Quote

The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn. - Alvin Toffler

E-Learning and Digital Cultures #edcmooc - Week 2

Week 2 of #edcmooc is about looking to the future.

Below is a word cloud I created to answer the question: "what is the nature of communication in these future worlds?"

From the readings I was most drawn to the metaphors and how they are used in discussing the future of digital cultures:

"The primary (or conceptual) metaphors that were used repeatedly in the editorials were those of physical space, physical speed, destruction, and salvation." - Rebecca Johnston in  Salvation or Destruction: Metaphors of the Internet

Applying the metaphors to proponents and opponents of digital learning I posit:

"The communications approach focuses on the Internet not as a technology but as a medium for human engagement. "The Internet encourages discussion, dialogue and community that is not limited by time or place. The role of educators in this world is to facilitate dialogue and support students in their understanding of resources" (Weller, 2007, p. 6). - Bonnie Stewart in Massiveness + Openness = New Literacies of Participation?

As a designer of learning experiences I am heavily influenced by the works of Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget. Therefore, I believe the salvation E-Learning offers is the negation of time and space to connect learners for the purpose of constructing knowledge.

Bonnie Stewart, referenced in the above quote, provides support for my belief in discussing the fundamental model differences in the creation of "cMOOC" as opposed to an "xMOOC." In a "cMOOC" the technology serves as the connection system learners use to actively construct knowledge. In a "xMOOC" technology is utilized as a pipe to shove a formal classroom out for students to passively sit in as receivers of knowledge. I am pleased to say #edcmooc demonstrates the salvation of the future as a "cMOOC" with the objective of learners creating a collaborative culture - transcendent of time or space - to construct knowledge, artifacts, and shared meaning.

"Social constructivism is a sociological theory of knowledge that applies the general philosophical constructivism into social settings, wherein groups construct knowledge for one another, collaboratively creating a small culture of shared artifacts with shared meanings. When one is immersed within a culture of this sort, one is learning all the time about how to be a part of that culture on many levels. It is emphasised that culture plays a large role in the cognitive development of a person. Its origins are largely attributed to Lev Vygotsky.

Social constructivism is closely related to social constructionism in the sense that people are working together to construct artifacts. However, there is an important difference: social constructionism focuses on the artifacts that are created through the social interactions of a group, while social constructivism focuses on an individual's learning that takes place because of their interactions in a group.

A very simple example is an object like a cup. The object can be used for many things, but its shape does suggest some 'knowledge' about carrying liquids (see also Affordance). A more complex example is an online course - not only do the 'shapes' of the software tools indicate certain things about the way online courses should work, but the activities and texts produced within the group as a whole will help shape how each person behaves within that group. A person's cognitive development will also be influenced by the culture that he or she is involved in, such as the language, history and social context." - Wikipedia: Social Constructivism

E-Learning and Digital Cultures #edcmooc - Week 1

Week 1 of #edcmooc is about looking to the past to see how technological advances are viewed from both utopian and dystopian perspectives. 

Two quotes state my takeaways from the video resources presented this week:

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

― Arthur C. Clarke, Profiles of the Future: An Inquiry Into the Limits of the Possible

"Fear cannot be without hope nor hope without fear."

― Baruch Spinoza

Reflecting upon the four videos I was transported back to my childhood of "duck and cover" drills and Civil Defense films in school, and watching science fiction movies on television. 

The development of hydrogen bombs in the 1940's...  

led to the hope of a utopian atomic age where the use of nuclear fission could provide the power of the future...

and to the fear of atomic bomb use during a dystopian cold war era attack. Notice that both perspectives were reinforced with educational films (technology) shown in school.

Classic science fiction films from the 1950's reinforced the utopian and dystopian perspectives with their depictions of the hope of technology turning into the fear of its unexpected repercussions.

The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) Example of the tension between man's technological world (atomic war) and the natural world (Earth and beyond). The movie reinforces the potential power of technology over man in that Gort, the robot policeman, will monitor Earth's use of technology and will use technology to destroy mankind if unwise choices are made.

Them! (1954) Another example of the tension between the natural world (ants in this case), and the technological world (atomic bombs in this case), with the future of mankind caught between the two.

Forbidden Planet (1956) And a third example of tension. In this case, of being so focused on creating the technology of utopia through positive creation thoughts, they failed to take into consideration that there is a natural dual side of negative (dystopian) thoughts that can create (destruction) as well. The film comes with bonus side warning that an obsession for obtaining and hoarding knowledge (or not letting go of your daughter!) can lead to negative thoughts with potential deadly outcomes.

I end week one with reflection on the assigned readings. My perspective of technology is eclectic, and, in my view, non-contradictory: 

• I believe technology has been and is the prime mover of societal change (technical determinism). 
• I believe that technology, as a means of societal change, becomes greater than the sum of its parts (holism).
• I believe that technology is neutral and its intended or unintended use can be positive, negative, or neutral (instrumental view of technology).