Learning begins with connections. We find connections in the learning process at the neural, conceptual and external/social level. So we are able to say that learning is the ability to form networks.
Through the instructional design we may work, for instance, with the sequences of content, the interactions and the space or ecology. For the design we should have in mind the context: learning needs and situation of learners
It is helpful, in this design stage to use the metaphors of chaos and complexity. Chaos metaphor helps us to be able to find in it some degree of hidden order and to be able to recognize the sensitivity to initial conditions. Complexity helps us to understand the multiple interactions of elements of a system that results in particular incomes. In brief, we should be able to design for adaptability, that is finding ways and patterns for sense making and achieve particular outcome through distributed approaches.
We may use a design model taking into account content, context and connections (concepts and others)
Tension in between traditional education practice and connectivsm vision
The following chart summarizes the tension in between the traditional education paradigm versus, what we may call a connectivsm ecology that takes profit of the web 2.0 social networking tools.
|
Traditional Education |
Connectivism ecology |
|
Need to reflect Build cumulative on existing knowledge Develop individual understanding over time |
Speed and immediacy Ability to access a vast amount of information |
|
Individual testing Recognition of individual contribution |
User participation, mash ups, remixing and co-construction |
|
Plagiarism? |
Combining sources, cut & paste, editing on other peoples’ work
|
|
Respository of ideas and resources |
Cross referencing, difficulty of identifying source of ideas |
|
Individual to be an expert on the field |
No one is an expert but part of a social network |
|
Predicating teacher as privileged expert |
User generated content, mass participation, co- construction of ideas |
|
Subject fields static and unchanging |
Subject field fragmented and diverse |
|
Hierarchical administrative and assessment processes |
Participation and negotiation |
|
Institutional tools |
Personalized tools |
Whenever assessing tools in the education practice we may map themusing the following dimensions:
1. From individual to social learning
2. Learning through information to learning through experience
3. Learning passively to learning actively
Engeström states on social networks:
1. The fallacy is to think that social networks are just made up of people. They are not: social networks consist of people who are connected by a shared object.
2. In education the primary social object is content.
3. Education value is not in the content itself but the social interaction, which occurs around the content.
So to design in educations using social networks we must follow these five principles:
1. Clearly define the social object your service is built around
2. Define the verbs that users perform on the objects, so that is it clear what the site is for.
3. Make the objects shareable
4. Turn invitations into gifts
5. Charge the publishers, not the spectators
When we finish our formal education, we continue to learn defining self teaching strategies. What is the design behind this strategy? The answer is connectivism. When the curricula, administrative and assessment process is gone, there it is the connections we make at the conceptual and social level. Is here where we need to find a natural way of practicing connectivism that would help us to bring to formal education the successful everyday connective learning experience.
