This is a pretty good set of reflections. It's interesting to me that so much of the value of knowledge networking is based on structure - how we connect, how many we connect, what we do when we connect. Also relevant: we learn when we talk. "We organize information differently when we talk, than when those ideas are just swimming around in our heads. And by mentally organizing the information in preparation for speaking, we create greater understanding for ourselves." Note, though, that knowledge doesn't always originate in individuals and then percolate up - knowledge emerges through conversation (or interaction generally), so it's important to have an external perspective on these conversations (and not just the summation of the conversation). That's why sharing is so important. I'm less a fan of things like the 1-2-4-All model, which is really based for in-person sessions. The same with sitting in a circle. What's really important is that all voices are equal and everyone gets a voice.
This article (14 page PDF) discusses the shortcomings in the use of traditional pedagogies in teaching the mandatory Literature Course in China and examines a new approach based on online and offline (O2O) integration. O2O is an "iterative project-based teaching model is mainly the iteration of online and offline activities... the chief teaching principle is to cultivate learners’ability to solve problems through explanation, question asking, exhibition and operation for different knowledge and principles." The latter part of the paper looks at the effectiveness of the process (control and experimental groups just over 100 each) and interestingly measures teacher effectiveness as well as student initiative and interest ratings to identify the impact of the technique itself.
Most of this makes decent sense, especially as directed toward a global audience, even if the advice is pretty basic. The main lesson (which shows up in several of the takeaways) is that learners need support; this is most vividly evident in the observation that hardware dumping does not work. As well, working with what you have is better on balance; "spend more time considering what digital infrastructure already exists, and how it could be put to better use" and use "content that already exists, and curating it around learning objectives." It wouldn't be a World Bank publication without an emphasis on measuring everything, but I would caution that organizations measure only as much as needed to identify needs, resources and capabilities. Because it's not measurement that produces the outcome, it's the learning program itself.
This is a more succinct presentation of the ideas in Marc Prensky's previous post on replacing schools. It introduced the term 'empowerment hubs' to describe a learning and development process focused on real-world accomplishments. The concepts of knowledge and skill don't disappear, but they become by-products of a person working to achieve a tangible outcome, rather than in the traditional system, where we focus on knowledge and skills, and hope they result in some good being produced in the world. I like the model but think it really needs to focus on personal agency where the person in question determines what counts as an 'accomplishment' and how it is measured. Also, there are various agencies already called empowerment hubs so I think there may be a need to revisit the term. Image: Oleksandr Pidvalnyi via Oppression and Power, Rebus.
This is a discussion of Jane Hart's Top 200 Tools for Learning 2020, released today. Firefox, which was my number one pick, is not in the top ten, nor is any other browser, but I note that you usually use a browser to access eight of the top ten. Anyhow, I like that she provides three sublists: personal learning, corporate learning, and education (I don't recall whether she has done this before, but it's definitely useful). She mentions the (unsurprising) rise of videoconferencing tools, but I find it noteworthy that Zoom rose only eight places - meaning it was also in the top ten last year.
Education, says Marc Prensky, can't be fixed. "It no longer meets our needs, nor will it ever meet them again." It needs to be replaced, he says. But with what? Something that not only responds to technological change but also the sea change in what we believe and how we relate to each other in the world. And the changes we are seeing now make the 1960s look like a minor blip. So we need what he calls 'post-education'. A lot of what Prensky proposes accords with my own thinking. You have to read about half way through this longish article to get to it (but it's worth the read):
"The old ends (of 20cE) are to improve individuals intellectually — so that they can, ideally, go off later and improve the world. (But we never check if they do.) The new ends of Post-Education are to improve the world immediately, through teams of kids’ accomplishing real-world projects with Measurable Positive Impact, and for those who do to get better and better at it through constant practice and improvement." That's not bad, but I would draw an important distinction between enabling them to change the world rather than forcing them change it. That's why we need (what he calls) the key future elements of empowerment, that is: new beliefs, accomplishment, uniqueness and symbiosis (contrast with my key elements of autonomy, diversity, openness and interactivity). Image: UMSU.
Acronyms are used all the time, and they often mix numbers and letters and sometimes even Roman numerals. They're an easy target for critics concerned about accessibility, but they shouldn't be, at least, not without a little diligence. Unless the acronym is one that everyone knows, in news writing the standard practice is to write out the term in full the first time the acronym is used; readers will notice I follow this practice on OLDaily, and it is recommended in this CSS-Tricks article. Additionally, when it is being introduced, the acronym can be introduced semantically with an abbr tag. It seems like a good idea to me, though it needs to be implemented in text editors (the editor I use automatically deletes the tag as invalid).
This newsletter is sent only at the request of subscribers. If you would like to unsubscribe, Click here.
Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter? Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list. Click here to subscribe.
Copyright 2020 Stephen Downes Contact: email@example.comThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.