Anyway, this month, I got a paper copy of the UK version of Wired. A few articles focused on the people who succeeded in turning around a lost business case into a success again. I liked the conclusion of the editor (David Rowan):

“The comeback of public figures ranging from Mickey Rourke to Martha Stewart illustrate that being knocked down isn’t necessarily the end. Not if you have a purpose and a mission, a reason to prove yourself and a willingness to innovate.
And if you stay hungry. And stay foolish.”

Stay foolish.  Must not forget (note to self).

My presentation starts with some observations out of my own classroom. I ask my own students every year (pre service teachers, professional bachelors, 3-years of study) if they think they can learn from and with others via Twitter, weblogs, podcasts, Facebook etc. And every year, I get the same type of answers for all the applications I mention, except for Facebook. I took Twitter as an example here, but it could be replaced with blogs or podcasts or…

My mid-years always respond with “Twitter is trivial, there is nothing to learn from the update of a celeb telling how they are doing”. My last-years don’t use Twitter, but they start to reflect on ways how Twitter can be used for learning. They start seeing the value of a network as well. And here comes the funny thing: once those students are graduated, they start following paid courses about the applications mentioned above.

The exception is Facebook. They don’t see Facebook as a learning and networking tool, but they do use it that way.

I always tell them during my lessons: please listen to me now, while it is a part of your curriculum, in two years you will have to pay someone to learn the same in a seperate course. But it doesn’t really help.

So what changes in their perception of a tool in those 2 years? A first simple answer can be found in their age. They are two years older after graduation. A second answer will be the difference of being a pre-service teacher and an in-service teacher. I think we can assume that your network starts to grow once you are out of school. So it looks like an in-service teacher starts to use other tools than Facebook to build his/her network. And last but not least, I think our students underestimate the value of learning via a (diverse) network and the importance of building that network.

Since I started talking about learning via networks (5, 6 years) my students’ reactions stayed the same. Will this ever change?

Note: I don’t have proof for all this. It is just my observation of the day.

To be honest, I don’t like concept maps which are too big. That’s why I choose to concentrate on the topics that interested me the most in this course (or maybe: which I was ready for in my learning process).

Some words on the concept map:

• As a Ph.D. student, I read almost every day articles on learning theories. So far, connectivism has not been mentioned in any of those articles. The CCK09 course was a good starting point in widening my view on learning theories.
• Being a teacher myself, the course made me reflect on my own job. My second article, the end of the fishbowl, reflects my thoughts on this topic.
• A third focus for me was my own learning process, where I did a lot of thinking on learning in networks and the personal learning environment. I discussed my view and questions on this topics in podcast one part 1 and part 2.
• And finally, I learned a lot about (and did a lot of thinking on) the impact of technology and authority on learning and teaching.

The concept map was made with Cmap. I consider the concept map to be a snapshot in time.

Shownotes:

• Analyzing Cindy’s PLE (0:00 – 11:00)
• The influence of the CCK09 course (11:00 – 20:15)
• the difference between a LMS and a PLE (20:15 – 25:10)

About the panel:

Wilfred Rubens (1964) currently works as a policy advisor at an institute for vocational education and training (ICT in education, educational development and innovation). Furthermore Wilfred provides keynotes, presentations, workshops and classes about technology enhanced learning. He is professionally involved in e-learning for more than 12 years. For more than 5 years he blogs about ICT and learning and can also be found on Twitter and various other software tools.

Erwin van Hunen works as a senior technical architect and competence manager for an IT company in Stockholm. He’s also the creator of various Doppler versions (Windows podcast aggregator and RSS reader on iPhone platform) and blogs on the Mobile Viking weblog.

Your host is Dr. Smetty.

Shownotes:

• Introduction (0:00 – 2:00)
• PLE Erwin (2:00 – 3:15)
• PLE Wilfred (3:15 – 4:15)
• PLE close-up Wilfred (4:15 – 7:15)
• PLE close-up Erwin (7:15 – 8:45)
• Conclusion (8:45 – 9:45)
• PLE Cindy (9:45 – 13:45)
• Impact of technology on learning Erwin (13:45 – 16:30)
• Impact of technology on learning Wilfred (16:30 – 20:20)

About the panel:

Wilfred Rubens (1964) currently works as a policy advisor at an institute for vocational education and training (ICT in education, educational development and innovation). Furthermore Wilfred provides keynotes, presentations, workshops and classes about technology enhanced learning. He is professionally involved in e-learning for more than 12 years. For more than 5 years he blogs about ICT and learning and can also be found on Twitter and various other software tools.

Erwin van Hunen works as a senior technical architect and competence manager for an IT company in Stockholm. He’s also the creator of various Doppler versions (Windows podcast aggregator and RSS reader on iPhone platform) and blogs on the Mobile Viking weblog.

Your host is Dr. Smetty.

Introduction

I want to start this paper with a reflection on my first year as a teacher trainer. Being a newbie, I was really happy I could teach in parallel with a colleague. He provided me with support, content and the learning materials. At that time, ICT and media was almost completely understood as teaching Microsoft Office Programs. All courses were given ex-cathedra, and in a one-way-communication style with the teacher in front and students who were trying to follow the instructions demonstrated on their desktop computers. One day in that first year, I was explaining them how to work with styles in Microsoft Word. I remember looking at their faces at one point. Right there, I had the feeling to be in front of a fishbowl with goldfishes. They were gasping at me, just opening their mouth to breathe air. I will never forget that moment, because it was the first step in my belief I had to change my role as an educator.

ICT is more than just a course

In the past, ICT could be considered a separate course in a curriculum, just like math and history were. Today, this vision on ICT is no longer valid. There are numerous reasons why ICT should be part of every aspect in the education of future teachers, but I will concentrate on 3.

The first reason for teachers teaching in Flanders, should be “the final objectives” who were introduced by the Flemish government in September 2007. “Minimum objectives the educational authorities consider necessary and feasible for a particular part of the pupil population. Final objectives apply to a minimum set of knowledge, skills and attitudes for this part of the pupil population.” (website Department for Educational Development, core curriculum). ICT is one of the cross-curricular final objectives where the government states they are “a basic package of themes on which the school can be called to account by society (website Department for Educational Development, Cross-curricular final objectives). Ten objectives were determined like the pupils “have a positive attitude towards ICT and are willing to use ICT in support of their learning” (number 1), “can retrieve, process and save digital information by means of ICT” (number 6) or (number 10) “are willing to adjust their actions based on reflection upon the use of ICT by themselves or others (website Department for Educational Development, Ten ICT Cross-curricular final objectives).

Not only recognises our government that society considers ICT as mandatory, our student teachers must be able to meet the cross-curricular final objectives with their own students. In order to do so, it is clear they will have to master enough  ICT-skills themselves before they can meet the final objectives with their students.

A second reason could be found is several research studies concerning the importance of good “ICT examples” by teacher trainers themselves towards their own students (Jo Tondeur et al., 2009; Kangro & Kangro, 2005; Shapka & Ferrari, 2003).

A third reason can be found in the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) approach that “attempts to capture some of the essential qualities of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching”. “Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, transactional relationship between all three components. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator)” (Mishra, 2008).

More reasons could be found and cited in support for integrating ICT in every aspect of teacher education, but the three cited above should do for the purpose of this paper.

The end of the fishbowl

So what could be done for student teachers in order to help them develop new (or support their current) ICT skills?

To go on with the fishbowl metaphor, I would suggest we all go swim somewhere else. We don’t have to go to the sea or a river with strong current from the first time. A nice little pool will do in the beginning. As an educator I will still take the lead sometimes, but most of the time I will be swimming between them or even after them. They will learn from me, but also, and even more, from the other fishes. And once they feel strong enough, they can even go out and explore wilder waters with other great fish out there.

Learning Networks and connectivism are coming very close at this point of my story: the fishbowl (classroom) will be replaced by a learning network (pool). A few rules must be followed. It is clear we shouldn’t just suddenly take the fishbowl away and throw all the fish in the pool. And second, as an educator we need to be in the water ourselves, but it isn’t  recommended as well for us to jump in the water without thinking about the consequences. In the most ideal situation, all educators and fish are swimming in the same pool. Unfortunately today, too much educators are still talking to their fishbowl.

Conclusion
Our roles as educators are changing. In my field, it is clear that our society, with the support of the educational department, wants us to change and research happens to support this change. If we don’t evolve, we will either loose our students, by force or just by evolution.

Some of us (educators) already joined the pool, others will accompany us very soon, a few will be forced to leave the fishbowl and jump in the pool. The ones refusing to leave their fishbowl, should start thinking about another job.

It is never too late to take swimming lessons, but the clock is ticking loud and clear.

What is connectivism?

“Connectivism is the application of network principles to define both knowledge and the process of learning. Knowledge is defined as a particular pattern of relationships and learning is defined as the creation of new connections and patterns as well as the ability to manoeuvre around existing networks/patterns”(Siemens, 2008).

Siemens (2009) suggests that in order to understand learning we need to understand how and why connections are formed. He further states that “connections are formed at various levels: neural, cognitive/conceptual, and social”.

I do not want to talk about connectivism in a physical or biological sense, as I do not feel comfortable enough with the subject to do so. But I do have some thoughts on the conceptual and social level.

I would like to discuss the important role of technology and connections, networks and organisations (context) in our daily lives. These two components alone justify considering connectivism as a new starting point. It is clear that many more factors could be taken into consideration, but that would bring me too far from the scope of this assignment. I will also address three outstanding questions concerning connectivism.

Technology

Technology is one of those important trends, if not the most important one, that brings up new challenges in society. Educators encounter how technology is changing our knowledge and the way we learn. This also results in the way we (should) teach. For example: is it still important that we learn our children useless figures and facts that can be Googled in a few seconds? Or is it more important to learn our children how they can find trustworthy information and interpret this?

Technology not only changes the way we act on knowledge, but also how we interact with others. Not so long ago interaction was geographically limited. Knowledge was transferred from the teacher in front of the class to the students, from parents to their children etc. Today the world is a global village. Forming social connections can not be considered something new, but the internet gives us the possibility to form connections just anytime, anywhere and with anyone. Especially the internet with its Web2.0 and social tools, and the semantic evolutions with regard to search engines, help us to connect and learn in total different ways.

Context

Another aspect in favour of connectivism is the place where learning occurs. “A central tenet of most learning theories is that learning occurs inside a person… These theories do not address learning that occurs outside of people (i.e. learning that is stored and manipulated by technology). They also fail to describe how learning happens within organizations” (Siemens, 2004).
Knowledge is not restricted anymore and in possession of the happy few. Knowledge is out there, on the net and in our network. Learning should not be viewed as a linear process between persons, but as a process of forming and handling infinite connections. “Chaos is the new reality (Siemens 2004)”.

Questions

Is connectivism, based on new perspectives like technology and context, a new theory of learning?

I am not sure connectivism should be considered as a new theory or as an updated view on learning (what are the conditions that need to be fulfilled to talk about a new theory?), but it definitely addresses some new trends in society  that we need to adapt to and it forces us to rethink knowledge and learning. There is no way back and we need to focus on them as they are the new reality.

How do technology and networks influence the way I learn?

Let me start with myself and the learning part, and interpret the impact of technology and context on my own learning process. I follow more than 200 blogs via Google Reader and I learn via conversations on my own blogs (smetty.be, drsmetty.com and edublogs.be), the biweekly podcast I participate in and 2 Twitter accounts. Of course learning still happens through conversations with colleagues and students, by reading books and papers (just to name a few things), but the most important facilitator is definitely technology. Technology changed the way I receive and transfer knowledge and the way I learn. The connections I form and nourish with other people are crucial for my learning process.

I consider it easy and I feel very comfortable to learn this way. But this totally changed once I started participating in the Massive Open Online Course CCK09. The CCK09 instructors and participants differ almost for 99% from my traditional network. This means I had to find my way in a new subject and I had to form new connections. As the course is open and connections are not imposed, the responsibility has been given to the learner. But what was my initial feeling of the course? Let me describe it with a metaphor: it felt like a novice diver been thrown into water with huge waves. In the beginning I had to struggle, but once I got my breathing under control, I was able to go down and explore all the beauty below the surface.

My conclusion on the way I learn is that creating my network was a gradual and spontaneous process, but it was difficult in a totally new environment (CCK09) I couldn’t control.

How can the connectivism theory influence the way we teach?

I wonder how we, as teachers, need to tackle learning within a network. There are a few questions that come into my mind. A network will have to be diverse, so will teaching become something that happens almost always outside the classroom doors? Will students choose and connect to networks as they progress in their own learning process? And when do you start to learn via a network? Should we follow Steven Verjans (2009) who considers learning theories as learning modes who are all related to different stages in human life? More questions than answers. There is definitely a need for net pedagogy.

Conclusion

Our world is changing at an incredible speed. We will have to adapt ourselves and learn our students new skills to survive comfortably in this new world. Connectivism is definitely an asset to conquer the new challenges we face.

Note: The full version of this paper is available in PDF-format

TACCLE (teachers’ aids on creating content for learning environments) is partly funded by The European Union through its Life Long Learning Programme COMENIUS. The goal of this project is to help teachers create e-learning materials and raise awareness of e-learning in general. The project provides a ‘how-to-do-it’ handbook, local training sessions and an international in-service training once a year.

Currently the handbook can be downloaded on the TACCLE website (after registration) in English and French. I have a paper version in Dutch, so I guess the Dutch version and other languages will be available soon.

I am a little bit surprised about their choice for a paper-based version only. A citation by Jenny Hughes in her introduction to the handbook “Some people have made the obvious point that a book about e-learning is rather a contradiction in terms and felt that it would have been more appropriate to have produced an on-line version with all of the obvious advantages of easy updating.  However, we felt that the very teachers for whom this book is written are probably the group least likely to use or feel confident about using web-based materials. A book is comfortable and familiar and that is exactly how we would like teachers to feel about e-learning. It is both a reference book and a practical handbook. Some teachers will use it to find out about e-learning, others will be keen to actually get involved and start producing materials.”

Unfortunately, the book doesn’t include many practical references or good practices. Add the choice for a paper-based version on top of that, and you get a rather conceptual then practical handbook. But for those of you looking for a free handbook on e-learning, I would definitely recommend you to download it.

The first topic last week was quite an important and theoretical one: what is connectivism? A nice starting point is definitely the table created by George Siemens on how connectivism and the other learning theories match (or differ).

After exploring the Moodle course and the readings and resources for week 1, I ended up writing down 3 questions which look very interesting to me (I expect people to ask those questions when I talk about the course).

• Is connectivism really different from constructivism?
• How new is connectivism?
• Is connectivism applicable in my own educational practice?

I do not know the answers yet, and I am not sure if I will find them, but I surely will search for them.

Smetty is my nickname (online and offline). A lot off people I first met online, don’t even know my real name. Besides a nickname, Smetty is also my online identity. So when I was thinking about a name for my English weblog, it had to be something with ’smetty’ in it. Being a Ph.D. student at the moment, I came up with the idea to call this blog Dr. Smetty. In real life, I would never grant myself a title I don’t own. But, hey, this is the internet, and my online identity decided to blog as Dr. Smetty.

The content of this blog will be my thoughts in English, with a special focus on education and the road to my Ph.D.