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.

And how would YOU use the Socratic Method?

... in response to a question posed in class ...

Before discussing how the Socratic Method can be used in the classroom (and which teaching methods promote self-directed learning and independent learners), I was compelled to have a little fun with this after stumbling across a website about how to Use the Socratic Method to Easily Win Arguments during my search (there's a better site about How to Argue Using the Socratic Method that's more comprehensive and isn't focused on "winning" an argument) as it brought to mind this scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) that makes hilarious sport of the Socratic Method:

Sir Bedevere: There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
Peasant 1: Are there? Oh well, tell us.
Sir Bedevere: Tell me. What do you do with witches?
Peasant 1: Burn them.
Sir Bedevere: And what do you burn, apart from witches?
Peasant 1: More witches.
Peasant 2: Wood.
Sir Bedevere: Good. Now, why do witches burn?
Peasant 3: ...because they're made of... wood?
Sir Bedevere: Good. So how do you tell whether she is made of wood?
Peasant 1: Build a bridge out of her.
Sir Bedevere: But can you not also build bridges out of stone?
Peasant 1: Oh yeah.
Sir Bedevere: Does wood sink in water?
Peasant 1: No, no, it floats!... It floats! Throw her into the pond!
Sir Bedevere: No, no. What else floats in water?
Peasant 1: Bread.
Peasant 2: Apples.
Peasant 3: Very small rocks.
Peasant 1: Cider.
Peasant 2: Gravy.
Peasant 3: Cherries.
Peasant 1: Mud.
Peasant 2: Churches.
Peasant 3: Lead! Lead!
King Arthur: A Duck.
Sir Bedevere: ...Exactly. So, logically...
Peasant 1: If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood.
Sir Bedevere: And therefore...
Peasant 2: ...A witch!

Having had my fun, I'll begin by stating the obvious (which I assume will be repeated here, ad nauseum, if others participate in this discussion) that the Socratic Method is effective in teaching critical thinking, and refer to the site that gives the most comprehensive explanation for the Socratic Method (http://www.socraticmethod.net/) and describes, by implication, how it is used in the classroom (or, in Plato's case, The Symposium). For anyone unfamiliar with the Socratic Method, I recommend using that site as a quick guide for getting up to speed.

The first part of this three-part question, "Locate several websites that describe the Socratic method and how it is used in classrooms," seems redundant since, at least in all the websites I visited, the Socratic Method was described before any discussion about how it is used in the classroom. Having said that, all the sites I looked at and liked discussed how the Socratic Method promotes self-directed learning due to the method's emphasis on A), critical thinking and B), using questions to get students to probe deeper into a topic. Likewise, all the sites suggested that the Socratic Method promotes independent learning due to how it causes students to question themselves and the validity of their answers -- an existential dilemma that forces a learner to confront what they think they know by further researching their beliefs and the extent of their knowledge. Finally, none of the sites advocated any particular or unique method for using the method (other than contextualizing it) but rather made distinctions between the "classical" vs. "modern" approaches.

This site about using the Socratic Method in a third-grade math class was very interesting as far as it illustrated how critical thinking skills can be taught to even young learners. On the other hand, this site about the failure to use the method in a secondary English class was a nice reflective piece on teaching methods and how she would do things differently. Finally, there are some excellent strategies for using the Socratic Method in the classroom at ReadWriteThink -- one of my favorite websites.

Of all the sites I viewed, my favorite was from Stanford as it was more explicit about the self-directed and independent learner benefits of the Socratic Method. I highly recommend it.

A witch!

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.

Please share, educators!

I'm a little frustrated, right now.

My wife forwarded me an announcement for a web presentation through ASTD, titled, "Using gamification and serious games in learning," and I was hoping to watch it. I don't have time to watch it at the moment but I thought that, if I archived it or better yet, embedded the video here, I could watch it at my convenience, when I finally found the time. The added benefit? All of you would get to watch it as well.

Bupkis. No repost on YouTube or anywhere else (if I couldn't embed it, I'd at least link it), no, I have to register at the ASTD site, jump through hoops, agree to allow my spam folder get heavier due to the ASTD "sponsor" getting my email address and then sending me loads of crap, advertisements for doo-dads and programs I have no money for.

Holding information proprietary is decidedly not a 21st-century or Web 2.0 approach (I'm not talking about widget designs, OK?) and the best way to move us forward is to disseminate information in the most efficient, expedient way possible.

Share it!

Banning It Won't Stop It

This week one of our readings is about preparing learners for 21st century skills.  This is a chapter out of a book of compiled writings from various authors. While this entire text discusses secondary education and we are studying adult education, there are still aspects that correlate and give us a better understanding of the use of 21st century skills, including technology, in general.  I thought it was interesting that many schools are still banning various forms of technology in schools despite the increased use of them in learning (Fisher & Frey, 2010).  Instead of embracing what the learners have and know, the learners are being punished for this.  It seems that a large part of this problem is educators look at the individual names of technology (MP3 player) and sites (Twitter) rather than what they do for learning (presenting, collaborating) (Fisher & Frey, 2010).  Educators and institutions need to take a look at their policies regarding technology and revamp these to embrace the utilization in learning while providing learners with ethics and courtesy regarding the use of technology (Fisher & Frey, 2010).  At this point, social media and other forms of virtual collaboration are here to stay and continue to grow.  I wanted to share the following website that illustrates this in real-time, it's just AMAZING how quickly things are growing.

Fisher, D. & Frey, N. (2010). Preparing students for mastery of 21st century skills.  In 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Click the image to open the interactive version (via PennyStocks.la).

Web 2.0 for this week

My Learning Team (and PLN cohorts) are charged this week with creating a presentation of Web 2.0 technologies for the ostensible purpose of introducing them to adult learners as well as providing a demonstration or even a brief training for those learners on the use of one of the 3-5 online technologies we choose for our project. I've suggested that we take advantage of 30-day free trials for either Articulate or Captivate for this project; the challenge is to learn either in a short amount of time (before next Monday, as usual) but I am bored, bored, bored with PowerPoint.

In the run up to this assignment, we checked out 50 links or so of so-called Web 2.0 technologies (not all the sites were, strictly speaking, Web 2.0 as it's defined) and, although I knew a few of the sites, the exercise of clicking links was enlightening. Really, I was surprised at how much is out there and how many tools there are to move education well outside of 20th-century conventions.

I'm not going to go into any of those sites with this post (so, you're probably wondering, "What's the point of reading this, then?") but it has occurred to me that I would like to use this space to discuss, one or a few at a time, those sites, reviewing them and journaling my own experience using them. I'm inviting my PLN pals to join in the fun -- at a later date, of course.

Until then, we're apparently on the verge of speeding on to Web 3.0, apparently for the sake of making me feel like a dinosaur. For no good reason, then, I feel compelled to share this as an excuse for why I'm asking my Learning Team to take up the gauntlet of using a presentation application other than PowerPoint:



Collaborative learning, critical questioning and decompression

I have finally finished this week's individual assignment (you can view my work here as well as the lesson plan that accompanied it) and am ready to enjoy the rest of the day with some beer, baseball, and barbecue -- so nothing special about the last part, donchaknow?

Before calling it a day (and an end to Week 3), it occurs to me that I worked to include a collaborative learning element into my individual project and, in meta-fashion, asking my students to include a collaborative element into the PBL I designed for them. Additionally, I included two critical questions (one, the aforementioned collaborative element) for them to answer in response to the assignment.

Trying to walk the talk, here, it occurs to me that I need to ask a critical question for myself: Do I embrace opportunities for collaborative learning when they are assigned?

I have to say that I am enjoying this PLN immensely and, it just so happens, the current members are also on my Learning Team for school. I was fortunate that the instructor for this class accommodated us in honoring our requests for team membership. having said that, I have not always had the best experience with learning teams; indeed, I have griped in the past about being forced to work with people who seemed to have no motivation to learn or produce the best product possible but were only participating because they believed they would eventually acquire a credential but were seemingly uninterested in acquiring knowledge or skills.

Many assumptions are made about the benefits of collaborative learning and, I confess that I am largely a fan of the method. However, my critical question for today is: Is collaborative learning only effective when members are equally motivated to learn or is the potential for disparity inherent in the method, where the more motivated members actually become instructors (to a degree) when compensating for less-motivated group members?

OK, enjoy your Memorial Day Holiday and think about your answer when we're back on task. Have a beer and enjoy the barbecue!