- x28 on Polarization and Push or Pull
- jennymackness on Polarization and Push or Pull
- Stephen Downes on Polarization and Push or Pull
- PhD by Publication – Selection of Papers – Jenny Connected on Connectivist Think Tool
- Toolblog mentions our zettelkasten export – Thought condensr on Magic of Zettelkasten
- About Links (6)
- CCK08 (30)
- CCK11 (5)
- CCK12 (1)
- change11 (15)
- Classification (7)
- Cognitive Styles (37)
- CritLit2010 (3)
- DALMOOC (3)
- E-resonance (2)
- eLearning (8)
- Hypertext (4)
- Knowledge (14)
- Knowledge management (17)
- Learning (14)
- Misc (7)
- Multimedia and Dictionaries (2)
- Multimedia and Encyclopaedias (3)
- Multimedia and Language (14)
- NRC01PL (2)
- Personal Productivity (25)
- PIM (25)
- PLENK2010 (12)
- rhizo14 (9)
- Social software (9)
- Uncategorized (3)
- Usability (2)
- Visualization (34)
- Web (2)
Category Archives: change11
If you still subscribe to my Change11 category feed, please note that this is closed now, and use the more general feed address (without “category/change11/”).
One of the main obstacles against one sense of openness is another sense of openness: In traditional peer reviewed journals, peers are open in ONE sense when they frankly give negative feedback. Of course this excludes openness in the OTHER sense, the sense of public accessibiity.
In this week’s article I recognized my “selves” #3 and #4 (participatory and asynchronous). But while Bonnie looks “beyond the traces and trails we leave behind”, I am still grappling with the effect of the sheer mass of such traces.
While the publicity of the term “MOOC” is rapidly increasing, also the danger is growing that its original meaning and principles will be watered down. Everyone can call their endeavour a MOOC, no matter how much they are actually willing to let go their “controletti mentality”. But we must bear that it’s uncertain whose definition of MOOC will stick.
I found it difficult to understand the idea of knowledge of a community. It helped me to think of a community of experts, of becoming like one, and of the continuum of actefacts exchanged among them.
Do open space participants either consent or vote with their feet/ walk away? If the open space is a group, this is probably true. In a network, it is different.
In the beginning, connectivism was considered on three layers: neural, conceptual, and social/ external. What has become of the former two layers? For me this is a problem because I cannot grasp that societal knowledge is similarly residing in connections as individual knowledge.
Connectivism talks about conceptual connections of varying strength, and learning involves gradually strengthening connections. I visualize these slowly growing connections like ridges emerging from the ground, and I think the time lapse video of ebbing tide shows them nicely.