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.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
CCK08 George Siemens at Connectivitas
En Español al final.
Screenshots taken in SL during George Siemens conference on Connectivism at Connectivitas Headquarters. Sept 24, 2008.
The conference was a success with around 100 attendees.
Congratulations Dolors!! Thanks Elena for the translation!!
If you want to visit the UniHispana Auditorium this is the landmark:
http://slurl.com/secondlife/UniHispana/208/1/77
After the conference we visited Connectivitas Headquarters. We invite you to our Spanish weekly meetings every Wednesday at 20:00 GMT. To join from outside please click here http://tinyurl.com/6ey25m.
You can also find me in SL every Friday at 19:00 GMT winter time (18:00 GMT summer time) at Webheads Headquarters.
This is the landmark: http://slurl.com/secondlife/EduNation%20III/79/37/21
We also have a Wiki where we place, among other things, the teaching resources we find.
Capturas de pantalla tomadas en SL durante la conferencia de G. Siemens en Connectivitas. Sept 24, 2008.
La conferencia fué un éxito, contamos con alrededor de 100 participantes.
¡Mis mas sinceras felicitaciones Dolors! ¡Gracias Elena por la traducción!
Si quieren visitar el Auditorio de UniHispana la marca de terreno es la siguiente:
http://slurl.com/secondlife/UniHispana/208/1/77
Después de la conferencia visitamos la sede de Connectivitas. Los invitamos a nuestras reuniones semanales en Español los miércoles a las 21:00 GMT horario de invierno (20:00 GMT horario de verano). Para unirse desde afuera por favor den clic aquí http://tinyurl.com/6ey25m.
Me pueden encontrar también en SL los Viernes a las 18:00 GMT en la sede de los Webheads, el idioma es Inglés.
La marca del terreno es la siguiente:
http://slurl.com/secondlife/EduNation%20III/79/37/21
Tenemos una Wiki donde colocamos los recursos para la enseñanza que vamos encontrando entre otras muchas cosas.
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?
Monday, September 22, 2008
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?
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?
Saturday, September 13, 2008
CCK08 Theory Recollections. Week One.
What is Connectivism?
The most concrete definition I have found is: An educational proposal that states that knowledge is distributed across a network of connections where learning consist of the ability to construct and traverse those networks. Stephen Downnes
I still have to munch over it. From the forum messages I see that the concept, the idea of Connectivism, as it is being described in the course, is familiar to many, including me. Maybe at the end of the course I will be able to answer this question standing on solid ground, maybe not.
From the live sessions and video presentations, as far as I understand, which is not very far yet, we cannot say if Connectivism is a learning theory or not. The debate goes on among the high spheres of knowledge, were the gurus are, I will let them solve this riddle.
As it often happens when dealing with non tangible outcomes, at the beginning, the new wave or new "theory to be" is challenged from every corner while it proclaims to solve all the problems, that it covers more or at least that is better than the ones preceding it. Only time will tell if it is a theory or if it is a fashion. It is too early to tell for sure how Connectivism will be labelled.
What I perceive is that Connectivism tries to explain how learning occurs. It tries to explain what many scientist and theories have tried to explain: How do we learn?
It tries to go beyond learning theories. Paradoxically, we are sent to review previous learning models; Behaviourism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, etc. If Connectivism comes forward and gets recognition it will be the first learning model created by educators. Among the participants in the course there are mainly educators, probably all of them would like to have their own model.
That's the word that suits me: model. Connectivism has 5 principles as foundation.
1.- Our need to externalize, verbally or non-verbally, in order to make sense.
2.- Our need for frameworks or structures to deal with new information to make sense.
3.- Our need to socialize and negotiate around knowledge.
4.- Our patterning mind and
5.- Our need to extend our humanity, to overcome our limitations with inventions and technology.
This principles are shared by many learning models.
Connectivism believes that we build on the foundation of how we engage with others and interact with the world. Psychology believes the same, our perceptions shift when a significant other joins the picture and our perceptions shape our actions.
Connectivism takes into account three critical areas or surroundings or types of network:
Biological (Neural), Conceptual and External (Social).
What is new for me is the way in which Connectivism tries to explain learning.
It takes into account that our ability to understand is related to how well and how consistently we are connected with certain ideas or concepts. Such connections are a function of the depth and diversity of the connections, the frequency of exposure, the integration with previous concepts and the force or strength of the connecting ties. For someone expert on Artificial Intelligence or Neurology this will not be new.
However, Connectivism stresses that learning is the formation of new connections, that it is a distributed process. It states that different types of network with different types of attributes will serve different types of learning needs. Hence, the diversity of the network along with the strength of the ties influence the learning process.
"Learning in this model is not transferred but grown anew by each learner".
I feel strongly attracted by the above statement, I would like to prove it is right, I have sensed that growth in myself and observed it in others. How can we show this in an objective way? Is there a way to demonstrate it?
I may be naive but I sincerely hope that data from this chaotic course helps in that direction. Let's wait, watch and see how this course evolves.
The most concrete definition I have found is: An educational proposal that states that knowledge is distributed across a network of connections where learning consist of the ability to construct and traverse those networks. Stephen Downnes
I still have to munch over it. From the forum messages I see that the concept, the idea of Connectivism, as it is being described in the course, is familiar to many, including me. Maybe at the end of the course I will be able to answer this question standing on solid ground, maybe not.
From the live sessions and video presentations, as far as I understand, which is not very far yet, we cannot say if Connectivism is a learning theory or not. The debate goes on among the high spheres of knowledge, were the gurus are, I will let them solve this riddle.
As it often happens when dealing with non tangible outcomes, at the beginning, the new wave or new "theory to be" is challenged from every corner while it proclaims to solve all the problems, that it covers more or at least that is better than the ones preceding it. Only time will tell if it is a theory or if it is a fashion. It is too early to tell for sure how Connectivism will be labelled.
What I perceive is that Connectivism tries to explain how learning occurs. It tries to explain what many scientist and theories have tried to explain: How do we learn?
It tries to go beyond learning theories. Paradoxically, we are sent to review previous learning models; Behaviourism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, etc. If Connectivism comes forward and gets recognition it will be the first learning model created by educators. Among the participants in the course there are mainly educators, probably all of them would like to have their own model.
That's the word that suits me: model. Connectivism has 5 principles as foundation.
1.- Our need to externalize, verbally or non-verbally, in order to make sense.
2.- Our need for frameworks or structures to deal with new information to make sense.
3.- Our need to socialize and negotiate around knowledge.
4.- Our patterning mind and
5.- Our need to extend our humanity, to overcome our limitations with inventions and technology.
This principles are shared by many learning models.
Connectivism believes that we build on the foundation of how we engage with others and interact with the world. Psychology believes the same, our perceptions shift when a significant other joins the picture and our perceptions shape our actions.
Connectivism takes into account three critical areas or surroundings or types of network:
Biological (Neural), Conceptual and External (Social).
What is new for me is the way in which Connectivism tries to explain learning.
It takes into account that our ability to understand is related to how well and how consistently we are connected with certain ideas or concepts. Such connections are a function of the depth and diversity of the connections, the frequency of exposure, the integration with previous concepts and the force or strength of the connecting ties. For someone expert on Artificial Intelligence or Neurology this will not be new.
However, Connectivism stresses that learning is the formation of new connections, that it is a distributed process. It states that different types of network with different types of attributes will serve different types of learning needs. Hence, the diversity of the network along with the strength of the ties influence the learning process.
"Learning in this model is not transferred but grown anew by each learner".
I feel strongly attracted by the above statement, I would like to prove it is right, I have sensed that growth in myself and observed it in others. How can we show this in an objective way? Is there a way to demonstrate it?
I may be naive but I sincerely hope that data from this chaotic course helps in that direction. Let's wait, watch and see how this course evolves.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)