Week 6-Blog 3

Webinar: John Seely Brown, "A New Culture of Learning"
On February 25th, I went to the FutureofEducation.com website and listened to the recording of the webinar with John Seely Brown from February 22nd.  John Seely Brown and Douglas Thomas have a new book out titled, "A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change."  A description of the book on the webinar states, " the 21st century is a world of constant change.  In A New Culture of Learning, Doug Thomas and John Seely Brown pursue an understanding of how the force of change, and emerging wave of interest associated with these forces, inspire and invite us to imagine a future of learning that is as powerful as it is optimistic."
John Seely Brown (JSB) began the webinar with talking about how education needs to be transformed, not thrown away.  We need to build up the edges (i.e., after school programs, ecology around the schools) in order to pull the core (i.e., central school system) to the edge.  JSB used the example of a school in Chicago where they built up the multi-media in after school programs, which empowered the students, making them come "alive." The increased interest, motivation, and activity of the students really made the core take notice and become more serious about mentorship and ways to create an elevated edge.  JSB says that the practices around technology are building up the edge, NOT technology itself; this has led to the steady change that is currently going on in education.
JSB also talked about the teacher becoming more of a guide or a co-learner/co-explorer with the students instead of an authoritarian.  There would be a shift in power to more of a partnership between the student and the teacher, therefore, making learning more powerful and fun for each.
JSB compares learning as to what happens inside a petri dish; it is a bounded environment with powerful nutrients where exploration happens.  There is constant change where boundaries matter.  The boundaries or constraints can be transformed into resources; we can work with them and they can become resources in a powerful way giving people new ways to use things in unexpected ways.
JSB used the example of a one-room school house where the teacher and students are constrained to one room, but re-implement these boundaries into a powerful tool by having students learn and teach from each other instead of having the teacher instruct all students at once(where students are at different learning levels).  I liked when JSB made the comment, "the best way to learn something is to teach it."
JSB also talked extensively about how students should show their accomplishments.  He called standardized tests "pathetic," which really made me laugh!  He introduced the idea of a student portfolio that shows what the student has created throughout the school year(s), this way the student can meet the teacher, reflect on past work, think about what has worked, what didn't work, and ways to improve and build on his/her work.  A portfolio highlights the student's creativity and passions and also allows the teacher to know more about the student.  JSB suggested that students write essays surrounded around making the portfolio and express how they feel about it (reflect).  He stated that the test that students take today "make no sense," and students lose motivation(often falling asleep in class).  We need to start shifting the focus of learning from the explicit (learning about) to tacit learning (learning to be).  If we encourage students to follow what they are passionate about, to reach their goals, then they don't have to constantly memorize facts and just worry about what questions will be on test.  The students will be motivated to learn when we empower their personal passions.
JSB also talked about the notion of playing, that from birth we figure out how to make the world stable and build our own frame of reference.  However, when we start attending school, we have information poured into that framework, therefore having to rebuild that knowledge.  Our world is in a state of constant disruption, but by playing(finding our orientation, our passions) we can build our knowledge and learn new things.
JSB used the term agency: how does one imagine something that is different from where they are at now and what can one do about it?  He states that agency has been stripped away in today's education; the feeling that students' can make a difference, they need the structure that provides useful constraints that can be built into resources to let them act, learn, and make the world different.
Learning in the collective is another subject JSB touched on.  He stated that when people are stuck on something, they ask the collective (or group of experts/professionals/peers) on ideas on what to do.  Then  once a person tries the suggestion(s) he/she returns to the collective on whether the idea(s) worked (giving feedback), therefore, making the collective smarter.
They last topic that JSB covered was gaming, massively multi-player online games (MMO).  JSB describes this as an ideal learning environment, where participants are operating in the collective (described above).  The MMO is a great example of how groups function, build knowledge and absorb ideas from each other.  MMO participants post new ideas/strategies on how to game, therefore, there is a flood of knowledge sharing, constant fluctuations and experimentation, and healthy competition among participants.
I really enjoyed listening to the webinar with JSB; I like the idea of learning in the collective and students having portfolios to highlight their work, their passions.  I know that JSBJSB said, sometimes teachers do not have all the answers. This was a great interview with JSB and encourage anyone reading this blog to log onto FutureofEducation.com and listen to the archive.

Week 4- Blog2

Summary of Renninger & Shumar’s Chapters 10-12 (Possibilities for Communities):

Chapter 10 reviews the systematic patterns of change that network-based learning communities undergo over a period of time that ultimately lead to the termination of the community, also defined as a “life cycle” (Levin & Cervantes, 2002).  Levin & Cervantes (2002, p.270) state the “lifecycle of network-based communities can lead to more productive learning by communities of learners distributed across the world...can help create powerful learning environments for diverse sets of learners.”  Six stages in the network project life cycle include the: (1) proposal, when the activity for the activity is proposed; (2) refinement, the idea is refined through communication by the proposers; (3) organizational, time schedules and planned procedures; (4) pursuit, activity is carried out; (5) wrap-up, proposer of activity thanks participants for contributions; and (6) publication, aimed at attracting future participants (Levin & Cervantes, 2002).  Levin & Cervantes (2002) describe a case study of the Zero-g Project, which I thought was quite interesting because of the diversity of the participants involved: from novice (students) to experts (NASA scientists).  This learning community was successful due to several factors: clear project goals and purposes, availability of resources and support (educational and technical experts), wide range of curricular areas, teacher flexibility, strong and consistent leadership throughout the life cycle, timely and adequate feedback to participants, and a solid orientation that motivated participants.  Reading this chapter made me realize the importance of understanding the way activities within a learning community unfold overtime and that there is continuous development. Also, as the stages progress, the role of each participant also changes.  The leader of the community may also have a different role as the community progresses through the life cycle, but he/she always remains active and engaged in the process.

Chapter 11 (Nolan & Weiss, 2002) state that the commonality between offline and online communities are the possibilities offered for learning.  What makes it difficult to determine if online communities actually exist is the sense of space; there is no physical location to attach itself (Nolan & Weiss, 2002).  Nolan & Weiss (2002) argue the online community is actually a community because it is constructed and the only difference between an offline and online community is that people make conscious decisions to inhabit cyberspace.  Nolan & Weiss (2002) describe several learning locations for learning in virtual communities: (1) Curriculum of Initiation and Governance, requiring that the individual(s) make the decision to create and maintain the virtual site and location; (2) Curriculum of Access, accessing and becoming socialized to the virtual community; and (3) Curriculum of Membership, the actual engagements in the community, purposes for the site, and the gains people expect from it.  Nolan & Weiss (2002) describe in detail, four online communities to help readers understand the sense of location and expectations that each group creates for its community.  In the MOOkti example, I found it interesting that the creator had an intended purpose for the site, but placed no limitations or condition on participation, therefore, external participants shaped the site into fulfilling their own needs and criteria (an unintended outcome of Curriculum of Initiation and Governance).  The founder had to have assistance in the initiation of the site because it developed far beyond his technical knowledge, therefore, “a small community of the administrators had already developed, and this social core became a template for interaction that new members could learn from or ignore...influenced the way in which new members manifested their own experiences in the environment.” (Nolan & Weiss, 2002, p. 309).  What is common among the four examples is they are all learning communities, there are limits to membership, purposes and goals vary, there is individual mobility, no long-term commitments, continuity among membership, and they interact and communicate within the community.

Chapter 12 describes the tools or type of technology that support a knowledge-building community.  Hoadley & Pea (2002, p.325) define a knowledge-building community where “individuals are committed to sharing information for the purpose of building understanding (knowledge) in all the participants.”  It is important that the learning community has precise goals and collaborative support from the community members.  Before developing a knowledge-building learning community, Hoadley & Pea (2002) reflected upon eight areas of inquiry: defining learning communities, examining existing practice, identifying potential changes to improve practice, finding ways that technology might effect these changes, designing and building the technology, advocating the technology, understanding the consequences of technology, and evaluating the community in respect to the original goal.  The design and building of the technology must fit into the goals of the community and what tools will work best.  However, proponents of the technology must help the community reach a productive equilibrium, that is, working with community to develop new practices or ways of working to appropriate the new tools (Hoadley & Pea, 2002). Lastly, the community should be evaluated to determine its success based on goals reached, which can vary between communities.

References:

Hoadley, C., & Pea, R.D. (2002) Finding the ties that bind: Tools for a knowledge-building community. In K. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 321-351). Cambridge University Press.

Levin, J., & Cervantes, R. (2002). Understanding the life cycles of network-based learning communities. In K. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 269-292). Cambridge University Press.

Nolan, D.J., & Weiss, J. (2002). An educational view of virtual community. In K. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 293-320). Cambridge University Press.