A Connectivist Disconnected?

Gladys Gahona’s message got me to LinkedIn today. Once there I found several invitations to join networks. I feel honoured to join you, thanks.

If the post title sounds as unbelievable or incongruent as a cat barking,  the fact that  Stephen Downes requested me on May 15th to join his network seemed equally unbelievable.   

However, it only shows that the map is not the territory.

Out of the web I’m connected. 
Inside the web, I’m disconnected.

Do the above phrases reflect the map or the territory?
Who knows? I guess it depends on the place where you’re standing.

Anyway, I came to post what is an unbelievable event from where I seem to stand now.

An Illiterate in the CCK08 course

Tonight, after the last  Elluminate CCK08 session, I went to Dave Cormier's blog and found his post about Literacy.  It was like if a veil was taken from my eyes, many of my discomforts found its place.

My reply there was:

Hi Dave!

Thanks for giving a name to how I felt during the CCk08 course, the word “inadequate” didn’t quite explain things for me. Illiterate is the perfect fit. In many aspects I was illiterate, in many others I remain so. I have a looong road ahead but now I see some paths.

I’m glad you explained to me some subtleties in the Korean language and culture, one of my best friends is Korean and I understand him a bit more now.

Thanks also for moderating the live online sessions. It’s been a pleasure hearing you.

Maru :X

Then I went to the Intro Emerging Tech 09 course wiki and found this video.  What caught my attention was that I had seen it before, finding little sense; today, I found more sense. Maybe, if I watch it again in the future I will see more patterns.

 

This morning's events are also clearer now after reading Dave's post.  I went to the  International Forum on Digital Contents (Ficod08 for his Spanish initials) in Second Spain.  Although it was in Spanish, it was about social networks and how are they used for business, I didn't understood some of the terms.  I saw that I had learned the technical words in English during the CCK08 course and I did not have the words in Spanish.  A side of my illiteracy showed up.

An hour later we had our weekly SLexperiments meeting in  Spanish, Dolores and I agreed on solving two things: my urgent problem to get rid of my cat paws and her required visit to Muvenation site.  Steve joined us and he helped me to select a new avatar, his Spanish is very good. The first new avatar remained with paws and I had to strip to sort out the problem, Steve's avatar respectfully turned his back to give my avatar some kind of privacy. I was so embarrassed!

With my new avatar  we went to Muvenation and met Daf there. Daf took us to where Dolores could join the Muvenation student's group that suited her needs and then we tested Daf's orientation site: 

http://slurl.com/secondlife/MUVEnation/212/194/100

Having satisfied our needs we rested by the fire.  It was a wonderful afternoon!

With my deepest gratitude to Dave, Stephen, George, Dolores, Steve and Daf.

CCK08 Final Mind Map

I'm placing here the concepts I found more relevant and how I see them relating and influencing one another.  The map itself has changed little, what has changed is how I understand it now.  For example, over the past two weeks the issue of Openness has gained more weight.

The red lines show a one way influence or impact; I may be wrong, maybe there aren't one way impact relationships with the concepts I mention.  The rest of the colours show the impact of one item; for example, the purple lines show the interaction of the concepts with our "Mind", the blue lines show the interactions with the "Context" and so on.

I understand better now what has happened to me and my connections this year (2008).  My offline connections have a new topic to talk about, besides that, the changes have been those brought about by life itself.  My online connections have widened, I got now a lot of new weak connections and a few stronger new connections.  With Becoming a Webhead (BaW08), Becoming an e-Learner project (BaeL), Connectivism and Connective Knowledge (CCK08), Connecting Online(CO09), Electronic Village Online moderator training (EVOMods09) and Corporate Learning Trends and Innovations (CLTI08) I have learned a lot this year.  My mind view things in a different way.

I see clearly that to have people hanging around with me they have to gain something valuable.  I understand now why when I had worked and pulled my share of work with some people who asked me to participate in their projects I got little or nothing in return when I asked for participation in mine.  They considered me some sort of an asset during their projects, what I did provided something valuable them and I was learning.  Once the project was ended if my project didn't go with their line of work they didn't participate, they wouldn't gain anything of value.  Reciprocity does not have anything to do with it, it's just the way a network works. It's a description of a fact, not a complain.

I understand that Openness is a delicate issue for people and organizations.  Some people and institutions say they are open to new ideas, that they want collaboration but in the practical sense they want you to do things in a certain way and don't accept changes.  It's their organization, their project, their wiki, their site and they have the right to have it as they want it.  It's very difficult to let go of power and control, to set a common goal, elicit participation and receive it as such.  I don't see that happening soon.  I didn't see evidence in Stephen's predictions on the future but what a wonderful piece to read.

His words: "To learn is not to acquire or to accumulate, but rather, to develop or to grow. The process of learning is a process of becoming, a process of developing one’s own self".

I wonder how could I use iCall? Stephen mentions that this allows events and syndicated contents to circulate within the same network, creating an association between time and content that is dynamic, fluid, and distributed.

How could I enable my communities? "At most, the educator needs to ensure that the tools are there for students to use, and that the channels of communication, from student to student, from community to community, are open".

I'm puzzled.  Why didn't Stephen mention "Equity" in his recent SL Conference as a feature of Reliable Networks?  Is that so unreachable?

Account of Stephen Downs visit to Second Spain

Stephen Downes very kindly agreed to guest a conference about Networks within organizations in  Second Spain.  The SIM was unstable, the participants that arrived on time had no problems with sound but  some of the latecomers could not hear him or my translation.  His talk ended and the round of questions was held on the text chat expecting to reach everyone in the room.  People were eager to ask and get answers so they put up with the unexpected heavy text chat while Stephen very patiently waited until I typed the translation to continue.

The content of his conference is available in the following videos that he gently provided before hand.

Talking to educators, he told them he wasn't going to talk about how to teach their students,  he would rather talk about how could they manage their own learning because that was the important point.

His views of a Networked organization sound like a dream from the point of view of the members of an organization, to be able to choose which product to sell by pursuing your interests and talents would be fantastic. Can you imagine?

From the point of view of the organization itself, this view requires them to let go, to leave their mission behind, to foster openness, diversity, autonomy and connectedness. I guess the feeling there would be fear, you'll have to trust others, to believe they'll do their best in their field.  Stephen  mentioned that to manage a company in a traditional way is not efficient, people work for their own interest not for the interest of the company owners.

If we own an organization, what we have to think about is how to set activities that mean, quoting Stephen, "A mutually beneficial exchange of value". As Jorge Cuevas says: "Give others the chance to win too", this is, make others gain something valuable working with you,  while you get something valuable also for yourself.

It was a pity that the SIM behaved so badly. There were people who could not hear a word of all that was said, the richness of Stephen's voice was lost for them; it's certainly not easy to translate to and from a text chat but it was a different experience. I had never translated online with no body language clues!

Why is so difficult to change the practice of Education? Third CCK08 paper.

I think that the main reason lies on the self image that the teachers held about themselves and in the way in which the students perceive education.  I wish I knew about a practical way to shift those positions.

The teacher's traditional position.

In a traditional way a teacher stands out of the crowd, in a way that medical practitioners did some years back as pictured by Quino in his famous cartoon (Quino cartoon, page 5, Mafalda, book 9;1977). In that view teachers are considered vessels of knowledge, leaders of the future generations.  In rural places they are treated with awe and respect, the community is grateful to have them; it usually implies less comfort to go and teach sometimes in a hut.  In the cities they are held also with respect, parents try to get along with them for the sake of their kids' well being. The teacher that requires his students to send their homework to his/her email sometimes is viewed as a nuisance; most of the students don't have computers at home and parents have to cope with the expense of paying extra to cyber places.

Being a teacher gives you status, power over your learners, a position in life supported by your credentials and years of experience in the field.  It's not easy to let go of that position, of the privileges perceived and of the underlying assumptions. Stephen Downes talks about this, among other things, in his post about Reusable Media, Social Software and Openness in Education.

Students point of view on education.

On the other hand, most the students regard school and homework as an imposed obligation that they don't enjoy.

Qino cartoon. #895, Mafalda 4 (1968)

Felipe (thinking): "Well, I better go do my homework."...
Felipe (thinking): "Damn!"

They act as Felipe, they wish that something would come along to get them of the hook. I have acted like that myself.  Students come to the cyber place to do their homework and what they do is copy and paste from pages they Google, they don't reflect on what they put together. They try to do it fast to have time to add a picture to their photo blog (MetroFlog is their favourite), chat or visit their Hi5 spaces. If they happen to find a teacher that invites they to learn in an engaging way they respond eagerly but they expect leadership.  If you leave them to choose what to learn and how to go about their learning they freeze.  Talking to teenagers I've found they are confused, they know that even if they do well in their studies that doesn't warranty them a job or a better life in the future.

Matthias has a different point of view on this issues and looks into resistance in a broader way than me. Worth reading.

S. Downs puts forward an answer: "The idea that all of us, acting independently, but ensemble, en masse, can come up with something better than any individual in the group could by themselves. This is not a case of marching toward mediocrity, this is a case of the group simple being able to take into account more factors, more variables, than any given individual. The group being able to absorb more information than any individual. But for this to work, we have to have the open communication and access. We have to have the distributed non-centralized non-hierarchical model".

To teach in a non traditional way means to accept, claim, demonstrate and model that you don't have all the answers, that you are not better or worst than others, that you are only a bit different.  It also means that you are open to share what you know and have, that you are open to persuasion.

I don't have a practical path to bring this change about.  All I see is that maybe if we take responsibility of our own learning, model the behaviour we expect, provide examples, establish outcomes, set the table with what we see as goodies and invite others to share the meal we may shift the status quo a bit.

I found the following video at Tom White's blog. We are against inertia.

Despite the fact that this short article is a free roaming thought piece, I find myself with an acute feeling of the responsibility for what I write.  It's hard to explain.  This doesn't mean that I didn't feel responsible before, it means that I'm more aware of that  responsibility as a part of a learning community. I see this as a beneficial outcome.  I blame this to all the readings, interactions, talks and wonderful people I have met during the CCK08 course. Thanks to all of you.

The Official Quino Home Page can be found at http://www.clubcultura.com/clubhumor/quinoweb/

What's the role of a connectivist teacher?

My answer to this questions can be found in this CCK08 Moodle thread, I'll post it here:

"As far as I see and as far as I have understood the connectivism model the role of the "teacher" is to sit back and let the students take control. 

I mean sit back not with a bad connotation, of course SD and GS are not scratching their bellies!  They are very busy keeping this three or four ring "circus" going.  They invested many hours beforehand setting up the design, the layout, the Daily, pageflakes, Wiki, Elluminate, syllabus, inviting guest speakers, getting Dave to moderate, etc.

The most difficult part of online and offline teaching, is to get the learners flying on their own.   Connectivism strives towards learners independence, to decentralize the learning process, to avoid hierarchies. To get that going you need to kind of disappear at the background. If you jump in, the learners will tend to ask YOU to take the lead. Because they recognize you as an authority figure, you'll mark and evaluate them.

I think a connectivism course doesn't have to be "cold" or "detached" to avoid learners dependency.  Webheads, for example,  don't promote dependency and their sessions are full of generosity and kind encouraging comments.  They set tutorial's mechanisms at the side and point learners to go, click away, find out and sort things for themselves.  They also, as a rule, set aside a week for informal networking along with a Nettiquete code. That time is used to make sure that all participants know how to handle their email accounts to avoid the overload feeling, to free participants from the technology issues to be able to focus in the content."

 

I was very impressed by the way Dave Cormier handled the  evaluation of the CCK08 in his Elluminate session: with honesty. The picture is a screen shot of that session.

As Dave Cormier mentions, Webheads are kings on teaching online a knowledge moving target without losing people along the way.

I found some of Stephen Downes comments evaluating somehow the CCK08 course at one of Graham Attwell's  posts.

I also found Cristina Costa's reflections about a course she gave, she is on of my admired Webheads, I don't know if her course had a connectivist approach but I definitely like the way they encouraged and aided the learners to participate; from backstage.

Preparing this post I ran across an open eye slide presentation that touches responsibility, enabling and community creation in an open source platform.  By David Eaves.

Community Management Presentation

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: 2007 fsoss)

My learning journey with EVO and CCK08

This is not the third paper.  I want to place my thoughts here to let them go, to reflect on them and leave my morning's non practical thoughts behind.

When I signed up for the CCK08 course I knew it was beyond my league, now I see that to participate in an online course feeling so detached from the "teachers" or moderators and participants doesn't work well for me.  I had fun as Sia Vogel mentions,  but not during the entire journey as I'm used to have at the EVO sessions.

As participant, the Webheads provided me with readings that helped me to understand my role as participant and to succeed in online courses.  Issues like "Personal Learning Environments" (PLE), Online Courses Design, Learning Theories from the Online point of view, Properties of Networks, Instructional Design, Complexity and Chaos, Power and Control, Epistemology, History of Networked Learning, Collectives, Roles of the Teacher, Openness, etc.  were all new concepts to me.  Unfortunately, before this course I have never heard of Stephen Downs, George Siemens and connectivism.

The fact that I plunged into a totally new conceptual environment did not help me either to have fun, the people I'm learning from/with are more savvy, experienced and  better conceptually placed than me.  Most of them are recognized figures in their fields, busy people, with little time and low inclination to waste time explaining the obvious to me. This is not a complain, it's a description of a fact, I understand their position.

When I opened my own online course, BaeL,  I did not have access to all the readings I have given access now that I'm part of the moderators EVO team.  I have access now to tutorials to set up groups, readings to help me select which venue suits best my courses targeted outcomes, readings about online learning, emails with information about the "back stage", the set up, the management of the courses, the facilitation role, etc. I set BaeL course on my own, selected the venues and tools with my instincts as guide and once armed I invited the Webheads to join.  Of course I asked thousand of questions, some were answered and some were not.

Some Webheads joined and have not interacted, some were active during the online course and then backed away, some are still participating with me in that learning journey.  I'm thankful to all.  The remaining Webheads at BaeL are having fun while learning, we are learning all sorts of things, we became a caring tight knitted group with no teacher appointed, we learn from each other, we encourage each other, we learn practicing together and sharing experiences, we are open to our feelings and respect our cultural differences.

When I joined FaceBook,  I had so many friends already there that I started feeling concerned by my slow answer rate.  Rita Zeinsteger, one of my most admired Webheads, told me then: "If it's not fun, it's not worth".  It's one of the best advice I have received.

To work online you need discipline, to set times to be in front of the computer and respect them, otherwise the overload may threat your life and well being. The new term I learned is: Burn out.   Today at Ustream, in our weekly live session, Stephen Downes shared that "We have to focus, to know what we are looking for"  If we surf the net with something in particular in mind we can handle overload better by narrowing our choices.

How do you handle the feeling of overload?, How do you manage your weak ties?, Do you feel comfortable in an environment where most of your ties are weak?  This network environment is kind of new for me, your insights will be welcomed and very helpful.

What's the role of the teacher?

The term I used to name de new role of the teacher, lurer, has a negative connotation in English; maybe in another languages too.  To  let me know about it Ariel, very gently, sent me the following twitts.

Kristina Hoeppner went farther, looked up the term and shared in the comment area: "A lot of times, at least in my understanding of the term, luring is used to make people do something they would never do on their own. I don't have a great idea for a possibly better word to use. All seem to have a somewhat negative implication attached to them."

About the teacher's role she says:  "I think we do not only have one role but many, maybe sometimes packaged all together, sometimes only one or a dominant one."

Nancy White, with her bright mind and warm spirit came by to share that "In the facilitation world, an alternative term is "invitation." It has been long recognized in that domain that it is often more successful to invite people in rather than to require them. And that the quality of the invitation matters -- how do we make it irresistible?"

As I mentioned in my previous post, the name given to the teacher is the less important part.  What matters is what you do and how you do it, if you engage with learning honestly you'll set an example for your learners.  Your words may be taken away by the wind but your actions remain to drag others along the wonderful learning path.

Jenny explains the above much better in her post called "A Good Teacher".  I totally agree with her: "She (Nancy) is recognised world-wide, but her humility and obvious desire to be one of the learning group and not apart from it, is the mark of a good teacher." Nancy made a deep impression in my soul, she's always present

In another venue, Allison Miller states that "Teachers already have e-moderating skills.  They just need to analyse what you currently do face to face–and then convert it to online".

What do you think?.  According to your views, what's the role of the teacher?.   If you are a good f2f teacher, does that qualify you be be a good online teacher too?.  If not, what else do you need to develop to become one?

Powerless during Power week

I shouldn't’t be doing this. I should be writing my paper and making sure to answer the questions. Last week I was off line, I was powerless, with no energy or power to move. I was bed ridden for days with bronchitis. I logged in to last Friday live session to find out that I arrived an hour late so… powerless, unable to connect.
This is my answer to Ken’s lasts posts about success, failure, power, groups and more.

Hi Ken!

I am glad to be back here, I enjoy very much your readings. I came here from today's daily and what attracted my attention was your post title "I made the news".
Congratulations!!! Did you write home about it as you mention? What did they say?
This is a response to your last three posts so if you don't have time now please skip it and keep the “Congrats” part.

This applies to you too kind reader. :-)

Thanks for pointing out that Stephen's readings are difficult, it thought I lacked "proper background" (whatever that is) to understand them. Now I see I'm not alone. I'm stupid in some areas, as many people are, but I thought that understanding "deep philosophical readings" was not one of them until I found Stephen's readings and videos which made me ask myself similar questions than yours. After reading your last three posts I guess they are the exception that confirms the rule, I'm not so stupid in that area.

If I don't get meaning is because they are meaningless to me, I cannot connect with them, I'm a "doer", I didn't find practical application on those readings and I have been living in a "connectivist" way for more than 20 years. Don't misunderstand me, I rather clarify.

I have been, as mankind has done for centuries, connecting with experienced nodes to learn from them or to pay them to exercise their expertise in my benefit.
In my practice I work with multidisciplinary forces or nodes, it's in that sense that I stated that I work in a "connectivist" way. From that point of view I can happily agree with the sanctum sanctorum connectivist phrase: "knowledge is in the network". As I've told you before, that way of learning is not new, I'm not buying the "theory" bit either, time will tell in that sense.

Regarding Stephen's "illusion of power" exercise: It amused me.
Why? Because for the first time he stood up and exercised his power OPENLY. As you mention in this post, he had used his power from the beginning; in a covered and clever way for me. From my point of view, this last move was not clever, it didn't empower the learners.

Rather, he is modeling his "theory":

"The pipe is not important".

He did not think about the havoc he created to some that use their employers’ hardware and software to connect, he has said so several times on the live sessions:

"I don't care if you are learning, I'm learning!".

On the other hand, let me tell you that as a "teacher" in an open non-authoritarian system you have to find ways to push your students towards the content you expect them to learn so to use your power is valid in that context. It's an effective behaviour.

Your question about the success or failure of the experiment is one that voices many participants' concerns, as you have measured with your visitors’ blog counter and comments, the question is lying there and they can easily say and justify that it was a success. Again, time will tell. But as participant you can define if it was a success for you or not. Was it a success for me? Though I cannot tell yet in a broad sense, I'm learning and I've met some valuable people not nodes. That’s for sure. Did I learn what connectivism is? It seems I didn't, I learned a new name to christen what I do.

I joined for the feedback that non-credit participants believe we, the credit ones, are getting. I have not "earned" a direct email, tweet, or comment in my blog from the "teachers". Here is an account of "my feedback".
I have not opened a thread in Moodle; I got two answers from SD in the Importance of Context thread. I got one comment back from GS on all the live sessions I've listened, one of the 10 or so times I have dared to write something "valuable" in the chat box. I got an A, also from GS, for not answering the main question on my first paper. That's all. For me, that's not clear feedback but I have not participated much as you can see, maybe I have not given them a chance (?) What it tells me so far is that in a connectivist view I am a "dependent learner" who has not received clear feedback from the "teacher" who doesn't care in the first place if I learn or not.

Turning to the alternate places where CCK08 network gathers, I just can tell you what I've seen which is not much.
I've gone just to two SL cohort sessions, the first one was on a Sunday, and no one was there. The second was on Tuesday and there was a text chat going with 5 participants including myself; I was told that there was more participation on Tuesdays, that they did not use voice to keep records of their meetings and as none of us had done the readings of the week the meeting was cancelled. To be at SL to use only the chat box did not appeal to me and then I started having problems with my graphic card and then I got sick so... I will go back next Tuesday.
The Connectivitas site in Spanish has very low participation; the Connectivitas SL weekly meeting gathers also 5 or 6 participants using voice, not keeping records and voicing questions, discomforts, positions, RL activities, etc. Some of the members (3) formed a group to do the final project. Guess... Who is one of those 3? Who started those meetings? :-)
I have not seen blogs in Spanish about connectivism; I've seen blogs posts tagged as CCK08 where the conversation is about something else. I wish I had more time to search more blogs.
In Moodle I've seen and then talked live to one participant that chose the forums to promote himself, openly as a marketing strategy to get the teacher's recognition. Admittedly not doing the readings, nor visiting blogs, nor blogging about connectivism. He opens threads and posts his papers in his blog due to lack of time. He has followed SD and GS work for 3 years or so. It's working for him, every one of his threads has SD or GS postings and some have made the Daily news.

As for your assertion that CCK08 is a group and not a network I, again, can only tell you my position. A sense of belonging is one of the main aspects that identify a group, right? If you don't feel you belong then it's not your group or you pay a high price to remain there.
For me, if I don't feel I belong, if I don't get feedback then it's a network not a group. I can abandon and no one will notice. In my groups, if I abandon without giving notice, they ask about me and fortunately they get concerned about my health or my situation. I did that just once many years ago and learned my lesson. When I logged in and found the worried messages in several venues I decided that it was not fair to worry people just because I did not think about it, one member called me home from Korea to ask about my silence, he was going to call my parents first!


Regardless of what Stephen and George learn, or how many papers or thesis or whatever they get out of this experiment; I honestly believe that they deserve it. By putting this experiment together, by keeping it going with one or 2000 survivors, they have placed and keep placing every day great effort. They are modeling and giving an example on online team work; they are very different, have opposite views in some areas and have accommodated their differences publicly. George strives to engage students while Stephen enrages them easily, the bad cop vs. good cop routine. That effort should and will be compensated somehow. Besides, they are putting themselves in the firing line, exposing their work and ideas to a vast audience. If I agree with their views or not that's my business. What they are doing is very brave and I salute them for that. = deep bow.

I did not find the "rabid mob of connectivists" here trying to set you right as before, have they gone too? Where are the non-connectivists cheerleaders?

I have used up today's fuel, I started to feel dizzy again so...
Si tienen tele... ahi se ven! :-)

How do we deal with emotions in a network?

Ed Webb, Sara Stewart and Francis’s comments in my post “Design. Following my hearth, prompted me to write this post. The tone of my previous post has also influenced my decision, my emotions are somewhat obstructing the way.

Edd comments: “But I was most struck by your personal note at the end, about your 'core network' and the emotional impact of the course. This, too, is learning, and I think we should be open to sharing and discussing our emotional insights and reactions as well as our more cerebral ones. Those are also important elements of connection and something we need to consider as educators as we design connectivity into our teaching and learning. Does your core have hard boundaries, do you think, or is it more a question of degrees of connectedness, of a more fuzzy notion?”

As usual I see an example of the importance of Context. One member of my core network passed away recently, I am still in mourning. He was 85 years old and left me as legacy the custody of his Templars books to share them with others; he left me clear indications about how to do it.

My core network does not have hard boundaries, as Ed mentions is more a question of degrees of connectedness, it’s also emergent. Sometimes I am connected with part of the network depending of the issue at hand and the rest becomes kind of dormant. Sometimes it shifts in a day to day basis and sometimes it takes weeks to shift. There are even times when it shifts several times the same day. I feel I have been blessed with the core network I have, that feeling and my resent loss brought about the tears.

Sara mentions “Thanks you Ed and Maru for starting a thread on the emotional aspects of connectivism. How would you do that with your students, in a way that keeps both you and your student’s safe?”

I believe that if you communicate frequently with your students, deliver prompt feedback and keep a netiquette code in your course, you and your students would be safer than if you leave them wandering around on their own. To do that you will need a bunch of trained moderators. Sometimes it’s not possible because there is no money to pay them but you can have willing connections within your network that will do the job on voluntary basis. It’s easier said than done, you need to have a strong tie with your moderators and be sure that if they need to abandon they will place at least someone to cover their position.

While Sia Vogel writes about her feelings in Being there and suddenly very lonely. I think that if CCK08 course had spared a week for introductions, as again my dear Webheads usually do in their EVO workshops (sorry for being so redundant), we could have acquired a sense of belonging and then move to the content itself with more ease and a sense of recognition. I see clearly that my views regarding online learning and teaching may be biased, I believe that if you set a friendly and warm tone with participants it’s easier to get them focused on the content.

Regarding emotions, as a private email points out and Frances comments: “The emotional aspects are important but can be difficult to discuss 'in public'. I noticed that Stephen D had praised someone sharing their grade as 'living the spirit of connectivism'. What is the place of private discussion in networks? Important to me.”

While I a agree with Ed, on that “we should be open to sharing and discussing our emotional insights”

I am finding that it’s complicated to do it in public as Frances comments, it may also be risky. I would like to find out more about this issue because it may have deep implications, I think that if by sharing your feelings you are bringing something valuable to the network it will be appropriate to do so.

In the case of my last post the valuable thing for me was to bring emotions to the table but… Will others consider it valuable?, Are we willing to discuss our emotions openly?, Does dealing openly with participant’s emotions really promotes learning? The netiquette suggest to deal with flame messages by private email, is this the only way?, If we do it in private how will the rest learn about it? Emotions are important for connections but how and where do we deal with them in a network?. I bet some research been done on this, could any of you share links on the subject?

Design. Following my heart.

I understand that many people don’t agree with the way I do things, online and offline. I learn by doing. I saw a learning opportunity that could be shared and beneficial... I followed my heart. In this post I will describe the background story behind the creation of BaeL project and the instructional design issues that, with my interactions on the CCK08 course, I see now.

My contact with Andy Pincon from Digital Workforce Education Society or Digibridge was triggered by a final comment I posted at BaW07. He contacted me by email, I told him that it was an incredible coincidence that he saw me because I had been learning with Mercedes (the voice in the video) about his long distance Chicago project with immigrants . As part of Mercedes’ workshop I trained for free a digitally illiterate adult to learn basic computer skills like turning on the PC, use of mouse, use of keyboard, etc., using Alado as virtual classroom. The student was in another place of town with a moderator by his side listening to me and following tutorials. By the way, the Mexican organization linked to Digibridge is Innovative Soft.

The following year, at BaW08, I mentioned in the mailing list that I wanted to practice what I had learned, I did not want to spend another year away from online teaching and that I would get a group of students to do so. Sharon Betts suggested me to connect my students to hers at TLG, Andy Pincon suggested me to contact Unete and to consider LearnFree programs. Bernice La Lucerne, Jose Antonio Da Silva, Ronaldo Lima, Nergiz Kern and Dennis Oliver’s generous ideas and questions about the issues I was considering, helped me to decide how to go about it.

For me the process described above shows that, as George Siemens mentions again in this Instructional Design week, all learning starts with a connection and that attributes of connections influence knowledge. By talking, visiting sites, exploring web 2.0 platforms, asking questions, interacting with them and their experiences I decided to leave BaeL at 21^st Classes inactive, to create BaeL at Ning as virtual support community and designed a short four weeks online workshop using AprendeLibre computer tutorials as content material, Yahoo Messenger as live sessions site and BaeL-PC Yahoo Group as forum and mailing list. The workshop was launched the 24th of March 2008.

According to Renata Phelps’ paper, I designed a complex non linear learning environment. If I had read George’s Learning Development Cycle or watched his presentation on Instructional Design and Connectivism maybe I would have done things differently. I say “maybe” because the Context, Readiness, Tools, Equipment Available and Resources were the Impacting Factors to plan the design of the workshop.

It was a free activity, not related to school in any way. My students and I were working from Cyber Places which created difficulties due to the “strange” sites I required access to. The target group age range was 14 to 18 years old, some of them worked and studied, some went to school in the morning while others went in the afternoon, non of them spoke English, the older ones used the computer to chat, the e-mail to send PPP presentations and had Metroflogs to post images. Some of us did not know how to use a computer properly. The sites are still active, the last member is a young single mum who wants to learn to use computer programs to get a job as a secretary or receptionist. I am glad to help and continue learning with her participation.

The trip to my hometown was… different! I lost the 10 AM bus, took the next at 2:00 PM, trying to fix SLExperiments wiki. The movie I saw on the bus was “The Count of Montecristo” I ate my lunch and drank my soda… different. The last scene of the movie shows the hero’s core network; in my mind I saw a picture of my core network and started crying softly. This course is having deep emotional impact on me.  But that’s another story.

Connected without modem?

Before going any further let me tell you that I just installed Snap Shots. I have found it handy in other blogs. Should you decide this is not for you, just click the Options icon in the upper right corner of the Snap Shot and opt-out.

Yesterday I got my modem back. It burned last Monday morning so most of week 5 I was off line, I joined two live sessions and missed my weekly meetings. However, I was not disconnected, I kept thinking about the course, tried to link more concepts and explored my wall. This is a late post, I will address here the specific questions required for this week: Have you begun to see the rudiments of a learning network forming?, Has some of the conceptual uncertainty settled?

While Lisa does not recall conceptual uncertainty she mentions the grading system. I was only aware of the 40% assigned to the papers and learned the rest from her post. You know? I am not concerned with the grades, I joined to learn, have feedback and to get my efforts documented somehow.

I saw a network forming from the beginning, a huge one with more that 2250 participants. Following Stephen's ideas on Groups vs Networks: The Class Struggle Continues,which for me are kind of rigid or don't leave much room, I could say that we have somewhat a learning network. It has the following attributes: diversity, openness, distribution, interaction, it changes and the topics are emergent. What I see in conflict is the autonomy attribute as described, we are not autonomous, we have guidelines, tasks and readings assigned, live meetings to attend and formal leaders. In fact, part of this post is "homework".

On the other hand, looking at George's Groups and Networks presentation which I find flexible and gives more room I could say that what we have is a learning network with a high level of autonomy. It is important to note that he considers, as stated in the first slide that:

"groups and networks cannot be compared, groups are a type of network, they are not something altogether different from networks so, in a sense, it's almost impossible to compare the two because they are the same".

So, taking into account the three critical elements he mentions: Agent Autonomy, Complexity and Task Specialization, the picture changes. I could say that the type of network that we have in the "course" is one that has a high level of autonomy (we have to archive a focused outcome but we can organize ourselves to do so), a high level of complexity is not required (the task can be managed loosely, they are not concerned about what the final outcome could be) and the task at hand does not require high levels of specialization (no one will be killed if we get it wrong).

We come back again to the importance of context. Being aware of the two points of view I can say that I see a learning network forming, not only the rudiments. There is huge amount of work to get this going and a lot of effort to plan this "course", design the network and set it flying. I am not overlooking that. What comes clear, from the educational point of view, is that depending on the objectives of your course you need to decide which type of environment is more suitable, a traditional group where you have more control or a network when you can afford low control.

To give a course using this learning model sounds attractive to you?, Are we willing to pay the price?, Is your student's criteria solid enough to achieve something in a network?, Is the subject fit to be learned connectivelly? Is your school or organization willing to support you on a learning network adventure?, Is your country technically equipped to use web 2.0 tools?, Are your students digitally literate to cope? There are many factors to consider.

Regarding the second question. I have had my share of conceptual uncertainty, I cannot say that the uncertainty has gone because I find more with every new subject. This is not a bad thing, I am enjoying expanding my contacts, I am learning to get ready to launch my BaeL digital literacy project as shown in this video but we need to get on board a charity organization to do so. We started in March so it has been a long road.

As I mentioned at the beginning, I have been thinking about my wall. I still laugh when I remember the image "You are not longer subscribed to anything" at Stephen's blog. Well, my wall is related to trust. George's presentation touches a bit this point.
I do not know how to relate to someone that I hardly know, to someone who interacts very little with me, I tend to doubt when facing closed people with no chance to talk to them. It may be silly but if don't place the wall out it will be harder to tear it down. I know we are not supposed to get validation or recognition, that's what my head says.
However, my emotion reacts, I am human. I have seen some behaviourism taking place in the feedback or lack of feedback given, I perceive some kind of light coercion going on, not in a direct way. It is in a vicarious way, I ignore your behavior and acknowledge the behaviour that I consider right for you to imitate.
Let me explain myself, I feel kind of forced to post in a certain way in order to receive feedback, no one has sent an email or left a comment here saying something like "your posts lack focus" or "your map is not linked" or something of the sort. I observe a distinct pattern in the posts that do receive feedback so it's kind of a behavioural pattern. Well, the wall is out. I hope this helps.

My concept map is still very similar to the first I posted, I have the elements, the concepts, disconnected except in some parts. As soon as I see some sense in it I will post it. The YH Group for credit learners is picking up slowly, not all the credit learners have joined. The survey to get information to plan live meetings has even fewer quorum. We are all fighting to get time to do things, I know that people with very limited time prefer to hang at Moodle and be visible there.

As I luckily can manage my time, I can afford to have live meetings several times in the week. Today I was at the SL CCK08 group for the first time, the meeting ended quickly and I stayed around with Louise for a nice cosy chat. It's a pity that they do not use voice in order to document the meetings; I find it sad, like a waste of resources, I connect better with voice and get tired of typing :-)

Talking to her I saw that I have now a network at Twitter, before I followed just my friends and now I am following people I hardly know.

Later on I invited Dolores to my launchroom. We were talking about the course, our questions and the way we are engaging, I will meet her again at Conenctivitas tomorrow at 13:00 SLT 20:00 GMT.

I am glad my modem is back!

CCK08 Riddles?

My trip to the forum left me more confused, it's not a surprise.
As I sometimes find hard to locate the threads I will place an extract here and ponder about it during the week.



If you wish you can visit Stephen Downes original post.

"I have advanced a position in my own work proposing four major principles of association:

*resemblance - a.k.a. Hebbian associationism
*contiguity or proximity - a.k.a. salience
*feedback or back propagation
*balance, or entropy a.k.a. Boltzmann mechanisms

Conclusion

A lot of what I've tried to argue in this (admittedly long) post is that Connectivism is a non-intentional theory of learning and knowledge.
What this means is that, in connectivism, learning is not about content. It is not about entering a certain representational state with respect to the world.

Such an account makes the representational state - rather than our actual thoughts, perceptions and feelings - the arbiter of what it is to know, what it is to have learned.

But connectivist learning does not require representational states. It does not require on the part of the learner that they commit to a particular account of the external world.

It allows - indeed, encourages - the idea that people may have different, and individual, accounts of the external world.

Which means that what is negotiated is not some set of statements about the nature of that world - not representational states, not meanings - but mechanisms for communication, protocols for interaction (which may indeed be, and probably are, understood differently by each person engaged in communication)."

To add to this confusion I stumbled into Ken's blog, it did not clarify my ideas but I had a good laugh which I welcomed.
Will I someday be able to understand the riddles?
Time will tell.

Values. Overnight reflection. CCK08

The last post I read last night was from Tom.
He ponders about disfunctional families and disfunctional netowrks, it was almost midnight so I went to bed. I woke up with some thoughts and before rushing to answer, because he is asking about networks, I decided to place them here.

What moved me was that he is somewhat touching my area of expertise. I deal with disfunctionality every day at the office, the people that function in an acceptable manner for them do not come to visit.


How do I know if something is functional or disfunctional? Something functional for me can be disfunctional for you. What I do first is to get into their perspective and ask from there to gain clarity. Few people can tell others what is right or wrong, what is valuable and what is garbage; it deppends on the circumstances, everything is relative.

Sometimes they come saying: "I am lost, I cannot deal with this, I am losing my mind... am I crazy?"
My usual answer is: Crazy people don't go around asking if they are crazy, they believe they are not, they believe they are Napoleon or that someone is after them, or whatever and behave accordingly. If you are asking yourself if you are crazy it probably means that you are not.


Some other times they come expresing: "I don't feel safe, I am insecure, how do I know if my decision is correct?"
My answer would be: Don't look outside, look within. Observe what is bothering you, is the pain enough to complain but not enough to move? If you choose to keep complaining maybe it's not time yet for you to move. On the other hand, if you choose to move, imagine yourself in the new position... Does it feel right? Does it suit you?, What's lacking? From the answers we make an action plan.

It is easier to write about it than to do it. My main concern is to get them going where they want to go. I do not approve or disaprove their decisions or actions, if that's right for them probably it's right. What I have to watch out, precisely, is that whatever they do, they do it looking at themselves first. I often find myself saying: Convince me, I don't buy that, "you" are not talking, someone else is talking here, whose eyes are you wearing to look at the situation?

The point I want to make here is that to wander in the values, measures, evaluation or assessment area is a serious matter. It is relative. The same fact, the same behaviour can create havoc in one place and heaven in another.

What's funcional? What gives you comfort, a sense of well being, what allows you to move, interact and enjoy the path.
What's disfunctional? What causes discomfort, a sensation of being wronged, what keeps you rooted in one place unable to interact and enjoy.

Don't overlook the fact that sometimes is healthy to feel discomfort, it is part of the growing process. Sometimes by exploring the disfuncion or discomfort for a while you get some answers. Sometimes you save your life by not moving. Sometimes you enjoy discomfort. We come again to the same point. It is relative.

CCK08 Forest, trees, paths and a bit of clarity

Today's session at UStream.tv brought along wonderful gifts. Thanks guys!

I saw a bit of clarity. I understood that one of the things that was confusing me was that I was not clear about which was Stephen's view and which was George's. Certainly the gray hair in George's avatar got me thinking that I had also confused their identities!!! As mentioned in the live session, I was walking through paths of confusion. The second one was the "distribution" issue.

I think I got the point, I may be wrong. While knowledge resides in the connections or forest, learning resides on the individuals or trees. Hence, knowledge is distributed across the networks, knowledge emerges from those connections, while learning is the capacity to build those connections and use them for our own purposes.

In this picture I show what I found:



The conversation was abundant, I felt it lighter and I could engage with it. It was about time :-)
Nancy White wrote, in her particularly rich descriptive manner, the way most of us feel in this non directive course. Her comment gave way to a description of intelligence. Intelligence is being understood as the ability or potential to comprehend, achieve, understand, function and absorb huge amounts of information. David Vidal came up with with the question: what is first, the egg or the hen?

That in turn lead us to... What is value? This point will be reviewed later on in the course but for now Stephen mentioned two aspects that define the value of something or someone:
1.- Goodness. Is it helpful?
2.- Measurement. Cost or number of units.

This other picture shows a bit of today's conversation

CCK08 Where does Connectivism work best?

Yesterday I came across Mike Bowle's interesting post.

"Thus brings me to my opinion on childhood learning and Connectivism.
The two can absolutely work together, and do it well; but not in traditional,
highly structured educational systems. In my view, Connectivism works best in learner-led environments, and the most learner-friendly environment of them all is the home".

My response:
What you post here is not traditional either and I find it very true. In Mexico, not many people can afford to educate their children at home and most of the schools are traditional, controlled, marks seeking environments. It is sad but true.
In my work I usually encourage parents to integrate their child to society instead of forcing them to get good grades. You see, I work with kids that are different. Regardless the medical term with which those kids are labelled, they are intelligent and want to learn at their own pace, in their own way with their own creative resources. Of course this is not allowed at school but their parents still need to send them to one. My proposal to them is to teach them to beat the school system while encourage them to learn what they are interested in learning.
The second best learner-friendly environment of them all is the Internet.

In an earlier post, also from Mike, I found another bit of information that got me thinking as well.

"As we delve further into the course, I think it’s critical to differentiate
discussions on the theory itself from those regarding implementation of the
theory within a specific context. Both matters are very important ones to explore, but they are - at the core - very different questions".

I do not see Connectivism applied at schools in the future. If the theory manages to get around the evaluation and curriculum points it will stop being Connectivism.
In practice, it will depend on the openness of the schools and teachers, I do not see it in a near future. At least not in Mexico. As digital literacy is very low here
I do not see Connectivism blooming online with Mexican teachers or students.

I highly recommend reading and discussing Mike’s posts on his blog.

CCK08 G. Siemens conference's notes

I made two presentations to share my notes. One in Spanish and one in English.
Enjoy them! I hope to find answers.
Hice dos presentaciones para compartir mis notas. Una en Español y otra en Inglés.
¡Disfrutenlas! Espero encontrar respuestas.

G.Siemens Notes 24sep08 S Lconference

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: cck08 connectivism)

Notas G Siemens Sl 24 Sep 08

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: cck08 connectivism)

CCK08 Mindmap Draft. Week Three

Mind mapping with tools is new for me so I attended a WiZiQ session with Brendan OKeefe to learn more about it. He gives free sessions not only about how to make mind maps but also on how to use them to define a personal life path.

Later on I found this helpful image.

I am glad I draw the map, my understanding shifted, I feel more comfortable and I enjoyed it. I have not found out how to make the tool do what I draw on paper, I need more practice. I understand that in order to share it I need to make it with a common tool to allow others to add to it, erase or comment. I will continue learning the tool to achieve that goal. Meanwhile, I wanted to share a draft and place my reflections.

Regarding the Connectivism concept I have more questions than answers. The foundation principles I drew are common to many learning theories while the branches on the learning process and networks are related to what I have read, seen and listened in the course. The branches on the role that our mind plays on learning and knowing also come from what I have found in this course.

I would like to understand better how knowledge is distributed in a network. I understand that knowledge requires a knower, that if I want to learn how to make a map with Cmap I have to find a person who knows and observe, connect with, him or her to learn. The airplane example tells me that one person alone cannot build one, knowledge is what a group has connected to get the airplane completed. Looking at the example it seems obvious but I do not get the point. How is the distribution process?, Is it a process?, What is taking place?, How do I know that it is distributed?, By areas of expertise?

CCK08 Where does my learning occur? Ideas. Week 2.

Regardless the type of network I use to connect, who or what do I connect with and the node I access, the concepts and new knowledge lands on the light bulb. It feels like an Aha!

The following image formed during week 2.



I placed myself (my mind) in the middle, surrounded by the three main areas, or networks, where I interact. Where two networks connect, the color changes, the kind of knowledge I acquire changes too.

Learning depends on the point of view, on pre-conceptions. Connectivism postulates that learning is distributed across the networks. I am still trying to work around this idea. I do not have it clear. Besides, at this point, I do not really see that "knowing" how and where is that knowledge distributed will help my learning process. As in week three we will revise the properties of networks I may gain more understanding.

Before I joined this course I found a way to make a picture of my connections using a Facebook application. Most of those connections are meaningful, we share common interests or have similar beliefs and values.



I wonder if at the end of the course I will manage to do it again taking into account the new connections I am making in Facebook. It is too early to say which of those new connection will become meaningful for me.

What kind of network is reliable? It has been put forward that diversity, interdependency, interactivity and openness are the key conditions to achieve reliability.

Stephen Downes wrote an interesting Analysis on Online Communities.

The subject for the week was: Rethinking Epistemology.

Epistemology (from Greek επιστήμη - episteme, "knowledge" + λόγος, "logos") or theory of knowledge is a branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge. Another word that came up in the live sessions and the forums was Ontology.

In philosophy, Ontology (from the Greek ὄν, genitive ὄντος: of being
(part. of εἶναι: to be) and -λογία: science, study, theory) is a branch of metaphysics,often considered the most fundamental. It is the study of the nature of being, existence, or reality in general and of its basic categories and their relations, with particular emphasis on determining what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how these can be grouped and related within an ontology (typically, a hierarchy subdivided according to similarities and differences). Though distinguished from epistemology, as theories of knowledge typically involve some assumptions about existence and what exists, these can be seen as complementary disciplines.

The proposal this week was to move from knowing to being better persons. That is from Epistemology to Ontology.

As a Psychologist inclined towards a Humanistic Approach, one of my idols is Carl Rogers, I can easily relate to that.
As I believe in the "Third Force" in Psychology, Rhizomatic Education fits in the pattern, will Connectivism fit too?

CCK08 After the storm... a reasonable explanation.

Well, well, well.
What I felt as lack of interest or communication has a reasonable explanation. I owe a deep apology. Obviously they did not know I existed, they did not have the means to know!

I rescued from the trash bin two emails sent to Enrolled Learners CCK08 saying:

Date: Saturday, September 6, 2008, 4:39 PM

Hi,
Welcome! Please reply to this email to confirm that you have received this…
You’re part of a group of learners that have enrolled in Connectivism and Connective Knowledge. As such, I want to make sure you feel somewhat “settled” and don’t have any outstanding questions. We have 22 participants enrolled with about another dozen who expressed interest but haven’t committed. (20 was our initial limit)

I have seen mishaps like this, only online.
22 enrolled out of 2000? Their limit was 20?

The second one goes as follows:

Date: Monday, September 8, 2008 11:47 AM

Hi,
So, how’s day 1?
I’ve received several confirmations that my last email was received. If you did not reply, please let me know.
Exploring blogs and other media is an important part of this course. As such, we encourage you to set up your own blogs. If you do, could you please send me the URL? We are aggregating blogs in different sites, but I want to make sure I’ve got yours in my RSS reader…
Thx. George.

I toyed with the idea of deleting the former post but it doesn´t feel right to do so.
Due to no one's fault I felt isolated during the first week of the course. Two emails with the forum Digest were also on the trash bin, and the rest?
Vance's says that we learn more from technical difficulties, I agree. I have had my share of technical glitches even before the course started.

Have they hampered my learning?
I think so, I have spent a lot of time finding a way to answer replies to my posts without the digest and setting again my browser. My mind was clogged with so many technical issues besides the new concepts, I am behind on the readings and struggling with CMap.

However, tomorrow is a great day though it starts too early for a Sunday Morning.
I will be at 7:00 AM at Tapped in to celebrate...
Webheads in Action 10Th anniversary!
Then at 8:00 AM at the WiZiQ conference. I will surely re-charge my batteries in their company