CCK2011

is Mark Granovetter’s ‘Strength of Weak Ties’ argument in 1973, revisited in 1983. Essentially, weak ties are those ties ‘outside’ the core connections that any one actor has. Granovetter uses the example of acquaintances and friends, where the former are more structurally crucial to a network than the latter. In other words, if you operate solely within your group of ‘close-knit’ friends, then there is little or no expansion of that network and hence the proliferation of linear thought; a process known as homophily. Heterophily then is when networks are predicated on difference, or by exploration of ‘weaker’ ties to any given individual – a phenomenon which discourages linearity, and embraces rhizomatic thinking.

Wer sich online vernetzt, hat auch im echten Leben mehr Sozialkontakte“

Virtuelle Freunde aber könnten keine echten menschlichen Kontakte ersetzen – so mahnen immer wieder vor allem jene, die in den Netzwerken gar nicht dabei sind.

Soziale Kommunikation und Interaktion, aber auch soziales Engagement sind generell im Aufwind, nicht auf dem Rückzug

How can learning - something so basic that infants and animals can do it - defy explanation?

I believe the single skill that will, above all others, distinguish a literate person is programming literacy, the ability to make digital technology do whatever, within the possible one wants it to do -- to bend digital technology to one's needs, purposes, and will, just as in the present we bend words and images.

the kids will, as they are doing with so many things, figure out ways to teach themselves

Connectivism could benefit

all other learners who would like to develop higher order learning skills in their life-long learning journeys.

As most adult learners could be confused by the complexity of learning whilst immersed in learning networks (internet and webs), especially if they are exposed to such learning environment as “novice”, some would doubt about their perceived “digital migrant” status,