Changing the Narrative
Michael Feldstein, e-Literate, December 8, 2013

Michael Feldstein offers his retrospective on the MRI conference, suggesting that “the connectivist/open ed crowd has been spectacularly, stunningly successful at ‘changing the narrative’.” But as Phil Hill points out in another post, the only media coverage of the most significant gathering of cMOOC people ever is of some fairly minor UPenn study of xMOOCs. But I do agree that there's no point expecting to improve things by changing the narrative. I've watched the narrative - mine and others' - be changed over and over the last 20 years. LMSs. Learning Objects. Educational Modeling. Content syndication. OpenID. E-Learning 2.0. EduPunk. Learning Networks. Connectivism. OERs. MOOCs. The result is always the same. Sometimes it's ignored. More often it is co-opted and somehow becomes the property of the very institutions it targets. You can't change the world - or the establishment - with a narrative.

[Link] [Comment]

The battle for open - a perspective
Martin Weller, Journal of Interactive Media in Education (JIME), December 8, 2013

Open Access (OA) and Open Educational Resources (OERs) have won the day. writes Martin Weller, but after the victory comes the battle. "After the initial success of openness as a general ethos then the question becomes not 'do you want to be open?' but rather 'what type of openness do you want?' Determining the nature of openness in a range of contexts so that it retains its key benefits as an approach is the next major focus for the open education movement." 14 page PDF. Good read. See in addition a dozen or so more articles from this special issue of JIME on openness.

[Link] [Comment]

About those U Penn MOOC results reported at MRI13
Phil Hill, e-Literate, December 8, 2013

As Phil Hill points out, the main media focus from the recent MOOC Research Initiative conference (MRI) is a survey of some UPenn xMOOCs featuring large numbers of drop-outs (see Chronicle, Inside Higher Ed, and eCampusNews, for example). This is disappointing given the number of cMOOC practitioners at the conference. And the UPenn research isn't even worth writing home about. Kevin Werbach writes, "the researchers didn’t have any contact with the faculty teaching the courses. So some of their statements are generalizations. E.g., I’m not sure what it means for a course to be 'targeted at college students.'"

[Link] [Comment]

From trees to webs: uprooting knowledge through visualization
Scott B. Weingart, UDC Seminar on Classification, Mapping, December 8, 2013

If you ever wanted a dramatic visual representation of the changing nature of knowledge, take the time to download this presentation (16 megabytes) by Scott B. Weingart. It traces attempts by bibliographers and scientists to organize knowledge in images ranging from Porphyry's Tree to Paul Otlet's World City to Boyack & Klavans’ Map of Science. Speaking of Otlet, you may enjoy this presentation from W. Boyd Rayward on knowledge organization and visualization in the work and ideas of Paul Otlet. Both are from the UDC Seminar on Classification and Mapping, from this past October. There's a lot of really productive browsing to be found in the two dozen or so presentations here.

[Link] [Comment]

And I Walk Away, or How I Finally Decided to Quit Teaching
Justin Stortz, Pursuing Context, December 8, 2013

Now that Justin Stortz has walked away from the education system, I hope he can catch up with himself, take a breath, and figure out how to be a teacher for real, not just face in front of a classroom. There's no reason teaching has to be hiogh pressure and stress-filled. It should be the most fun job in the world. I wish Justin Stortz well, and I can relate to what he's going though.

[Link] [Comment]

Chaos Theory and the Sciences of Complexity: Foundations for Transforming Education
Charles M. Reigeluth, AERA SIG: Chaos, Complexity, December 8, 2013

This is from 2004 but still work reading, as it is well in advance of what most people today are still saying about learning. But it is relevant to the theories of learning networks and connectivism. Among other things, it discusses:

• network health - "For a system to be healthy, it must co-evolve with its environment: it changes in response to changes in its environment, and its environment changes in response to its changes"
• learning theories - "Co-evolution is fostered by disequilibrium and positive feedback" (ie., Boltzmann mechanisms and back propagation)
• openness - "open systems maintain a state of non-equilibrium… They participate in an open exchange with their world"
• content - "Transformation is strongly influenced by 'strange attractors'... In educational systems, they can be considered 'core ideas' and values or beliefs"
• self-organization - "require two major characteristics: openness and self-reference [and] Because it partners with its environment, the system develops increasing autonomy from the environment [and] the more freedom in self-organization, the more order"

[Link] [Comment]

On Translating Locke, Berkeley and Hume into English
Jonathan Bennett, Teaching Philosophy, December 8, 2013

Locke, Berkeley, Hume was the second text in philosophy I read (Decartes's Meditations was the first). It has a significant influence on my thinking, especially the Hume (and resonated well after years of reading science fiction, where many of the same themes were explored and analyzed). I read it in the original, which did slow me down. I found it helped to read it aloud, to get a sense of the cadence and timbre. (I really recommend this for reading Hobbes as well). You don't have to read the whole thing, just enough to get it right when you read to yourself. Take your time; these were careful men, precise in word and thought. So while I see the benefit of 'translating' Locke, Berkeley, Hume I do wonder what part of the understanding is lost in the exercise. Anyhow, this essay is from 1994 but is still relevant, and Jonathan Bennett is one of the authorities in modern (1600-1900) philosophy.

[Link] [Comment]

MOOCs: the C***** word is the problem!
Donald Clark, Donald Clark Plan B, December 8, 2013

Good post from Donald Clark (who has really been hitting the mark recently) on the way the use of the word 'course' in MOOC misleads us. The problem with the traditional course, he sais, is that it does not meet the "the needs of the real audience – lifelong learners. The data is clear – MOOCs are for all. This is to be celebrated, not disparaged." Quite right. "Don’t get trapped into thinking that ‘course completion’ is the goal – it’s not. Don’t get trapped into thinking that ‘certification’ is the goal – it is not. Don’t get trapped into thinking this is about long, and often long-winded, HE courses – it is not." Again - agreed. So you may ask, why would we call a MOOC a course? Because it has a starting point, a stopping point, and is typically focused on a topic or series of ideas. Those are the only things that make a MOOC a course.

[Link] [Comment]