blog of proximal development » Blog Archive » Virtual Classro...
Popularity Report
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rank
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 9 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2008-04-18
- Snowflake on 2008-06-04 - Tags diigo
- Ctscho on 2008-04-29 - Tags Education 3.0 , paradigm shift , virtual world , design , Sustainability
- Aldecardy on 2008-04-25 - Tags no_tag
- Ian_gs on 2008-04-25 - Tags no_tag
- Teachandlearn on 2008-04-25 - Tags virtual classroom project , teacher professional development , Clay Burrell , Leigh Blackall
Public Sticky notes
Highlighted by snowflake
Leigh’s Project - A Brief Introduction
As soon as Leigh announced his plans for a virtual prototype of a learning space based on the principles of permaculture design I was hooked. I realized that, to Leigh, the Virtual Classroom Project presented an opportunity to address learning as a fundamental part of our daily existence. “Leigh’s ideas,” I wrote in my project notes, “suggest that he wants to explore the process of de-institutionalizing learning. He seems interested in asking why learning cannot be grounded in informal places, places that we take for granted, such as our homes.” But Leigh took this one step further. If our place of residence is to serve as a focal point of learning in our lives, then we need to start asking ourselves some crucial questions about the kinds of places we inhabit and the relationship between those places and the environment. In other words, Leigh believes that the process of de-institutionalizing learning cannot lead to creating places that are as insensitive to the natural world around them as the big institutions that currently dominate our lives and, specifically, education. One could extend this argument and ask “What exactly are children learning in a school that does not have a recycling programme? What are they learning in a building that’s surrounded by concrete?” I think that Leigh’s project effectively addresses both of these questions.
Leigh’s use of permaculture design, defined by Wikipedia as “an approach to designing human settlements, in particular the development of perennial agricultural systems that mimic the structure and interrelationship found in natural ecologies,” suggests that he is interested in exploring to what extent human beings can be engineers of their own self-sufficient and ecologically-friendly environments. His design revolves around the notion of sustainability
Highlighted by cburell
on 2008-04-18 by cburell
I've been trying to de-institutionalize learning within the institution, and it's a thankless task. Beginning to believe that I can do better outside of the institution. Already created models with Students 2.0 and Networked Learning class, student Skypecast interviews, YouthTwitter, etc. Want to keep pushing those.
on 2008-04-18 by cburell
Want to explore pulling Project Global Cooling into this.
on 2008-04-25 by teachandlearn
Hi Clay, I think de-institutionalizing is a thankless job and is much more difficult than building a "school" that is de-institutionalized from the beginning. I put school in quotation marks because I believe that all the tools we now have at our disposal help us (force us?) to redefine what we mean when we use that word. For example, I am learning so much more from my own Virtual Classroom Project than any grad course I've ever taken. There are no boundaries here and the fact that educators such as yourself can join me at any point in this journey is one of the most wonderful aspects of this new vision of school. Building spaces for learning outside of established institutions is not only easier but also much more effective in the long run. Institutions are intended to serve the society. They are designed to produce people who will keep the status quo and strengthen it. Critical thinking is a good buzz word to have in your curriculum plans, but it's usually lack of critical thinking that help students succeed in the real world. Those who question tend to be labeled "leftist" and considered subversive. However, your attempts to use Twitter and skypecasts are certainly steps in the right direction. We need to continue to take these steps. We need to continue to re-define what it means to teach and learn. We need to continue to remove walls and focus on building bridges, linkages, correspondences, and networks with our students, and modeling that practice so that they continue to be competent network architects when they leave our classrooms. I agree that it starts with web 2.0 tools that allow for personal voices to emerge and dethrone the teacher from the traditional role of content expert.
Highlighted by ian_gs
on 2008-04-25 by ian_gs
This little word "should" is where I part company with Illich. I fear that his Utopian vision requires human nature to be other than it is. If we look at the learning tasks that most readily grab the attention and enthusiasm of large numbers of people, they very often are skill drills. Sudoku is one example that comes to mind. Additionally, many peoples' motivation to learn is the achievement of status within ritually-defined contexts such as a professional association. Illich has a habit of holding up the concerns of a comfortably-salaried academic as having moral supremacy over those of a cross-word obsessed, ambitious accounts clerk. I beg to differ.
What really fascinates me about Leigh’s prototype is that, in addition to making us think about sustainability and the environment, Leigh also explores the notion of de-institutionalizing or deschooling society. His project revives some of the key ideas of Ivan Illich. During our discussions over the past two weeks, Leigh’s comments about his design led me to re-visit my thoughts on informal education, lifelong learning, and community. Specifically, his ideas and the way he is implementing them remind me of Illich’s notion that institutions tend to dehumanize people and commodify learning. Consider this passage from Ilich’s Deschooling Society:
Many students, especially those who are poor, intuitively know what the schools do for them. They school them to confuse process and substance. Once these become blurred, a new logic is assumed: the more treatment there is, the better are the results; or, escalation leads to success. The pupil is thereby “schooled” to confuse teaching with learning, grade advancement with education, a diploma with competence, and fluency with the ability to say something new. His imagination is “schooled” to accept service in place of value (Illich, 1973).
In other words, our students tend to think that teaching equals learning. Learning and knowledge are commodified and transform education into a process of consumption rather than exploration. In addition, as Illich argues in Deschooling Society, schools discourage other institutions from assuming educative roles and tend to be places of confinement rather than liberating engagement. De-institutionalization, Illich argues, can take place when we recognize that education “relies on the surprise of the unexpected question which opens new doors for the inquirer and his partner.” This kind of inquiry can take place when the instructor abandons what Illich calls “skill drill” instruction and focuses on helping “matching partners to meet so that learning can take place.”
Highlighted by cburell
on 2008-04-18 by cburell
This is so in line with my networked learning elective class, trying to guide students to discover learning networks via Twitter and their own local networks. The downside: they're so institutionalized, they don't get it. Korea is probably the worst place to try this.
on 2008-04-25 by teachandlearn
Thank you for saying this. We have taught our students that learning is about passive acceptance and listening. Now, we're realizing that learning is messy and hard work based on active construction of knowledge. They often prefer to be told what they need to know and find it very difficult to switch into the mode of independent researchers. It is easier to sit and listen. This is a difficult challenge for educators today. We have to begin by helping our students become confident writers and thinkers. When they do, they often find it easier to engage in knowledge construction that is personal and active. I think we need to begin by helping students find networks and become contributors. Gradually, we also need to teach how to form our own networks. This is not easy when students prefer the structured environment of their institutions. Institutions present knowledge as finite and compartmentalized. Networks don't. Networks reflect what knowledge really is. The limitlessness of networks is scary to students who have been trained to see knowledge as a series of pre-packaged chunks. This is what we need to work on now as educators: we need to help students see that a unit on social justice or Shakespeare can never be as enriching as building their own network where they can explore these ideas. The other problem, of course, is that you and I, and 99% of teachers in this world, teach in places that equate knowledge and education with tests and exams. If my goal as a student is to pass a test then a pre-packaged unit will always be my choice. An ever-expanding network seems frightening when I have an exam to prepare for. In other words, what we really need to address is assessment, evaluation, and certification. This will not be easy.
Highlighted by cburell
on 2008-04-18 by cburell
This Diigo highlight, plus Diigo groups, Twitter, and a million other alternatives ("radical") exist now. The question of certification still looms. How do we answer that?
Public Comment