Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

I liked this source because PLCs are something that I am very familiar with at my current school. It is interesting to see how PLCs are making a difference at different schools, because they are certainly making a difference at mine!

The author's viewpoint on the learner interaction with content was interesting. Social learning is me and COPs are us.

This article makes the reader think. Janet Clarey poses the question "are social learning and communities of practice the same thing?" Her idea is that they are not. She makes the distinction between them as social learning is taking in all information from social settings. It cannot be tracked as far as acquisition of knowledge. Communities of practice focus on sharing and collaboration of information and can be tracked.

It's an interesting article. I think social learning might be part of a community of practice - I certainly use it that way. I use my professional network to learn and question and explore, much like Clarey describes. But it's within my community of practice, because I also share, invite, and collaborate as part of the process. I believe there is little dialogue in life that can be classified as cleanly as Clarey defines these terms - I think we fluidly move from one position to another.

This article compares and contrasts "social learning" and "CoPs." The major difference in my eyes has to do with the formality of the latter. CoPs aim to track the conversations and bring like-minded people with similar goals together to grow alongside each other. I appreciate this article as it gave me a clearer vision of CoPs.

This post's author discusses the differences between Social Learning (where learning is generally unorganized and done by observing, talking, questioning and learning is often not formal or unintenational) and Communities of Practice where learning is more intentional and happens between communities of individuals with common interests.

Article does a great job of explaining where connectivism came from and how it will continue to advance forward just as society if doing currently. We will continue to learn and mold our understandings based off of the connections we are making through a collaborative network.

This article provides a balanced view of the arguments concerning the role of connectivism in the field of education. The authors have done a nice job of differentiating the types of theories and their roles in practice. Perhaps the strongest features of the entire article is the discussion on connectivism as it applies to the use of technology. I appreciated their description of the theory as a connecting piece between some of the more established learning theories and the new technological landscape that characterizes our learning environment. Excellent article - thanks for sharing!

This article by Duke, Harper and Johnston is a detailed analysis of connectivism as a learning theory. Not only is technology discussed as how it's applied to this theory, but there is also discussion of learning theories and instructional theories in general. It is also a valuable read because it explains how this theory can or should not be applied to all students or content.

This source gives a good description as connectivity and connectivity as a learning theory, and it also discusses the argument that connectivity is not a learning theory. It ends by talking about connectivity and its integration with technology and online learning.

This article from Kaplan University explains the importance of connectivism in a digital age. They reference George Siemens and Stephen Downes and their research behind connectivism as a learning theory. They examine connectivism as a learning theory, and explain how the learner is at the center and designs their own path, essentially making their own learning.

This article discusses Connectivism and the debate over whether it should be considered as a learning or instructional theory or as a pedagogical view. The role of Connectivism in the use of technology in education is also discussed.

I really liked this article mainly because they clearly explained the difference between learning theories vs. instructional theories. I think that was useful in their conclusion that connectivism really is more of a tool to be used in the learning process rather than a complete learning theory.

This article discusses the validity of Connectivism as a learning theory. It gives the very straight-forward definition as "social learning that is networked." The discussion of the importance of the Connectivism theory in today's ever increasing technical classroom is quite engaging. It has also forced educators to look at what is being done in digital education and rethink, debate, and philosophize over how each part fits.

In this article, Duke, Harper, and Johnston discuss whether connectivism is a learning theory or an instructional theory. They begin by discussing the differences between learning theories and instructional theories. A learning theory should explain how learning occurs, while an instructional theory should explain how best to achieve the learning goals. The authors summarize connectivism as "social learning that is networked" (2013, p. 6). What a person knows is not as important as the connections the person makes that will allow further know,edge and growth. Everyone feeds into the systems of knowledge and receives greater knowledge as a result. This knowledge can be held by people, societies, or machines. Basically, everyone learns through personal learning networks. These learning networks allow people to learn through collaboration rather than by having to experience everything for themselves. Being able to tap into a large amount of knowledge allows people to understand patterns they might now otherwise see. While there are several arguments against connectivism as a learning theory, the authors argue that connectivism can be useful as an "instructional guide or theory" (2013, p. 9) to develop behaviorism, cognitivism, or constructivism for "application to a globalized and networked world." The authors conclude that connectivism is useful in the learning process or curriculum planning, but that it is not a "standalone learning theory" (2013, p. 10).

This talks about how connectivism takes elements from behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. It discusses connectivism as a learning theory and how the use of technology ties into it.

This article puts a focus on the debate if connectivism is "a learning theory or instructional theory or merely a pedagogical view." Instructional theory has major elements that are discussed in this article and connectivism is analyzed to see if it in fact, is a learning theory. The author recognizes that the debate will last a long time but the fact that connectivism is valuable in the educational setting will prevail. Technology is a major factor of its success. This article convinced me of the importance of allowing my students more access to technology for educational success.

The author of this article defines learning theories vs instructional theories, connectivism, connectivism as a learning theory, and connectivism and the use of technology. Connectivism was created as a learning theory for the digital age. Siemens and Downes came up with this theory because social learning can happen through networks. In today's world technology and advancements are changing rapidly, which in turn is providing new information quickly. Educators have had to embrace this new option of networks for knowledge use in the classroom. Connectivism can be used as a tool in the learning process for instruction or curriculum.

We are at a crucial point in history. By being educators, we must constantly be discussing and managing our definition of an educator's job. We must constantly be working through our philosophy base as new tools and ideas come to life.

This paper outlines connectivism and analyzes whether it should be considered a learning theory, instructional theory, or pedagogical view. I found this article interesting as it has a good discussion the differences between learning theories and instructional theories. The paper is critical of Connectivism as a learning theory, which I think is important as you consider how to use its principles in the classroom.

This article discusses a theory developed for the digital age by Siemens and Downes called connectivism. The theory has issued a debate over whether it is a learning theory, instructional theory, or a pedagogical view. In this article, the authors discuss learning in the digital age and how the theory of connectivism fits within the world today. There is a focus on connectivism being social learning that is networked.

This article discusses whether Connectivism is a learning theory or an instructional theory or a pedagogical view. A learning theory is not whether something is true or not but if it is useful for explaining behavior. An instructional theory must list procedures to enable learning by focusing on the overall structure of the learning material and how to achieve the most successful learning experience. Connectivism is social learning that is networked. It could be a learning theory as it states how a student learns through a network. Connectivism can be categorized as a tool to be used in the learning process and not a standalone learning theory.

This site explains in plain terms communities of practice. For example, it explains that a community of practice is not just a club. It is a group of people who are committed to a certain domain of interest.

This was a concise, but well written overview of the definition of communities of practice.

Communities of practice are used across a variety of groups of people. According to Etienne Wenger, there are three characteristics that constitute a community of practice: domain, community, and practice. Communities of practice exist on small local scales, to worldwide networks. This allows people to share and obtain knowledge about common practices with others who are actively engaged in the same domain.

Allows the reader to determine the general guidelines to what a community of practice is. Cites examples ranging from artists seeking transformation to surgeons trying to discover new methods. The article is very simple, yet effective in describing a community of practice.

by Etienne Wenger CoPs are formed by people who are engaged and interested in common domains. These can be done in many domains as long as there is an underlying interest. CoPs provide a new way to learn from one another in a safe environment. All members take responsibility with their members to access knowledge while sharing new ideas.

In this article, Wenger provides a quick overview of what a Community of Practice is. I like how she discusses the three components of a CoP and gives an example of what is not considered a CoP in each component. She addresses that just because something is a community, doesn't make it a Community of Practice. She also discusses where the concept of a CoP is being applied. It is helpful to see that it is being applied in many different fields including: education, government, organizational design, and businesses.

This website, from the National Center for Dissemination of Disabilities Research, identifies 3 characteristics of strong communities of practice: the domain, the community, and the practice. It briefly identifies what makes COPs unique and identifies specific applications. There are additional links in the sidebar that provide more information about COPs and prompts for further research.

This article gives an overview as to what communities of practice CoP are. It describes the characteristics of CoP: domain, community, and practice. The article stresses that CoP are not just like-minded people, but they are where people can interact with others to learn with and from others. CoP rely on active participation. Sharing and learning are at the heart of CoP.

Provides a good, crisp explanation of CoP. This is more of a recap, but sometimes saying something in another way helps to get the point across better. What I particularly liked about this one is that it emphasizes how these communities interact based on a passion that they'd like to learn more about or to improve skills.

This article discusses communities of practice in a very understandable, clear way. It describes communities of practice as individuals working together in collaboration with a common goal, or passion, in mind. I feel that one of the most vital parts of my job as an educator is to collaborate with other teachers about best practices to use in the classroom. It was fun to read this informative article!

This is a great overview of Communities of Practice. I appreciate that it distinguishes between a community and a community of practice because "not every community is a community of practice." I also appreciate that it gives where the concept can be applied.

The article provides a definition of communities of practice and gives examples of these communities. It also gives the three "crucial" characteristics of communities of practice.

Wenger's excerpt focuses on a crucial aspect of CoPs - the difference between a community and a CoP. Wenger outlines the three characteristics of a CoP and the role each plays in executing a CoP. (1) The domain in a CoP is not just a group of people. It is a network of people with similar interests and commitment to the growth of that interest. (2) A community engages, shares, and collaborates in order to learn from one another. (3) The practice of a CoP involves creation. The members act as "practitioners" that develop and share over time and through continuous interaction.

This article discusses how the community of practice is a shared domain between its members or those who engage in the community. It also says not all communities are all communities of practice. To explain that, it lists the three important parts that help show it is a community of practice. It states those parts are the domain, the community, and the practice. With that, it explains that all three should be developed within the community itself.

The author of this article explains that a community of practice is more than just a community. Communities of practice have to have three elements. The three elements are the domain, the community, and the practice. The domain is a shared interest. The community is people engaging in joint activities and discussions while helping each other and sharing information. The practice is the members of practice are practitioners. Communities of practice are being applied in business, organizational design, government, education, etc. Communities of practice have become a learning system throughout the entire world. They help practitioners take responsibility for managing knowledge, create a direct link between learning and performance, and create connections without formal structures.

Kayden, what a great site and explanation of communities of practice. I particularly like the distinct description of what a community of practice is including what it is not!

This site gives an outline of three factors that make a community one of practice vs. a non-specific group of people. The domain, community, and practice all combine to create a community of practice. The site then goes to explain where the concept of a community of practice is applied furthering the idea of "practice," as well as why they are catching on in workplaces and organizations.

An introduction to and application for communities of practice.

The authors participated in a MOOC offered by the University of Edinburgh in 2013. The course included digital activities and peer collaboration exercises. Many of the participants enrolled in the course so that they could improve their own instruction in online environments. Through the process the course takers learned that they could use social media platforms for educational purposes. As they participated they ended up forming PLNs among themselves and other participants. With this article, the authors offered their experiences of how they realized the full potential benefits of MOOCs and social media for educators.