challenged by expectations of doing ‘ it ’ the correct way – for example, from peer to peer or from instructor to peer.
      • Emergent, sporadic participation may not reflect accepted standards of academic (or MOOC) conscientiousness.
    • 13. Openness
      • Connectivism means partaking and conversing to generate new knowledge via complex connections.
      • Psychologically for individuals it is an attitude of reception of new information without pre-judgement.
      • So, sharing may actually impede openness for some as it is active rather than passive participation.
    • 14. critique This perspective is somewhat challenging to follow – especially for those unfamiliar with psychological theories – but it offers some unique insights into the Connectivist world.
    • 15. This paper has its strengths and weaknesses:
    • 16. This article offers an insightful look at the opposing forces inherent in the MOOC environment that work against the ideal of Connectivism.
      • The authors delineate the major themes of connectivism.
      • They explain how these themes can be conflicting.
      • They identify opposing forces within the movement.
      • They show that at the individual level there is a conflict between the need for privacy and the need for sharing.
      The author’s development of the themes of both the inspiration of Connectivism and the and also the conflict within MOOCs is interesting and informative.
    • 17. This paper is difficult to understand.
      • There is little introduction of what MOOCs are and what Connectivism is.
      • The authors use a lot of inside references, and jargon – seem to be speaking to an ‘inside’ group of people who are familiar with MOOCs.
      • This is a problem for 2 reasons:
      • 1. MOOCs are still very new, and the number of people who have used them is still small – thus many potential readers may not understand the jargon and references.
      • 2. Those familiar with MOOCs and Connectivism may not be familiar with psychological theory and may become lost when faced with that jargon.
      • The paper would benefit from a more inclusive tone.
    • 18. This paper offers strong ‘insights’ based on research which may be too limited.
      • It seems that the much of the research for this paper is centered around Athabasca University and a very small number of courses.
      • It is difficult then, to verify the accuracy of the conclusions the authors reach.
      Initiatives like Apple University will allow for the exponential growth of MOOC-type courses world-wide, creating other trends, conflicts and benefits to be explored.
    • 19. This paper is interesting and thought-provoking, but difficult
      • The article makes a valiant attempt to look at the tensions and expectations of connectivity as well as what it has to offer.
      • It falls short of being illuminating to most people because it assumes a level of knowledge and understanding that only a small group of people would have.
      • At this point in time it could be that this information is too limited in its scope for current users.
    • 20. To see connectivism in historical context you may want to check out this video….
    • 21. Interestingly, Connectivism as a learning theory is a perspective on a wider movement of global Change… connectivist theory is already being used in practice by change agents outside of education Thank you! Your thoughts on this are appreciated.
    • 22. References Boukobza, Philippe. March 12, 2008. “ Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. ” From his blog, “ Visual Mapping. ” Retrieved from http://www.visual-mapping.com/2008/03/connectivism-learning-theory-for.html   Cormier, Dave. Writer and narrator; Gillis, Neal; Video. Dec 8, 2010. “ What is a MOOC? ” Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW3gMGqcZQc   Downes,S. February 3, 2007. “ What Connectivism Is. ” From his blog, “ Half an hour. ” Retrieved from http://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2007/02/what-connectivism-is.html   Johnson, Steve. “Where Good Ideas Come From.” Uploaded by ‪Riverhead Books on Sep 17, 2010. Youtube video of RSA graphic documentation of Johnson’s text, Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation . Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NugRZGDbPFU&feature=related  
    • 23. References Seimens, George. Undated. “ Connectivism: A Learning Theory for Today ’ s Learner. ” From his blog, “ About. ” Retrieved from http://www.connectivism.ca/about.html   Seimens, George. “ Sensemaking artifacts , ” December 14th, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.connectivism.ca/   Tschofen, C., & Mackness, J. (2012). “ Connectivism and Dimensions of Individual Experience. ” The International Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning, 13 (1), 124-143. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1143

    ×