Sus Nyrop :: Blog :: George Siemens on Connectivism

Comments

1. Hi Susanne 

   I have been interested in George Siemens' ideas since I first discovered them here in elgg.net. As you probably know there is a podcast published here of an interview Dave Tosh conducted with George - I posted about it at: http://elgg.net/terry/weblog/2014.html.

   There so much of interest and to be developed in the idea of connectivism. Sometimes it seems to refer to how individuals construct, in their heads so-to-speak, their own developing network of ideas and knowledge. Other it seems to refer to the external (with respect to individuals) network of knowledge as in George's example of how an aircraft depends upon the linking of many specialists who have their own expertise but also an understanding or how this links to a network of other expert fields of knowledge. I think these two notions of network - internal and external -  are both present in this presentation.

   I think George is talking mainly about school education and perhaps less about University education, particularly in research led institutions like my own. He says 'courses' do not function in a complex and dynamic environment where knowledge growth is exponential and its half life gets ever shorter, in some subject areas at least. I would absolutely agree that there has to be a shift in balance between providing students with content and the metacognitive and learning skills they will need to fend for themselves throughout their careers in a 'knowledge' society. We certainly haven't got this right yet. And much of his account of perpetually postponed uncertainty fits very well with the theorists of modern society and rapid social change that talk about 'reflexive modernity' and 'the risk society', for example Anthony Giddens and Ulrich Beck, and the implications this has for identity, citizenship and personal effectiveness.

   However, the charge that courses are static and offer only snapshots of a knowledge area frozen in time does not really fit a lot of University courses these days. In my institution the curriculum is largely research led and taught by research active academic staff or teaching staff who's scholarship entails working with research active staff. Where it is appropriate, modules tend to be updated each time they are taught. And we are beginning to be much more explicit in the way we make the links between research and teaching, not just in terms of up-to-date content but also how the process and activity of research can inform the activities engaged in by students as learners. For me the notion that doing research and learning are essentially the same thing has been very productive in the way I think about teaching and supporting learning.

   However, this may make me sound a bit complacent. I am sure there is still much we can do, particularly in the development of students' metacognative and process skills. And this doesn't address the issues George identifies in school education and, perhaps, teaching in HE institutions that are less involved in research.

   Terry Wassall on Monday, 20 February 2006, 23:44 CET # |