In any subject area that I have been involved in I don't think I have experienced as much transformation as I have in NGL. The subject has not only changed my learning routine, such as developing a PKM process or using new tools, like Mendeley and Feedly, to complete my work, but it has also encouraged learning and knowledge sharing, particularly through sharing what I am learning on my blog, thus creating my own "knowledge base" that combines everything that I learn in a process that is made public, and also providing opportunity to clarify my ideas and receive feedback from others (Jarche, 2012). Through NGL I have also learnt how connected learning - the use of digital and networked media - enables learners, such as myself and my students, to engage in learning that is "socially embedded, interest-driven, and oriented toward educational, economic or political opportunity" (Ito et al. 2013). All this makes for the most transformational learning.
Through engaging with Web 2.0 tools via a PKM process I have shifted from primarily consuming information to "produc[ing], remixing and sharing" (Goodyear, 2014, p. 41). This is a major cognitive and behavioural shift. Since 1998 I have had access to endless sources of information, much more than I could ever hope for or need, but I was not collaborating or developing knowledge on the web (Kligyte, 2009). If I was collaborating or creating it was within the confines of formal educational environments or within institutional frameworks. At the end of 2013 I realised that I could no longer be only a consumer, I needed to become an active producer, particularly if I was going to move beyond my role of teaching within institutional walls. I came to this realisation because many writers and entrepreneurs (i.e. from Richard Branson to Derek Sivers) would assert that through contributing to the world they grew exponentially, far more than they could have ever anticipated. In each successful individual that I read about there tended to be a feedback loop, the more they gave, the more they got back - monetary or otherwise. This is definitely not what my formal education had taught me but seems to be built in the ethos of NGL.
The process of participation in NGL, via writing on a blog and participating in online networks, is in stark contrast to traditional classroom learning. Within the discourse of the classroom, as I have expressed in previous blog posts, learners' thoughts can be lost within the "ongoing dialogue between learners." Although group discussions can be beneficial, and I have argued in another post about the importance of face-to-faceinteraction, the act of having to articulate one's ideas in an online format encourages greater learning, and also avoids the phenomena known as "echo-chambers." In fact, according to Vygotsky (1987) as cited in Bell et al. (2010) reflective writing that encourages dialogue between learners’ acts as a "catalyst for greater cognitive development ... that is more considered and intellectual." Networked learning also provides access to knowledge that is "distributed in different minds" (Goodyear, 2014), rather than being limited to the 15 - 20 people in a discussion group or forum, thus generating more opportunities for new ideas.
Networked learning achieves this diversity through its potential for learners to develop "weak ties," relationships that have an "important role in distributing new knowledge," rather than relying on the "strong ties" that one is embedded in or that one develops in on-campus courses (Goodyear, 2014). In my undergraduate degree I became a member of a "tight-knit" network of teachers (i.e. my strong ties), who shared views of the world that were relatively consistent or "stable" (Goodyear, 2014). The only way new information or insights penetrated our world was through "distant parts of the network" (i.e. through teachers or Professional Development). Whereas, in an online network learners can gain access to new information that is not hierarchal (Podolny and Page, 1998 as cited in Goodyear, 2014) and offer alternative points of view, something that was very limited during my undergraduate experience. Like the coffee houses that brought together disparate individuals with a common interest in the late seventeenth century, online networks bring a diversity of individuals to share insights into practice issues through "interactive discussion, joint problem-solving and trust" (Goodyear, 2014), at a fraction of the cost that on-campus learning opportunities provide.
Although being connected in an online network can lead to many enriched learning experiences, I have learnt that just being connected is not going to ensure connectedness or interactivity (Mackness et al. 2010). As a learner in NGL I have been able to find "informational supports for my specialised interest" – writing but only through actively seeking out networks that I could engage with. What I did not expect was to find so many willing collaborators, who embraced interaction. This is fortunate as in my day-to-day life I am not surrounded by many people who share my interest in writing but online, I am able to reach out and form a new peer group that has the knowledge and expertise that I am seeking to develop (Goodyear, 2014). I can then use these skills and knowledge to share with my students, and with my community, thus increasing my potential to create high-quality work.
Nevertheless, despite the many benefits of networked learning, as a learning coach, I still believe that forming offline study opportunities also offers powerful learning opportunities (as espoused by Harold Jarche), such as receiving guidance from a knowledgeable other or participating in groups and workshops, as I have done on numerous occasions and found to be very productive. Bell et al. (2010) highlight how the future of networked learning should not only focus on "text becom[ing] the medium of mediation between learners and their resources," but also the "robust voice dialogue" that enables learners to "feed off others' energy" and enthusiasm for the learning process, improvise in a non-linear cognitive process, as through discussion. It is these important in-person features that are also pivotal to learning, particularly for self-declared extroverts like myself.
Thus, through engaging in a an online network through NGL (and I would add being guided by a “knowledgeable other”) the learner is invited to enter a "portal" that will transform how they learn, and ultimately how they live their lives (Kligyte, 2009). At least, that is what being a part of NGL has done for me.
References:
Glastra et al. (2004). Lifelong Learning as Transitional Learning, Adult Education Quarterly, 54, p. 291-307.
Goodyear, P. (2014). Productive Learning Networks: The Evolution of Research and Practice. In L. Carvalho & P. Goodyear (Eds.), The Architecture of Productive Learning Networks (pp. 23–47). London: Routledge.
Ito et al. (2013). Connected Learning: an agenda for Research and Design, Retrieved from http://dmlhub.net/sites/default/files/ConnectedLearning_report.pdf
Jarche, H. (2012). Seek Sense Share, Retrieved from http://www.jarche.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/seek_sense_share.pdf
Kligyte, G. (2009). Threshold concept: A lens for examining networked learning. In Proceedings of the Ascilite 2009 Conference (pp. 540–542). Auckland, NZ.
Menchaca, F. (2012). The Future Is in Doubt: Librarians, Publishers, and Networked Learning in the 21st Century, Journal of Library Administration, 52(5), 396-410.
No comments:
Post a Comment