they should just come and watch and stop wasting my time with the idiotic managerialist systems
1More
5More
Dave who? - un content ed - 1 views
-
-
I find it easier to be kind and open hearted in class than at home sometimes
-
Yeah, what's with that anyhow? Do I assume family members "should know this already" just because they live with me? Been much more conscious of that since an adult learner overheard me "teach" my wife a missing computer skill with a note of impationce. Learner rebuked me with, "You don't talk to me that way when you explan something to me."
-
35More
Wanna do a cMOOC? | doublemirror - 5 views
-
Matthias Melcher – he made it so easy to follow everyone’s blogs
-
power is not due to the technology or its design, but to the actual people involved
-
So, when I did DS106 as a course for the first time in 2013, life was already set up in such a way that I could give it my full attention.
- ...15 more annotations...
-
So, what was Rhizo14 setting out to create? A one of what? Stephen uses his own courses as an example
-
I have a great deal of respect for Stephen, and enjoyed his talk at Vlaencia (referenced in this blog) immensely. It seemed to me though, that he was explaining a landscape rather than prescribing a recipe for a MOOC. Might it be better to examine Rhizo14 in light of what Dave Cormier says about it, rather than force it to be scrutinized through the lens of questions raised by Steven Downes' lecture? Dave Cormier at MIT "MOOCs as a selfish enterprise" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smt8lsPU_Mo If any "making one" objective(s) existed in Rhizo14, it(they) would be very subjective. Dave says he threw a party to see if anyone would come. I certainly participated as part of my process of "becoming", but without conciously adding "...one of X". I just know by experience that by "hanging out" with groups like this, I am able to do interesting things in teaching that I had not deliberately set out to learn (and I borrow that articulation from Dave Cormier), so from time to time I keep engaging with communities and courses that interest me. Some others have expressed or evidenced more clearly defined objectives - academic research, webtool development, and building a PLN are some examples.
-
I agree with you that Dave is defferent from S.D. and rhizo should be described with Dave's terms
-
-
If my need for inclusion had been high, then I think I would have felt excluded from what some called Rhizo14FB.
-
They did what humans do so well in new situations: gather in their tribes and by definition exclude those not in their tribe, or try to ‘convince’ those outside ‘it’ to join it;
-
The design of Rhizo14, I have to assume, is the current state of what Dave as an educational technologist believes works for massive open online courses.
-
diversity was managed out through a group dynamic that excluded what the majority did not approve
-
I did not see much by way of supporting the importance of diversity in action rather than theory.
-
gossiping about other participants
-
but Rhizo14 as an experiment on the future of higher education as a whole is not what the originators intend
-
This critique of Rhizo14 accuses it of not producing what it was not intended to produce. Seems a bit like criticizing an alligator because, while it has great hide, it makes an unsatisfactory mount since it was never intended to be a horse. I understand the author's dissatisfaction with the course. Rhizo14 neither met expectations nor satisfied any personal objectives. A dissenting opinion eloquently expressed is very valuable. The underlying tone of the post, however, carries a distinctly subjective disapproval or dismissal of anyone who has received satisfaction in their own experience in Rhizo14. The author speaks repeatedly of observing attempts to silence or marginalize those who did not buy into the opinions of the majority. Yet the author engages in a similar tactic against possible critics.
-
I hope that after my comment on my blog this feeling has eased in you. I absolutely did not intend to disapprove or dismiss any individual. I disagree with some of the choices made in design and educator intervention precisely because I feel they closed down the possibility of having a space where multiple perspective could be held openly without the need for filtering through an agree/disagree frame. This led to people who we could all have learnt from leaving and I was sad about this. Also - just for clarity I was not at all dissatisfied with the course. It was set up as an experiment and I love experiments. I was dissatisfied with our human inability create more silence and space for listening and the compulsive drive to talk. Nick put it beautifully in his blog: "that kind of dialogue. It is a way of being that one has to learn, but seems to me to be integral to what we might call "deep" learnign. The word retreat is interesting, one of the first pre-requisites of that dialogue is to shut up and listen. Online you are largely characterised by the noise you make, the text you generate. Silence online transmutes to a lack of presence, and described as "lurking". Lurk has too many negative associations to be reframed. But we do have the right to remain silent! Another issue, as you observe, is that dialogue is not transactional, but online interaction does very often seem to devolve to that kind of behaviour…" http://avisodemiranda.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/marram-grass/ I chose to create the space I needed for learning and this may be meant I chose 'no intervention' when intervention may have benefitted us all. I need to take time to reflect on this. I will leave it here for now, let's see if this is a space for us to engage before I spend any more time here :)
-
Mariana speaks so well but why it is so challenging to hear, I am wondering after reading these notes
-
-
I recognise this clearly from my
-
You were definitely the right kind of ‘one’ if you believed in emergence, non-linearity, poetry and art rather than theory and explanation.
-
to connect with ‘old MOOC friends’ no mention of rhizomes of the metaphorical or garden variety.