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/

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! :-)