Connectivism

July 2nd

Connectivism
  As a librarian, this concept makes total sense and is worthy of full exploration.   There is no way that any individual is able to know everything - even those who can dedicate their whole  lives to a topic. Whether or not this a theory is an interesting question.  Given the amount of information, it makes sense to think of knowledge as being available to those who look for it.  Librarians have always helped students/clients to find information.  Knowing how and where information is stored is a necessary skill.  Given the fact that information is appearing rapidly, memorizing information simply doesn't make sense.. it's much easier to learn about where and how information is stored.   After all, I memorized the name of Delhi when I was growing up but they changed it to Mumbai somewhere along the way.   If I'd learned where to find the name of cities in India, rather than memorizing the names, I'd be better off.  If information can be stored in various digital formats, then the current librarian focus on transliteracies makes sense.  Students do need to be able to interpret visually presented information as well as simple print (on and off the web.)  Students should be able to interpret symbols

http://www.downes.ca/post/33034  Downes article is interesting to read.  Again, I'm back at how to define knowledge or learning.  If an apple only appears red because that's what we call that color, what is the knowledge.  Do we know the apple is red, or do we simply know that we call that color red.  This is actually an interesting problem that I looked at in undergraduate school, and one that we deal with daily as a language teacher.   If I call a house a house - I mean the type of house that I visualize based on my upbringing.  In the North of England, a house is invariably one of a row - often 50-60 in one street - all connected and all with two stories. The mining towns are all like that.   If I talk about a house in the US, I'm probably thinking about a typical ranch house.  However, if I lived in the Philippines, I might be thinking of a Nipa Hut - a home on stilts.   So simply translating the word  "house" to   "das Haus" or "la maison" may not really transfer the knowledge - in fact it may be far from what we want to say. It's important to know the culture behind the language  so that we can choose the most appropriate word to get the point across, and that may require some circumlocution. So when we measure learning (assessment) how can we measure that?  Is it not better to measure whether or not a person can find the appropriate information when he/she needs it?  Why do we give exams that require regurgitation of knowledge rather than something that shows a person knows how to learn?  Tradition of course, but we do have the opportunity with distance education to build curriculum that is not based on how we've always done it.

In Kop and Hill's article that we read this week, they discussed the necessity for students being able to "seek out current information and the ability to filter secondary and extraneous information"  When you compare this to the ALA's definition of information literacy, the ability to find information and evaluate information are included and this seems to me to be more important as far as skills go.  Of course, then in DE, you get the question that always crops up - how do you know who did the work if there is no final, closed book exam?
.
The other thing we looked at this week was how to use web 2.0 tools in the classroom.   I loved the innovative concept of using the web to have two completely different classes in two countries work together. What a great way for language students to get some real life practice in an authentic scenario.
There are some interesting ways for students to use some of the web 2.0 tools to show that they understand the concepts they are learning.  Whether a student writes a blog, which is then commented on by other students, or they create a wiki together - or share their examination of museum artifact using voice thread - they are expressing what they have learned or their perception of what they are learning and this is important to the concept of learning if we use the constructivist theory.  If we use the connectivism theory, the fact that they are sharing information with others makes them part of a network and is also valid.  As I read more and more towards my final project, it's obvious that many librarians are using web 2.0 tools in the library and extending themselves into the classrooms with those tools rather than simply staying in the library waiting for students to come to them.  One librarian (Midler) was using google docs with the classroom teacher so that the librarian could insert search tips/keywords/links to databases available via the library web site into the document before it was made available to students.  Another was teaching students to use content curation tools such as scoop it and netvibes to collect information about their topic.
It's important to keep up to date with all of the new web 2.0 tools as they are introduced.  Obviously, twitter, facebook and pinterest are some of the most popular but these may not be as readily available for use with K12 students.   There are plenty of other web 2.0 tools out there and students will need to know how to use these as they enter the work world.  Teaching the content is one  thing that is obviously important but teaching them how to use the social tools is an equally important by product.  Of course, this generation of high school students may be tech savvy, in that they know of the tools, but we all need to learn how to use them appropriately and effectively.  That's just one more argument for having embedded librarians in the virtual classroom...