Cart before the horse on MOOCs

Saying that the MOOC debate rages on is rather like saying, "Mosquitoes bother me," yet I encounter that quotidian statement in pretty much every article I read regarding the issue. It probably doesn't help that the name itself sounds like some street-level pejorative but we use the words we have, not the ones we want.

As a fairly-new construct of how knowledge is delivered, MOOCs would naturally be controversial based on their relatively recent introduction to the education field. However, aside from stale arguments that MOOCs can't deliver what classroom instruction can (an argument that has existed since the introduction of the first online course), most of the arguments I've encountered against MOOCs have been specious, at best.

Probably the most contentious issue surrounding MOOCs is their potential for social and economic equality (as I argued for in the this paper) and it's funny how ironic arguments from the Left and the Right cavil about the death of the academy, the Left squealing about how universities should be opened up to everyone, the Right whining about  the death of elite institutions.

Putting matters of delivery aside, MOOCs are the first step in an educational revolution, where learners decide what knowledge matters to them and that knowledge is delivered to them as it matters. For the first time in human history, learners have the capacity to attain knowledge no matter their circumstances or geographical isolation (provided they have a broadband connection). The potential for economic and social justice is here and it's about to be manifest.

Are MOOCs a nostrum? Not at all -- the problem of income inequality has to be dealt with, first and foremost. However, the potential to undercut the current system has begun with MOOCs, especially as learners from marginalized populations take advantage of their educational opportunities an use that position to bring up brothers and sisters.

Indeed, the potential for social and economic change is huge due to the possibles afforded through informal learning opportunities. That possibility will be dealt with in a later post.

Crossposted at The Firebird Suite

So why aren't we talking about Connectivism?

Not meaning to get too intellectual, here (because it seems that doesn't lead to ANY discussion) but when we say that "Open source learning is here to stay," I am apt to think of Michel Foucault's masterpiece, "The Order of Things," and the notion of the "episteme," that how we think about the world is determined by the time in which we reside, that intellect collectively evolves as we add to what and how we know.

Open source learning and the collaborative nature that guides it will only accelerate what we know. The more open source learning becomes the norm, the more human thought will evolve (especially since so much of how we solve questions is facilitated by the same computing power that allows distant minds to connect). Whereas researchers and scientists were once isolated in their offices or laboratories around the globe, they can now openly collaborate on questions about the universe; more than that, problem-solving (and problem-posing) is suddenly a globally participatory function, rather than a discrete and local endeavor.

21st-century learning vs. 20th-century thinking

The members of this PLN are all students at an online university where we are currently pursuing Master's degrees in Adult Education and Training and, at the moment, taking a class in technology for adult learners (although much of the material we're studying applies to learners of all ages) -- thus, the impetus for starting this blog.

Although I consider myself fairly informed about new technologies (indeed, some of the readings have seemed quaint to me, even though they're only a few years old), I have to say that several of the assignments have opened my eyes to new methods, ideas, theories and yes, technologies, that I had not been aware of until just now. So much of the literature refers to "emergent" technologies, as well as the emergent properties of learning networks, and I feel something emergent in myself regarding my new-found knowledge.

And then, I get hit full in the face with the reality that, well into our second decade of this century, those of us thinking about how learning should and will occur in the 21st-century remain in a slender minority of thinkers.

This occurred to me when I was participating in this week's class discussion, one largely focused on webcast and podcast presentation technologies. A couple of responses from fellow students to the instructor's questions about the potential downside of those technologies had me wondering how prepared we are, as a society, to embrace how technology will not just demand a change in methods but in the theories and practice of pedagogy.

For instance, a student (in all earnestness) responded that a potential problem with webcasting lectures might be a bad feed or poor connection, disenfranchising the student(s) from the content of a lecture due to forces beyond their control; apparently, that student (the one who made the response, not the one experiencing the "bad feed" -- you know the vicissitudes of the Inter-tubes and all that) was not aware that a webcast can be archived and posted such that it can be viewed at any time. In fact, that student's argument (as I read it) was that a webcasted lecture could only be live, a one-time affair, and that students were at the mercy of a schedule, much like my Psychology 101 instructor who threatened with, "Class starts at 9 am and the doors would be locked from the inside at 9:05 am."

I confess that I was a bit dazed by the response, wondering if that student was oblivious to the fact that, with the Internet and the technology of online learning, instructors not only post the webcast so it can be linked at any time but, if they're good at what they do, they augment their presentations with additional elements (such as interactive capabilities where learners can attempt to emulate portions of the material or access supplemental materials that "plug in" with what is being taught, other video or graphic examples to use, etc.). Given the nature of the response, it was apparent that the commenter didn't understand that the direction of 21st-century education is the freedom of students to make decisions about the what, where and when of their learning. A one-time only, live webcast is counterintuitive to that direction and counterproductive to 21st-century educational goals.

That was one example; I won't spend much energy on another student's response of, "Well, the power could go out and then what are you going to do?" There's little reason to speak (aside from what that student said) on the academic laziness and intellectual paucity of that response.

I recognize that I didn't enroll into a particularly rigorous program (no GRE or GMAT was required), a fact that became abundantly clear when a past team member submitted some work that my HS Language Arts teacher wife said would not receive a passing grade in a Freshman (HS) composition class -- that has happened several times in this program, in fact. Early on, it was apparent to me that I was only going to get out of this program what I put into it (and I write that while attempting to place a tremulous hand on my 30-day Articulate free trial).

My point is not the level of intellect that has enrolled in this program (the we in this PLN share) but in asking, how ready are we to embrace the inevitable change that technology will bring to how education is done? Based on my experience and conversations  with other students and other people, most of us are still stuck in a 20th-century paradigm of education (that has a foundation on a 19th-century paradigm, the so-called "factory" method) and are unable to conceive that 21st-century learners will need and demand (based on the technology) a shift in how instruction is delivered.

Sunday morning Skype session

It's past noon and our group is Skyping (as I type this), to determine which direction our PLN will take... we're feeling very 21st century! In addition, the group (Karla and Mikki) are watching my screen as I demonstrate some of the functions, gadgets and widgets available in Blogger -- pretty much participating in the activities that define a PLN (Professional Learning Network). At the end of our Skype session (the first sentence of this post was typed while providing an example of how to use Blogger, labels for posts in this case), we agreed that we were grateful to have been given this assignment since this is a tool each of us can use beyond this assignment, this class and even this program (Adult Education and Training), a place where we can share new knowledge, ask questions, share our experience with the technologies we're using, air our frustrations... isn't that what a PLN is about?

Without putting too fine a point on this (and avoiding the temptation to turn this post into a paper on Connectivism or shared VLEs), I just want to say that, with the exception that this blog arose from an assignment to this learning team (the existing PLN on this blog), everything has evolved organically, through mutual agreement, one of the defining characteristics of a PLN.

Having said that, I want to point to a massive resource that will add to my understanding of what a PLN is and can be (mostly because I haven't had the time to really work on my Diigo presence):
PLN blogs on Edutopia.

That should do it, for now. In the meantime, I'm hoping to see this PLN's blogroll grow... and, while that happens, having this place attract the attention of other professionals like us who would like to participate!