Subject: [IFETS-DISCUSSION:1357] SEC: UNCLAS Discussion Summary 1.
From: Laurie, John (john.laurie@defence.gov.au)
Date: Wed 14 Mar 2001 - 03:56:45 MET
From: "Laurie, John" <john.laurie@defence.gov.au> Subject: [IFETS-DISCUSSION:1357] SEC: UNCLAS Discussion Summary 1. Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:56:45 +1100
"Distilling a Language for Cyberspace" Summary No.1
> March 13
>
>
Bill Ellis recalled Ivan Illich and his "Deschooling Society" and the idea
of "creative exploratory learning" as against "skill learning". Bill
reflected on 'nonlinear learning', the third much discussed but little
practised way of computer education and how it may accord more with the
brain's functions as a non-linear organ, sorting what it needs out of the
jumble of life's phenomena. He further reflected on how various inputs at
the edges of attention are sorted into parallel narratives at the same time
as the main attention, perhaps an F2F lecture, is being absorbed.
(This idea of competing narratives being absorbed in parallel in an 'octopus
grab' fashion is an interesting one in terms of this discussion -
suggesting that the brain's internal relevance selection mechanism may be
harnessed in the cause of online education - and connecting 'non-linear'
to 'context' quite well. This also recalls a notion I first noticed in one
of Carlos Castenada's books, that actually a great deal of information is
absorbed by the brain from things occurring on the edges of attention, while
the primary focus is elsewhere. This explains some dreams - information
absorbed directly, almost subconsciously, from the edges of attention).
Bill points out that 'stories' don't exist as such, they are 'interpreted'
out of relative chaos, and rather than looking for linear stories on the
internet we should recognise the realities of non-linear learning.
> Dennis Nelson wrote that the focus on particular aspects of the online
> screen and on-line learning, is reflected in "most of life' as well, and
> that specialisation has inherent dangers. He went on to suggest that
> without a "common a life story" a search for story elsewhere is possibly
> futile. He further suggests that a need for "actualisation and love"
> drives our selection processes on the web as well as in life in general.
>
>
Charles Nelson wrote, commenting on Bill Ellis' final paragraph -
>This means that we do not learn linearly
>
>and
>
> >Life is a jumble. The
> >internal process of the brain sorts our the information one needs at any
> >time.
>
>and
>
> >The internet is yet to be successful as a
> >learning tool because we look for linear stories on the internet and
spend
> >too little time for ourselves and for our students in trying to search
for
> >ready made stories that fit our multiple minds rather than recognizing
the
> >reality of nonlinear learning
- and suggests that optimal learning takes place on the edge between chaos
and order and asks how we determine the non-linearity of stories, and
further, the juxtaposition of opposing or contrasting concepts.
(The use of the word 'juxtaposition' is apposite here; it is this which
creates the power of editing - the juxtaposition of shots - and there is
always a question in film editing about whether to use the smooth transition
of similar shots or the shock value of contrasting images - each of course
has its place in the constructing of story.)
Charles goes on to question how we might recognises non-linear stories
and/or grade them, or whether there should be a mix of linear and non-linear
learning.
(Is this a version of the 'construction/ instruction' debate? It would
seem that for operational instruction linear is inescapable ie., camera
operation is a linear effort, but how to utilise it in a fluid dynamic
situation may well suit non-linear tuition.)
> Gwen Tolliver-Luster asked for details on the Hara and Kling citation:
> Gwen,
> "Sudents Frustrations with a Web-based Distance Education Course" by
> Noriko Hara and Rob Kling is found at:
> http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue4_12/hara/ But if you go to:
> http://firstmonday.org/issues/articleindex.html You will find quite a
> number of articles relating to this subject.
>
> March 14
>
Charles Adamson wrote, pointing out the difference between teaching
and testing, and also the difference between "learning to" and "learning
about", quoting an example of Japanese students learning "about" English but
being unable to put a simple sentence together.
And, commenting on Charles Nelson's contribution, he suggests that
"the number of links" would relate to the edge of chaos. Too few =
inflexible and too many = confusing. He suggests a series of experiments to
determine the point of maximum learning, measured by change in the student
rather than goals achieved. Charles Adamson then goes on to tentatively
interpret "nonlinear" as meaning "having more than one goal" and suggests
the choice would depend on the level of education required.
(Personally I disagree with that interpretation and find the term
"non-linear" problematic. It's a negative term, defined by what it is not.
"Multi-modal" might be better, or constructivist?? Or.....?? Any
suggestions?)
Bill Ellis wrote an explanation of the way that 'content' has been
replaced by context and points out that 'story' no longer is
content-centered but context-relative, and how we "do not need to cram our
heads with knowledge which will be out of date by the time we 'graduate'".
He reflects that perhaps there's a parallel here with earlier-pre-modern
days.
(This is getting close to a good discussion start point - an
understanding that the ground is actually the new zeitgeist of the
Information Age, where the old ways no longer apply, where 'lifelong
learning' is a natural concept and not an imposition on an unwilling host.
It's also interesting to put the "edge of chaos" in Charles Nelson's
contribution, next to this, and realise that in looking for ways to
'interpret' the on-line screen, the first step might be in embracing the
world of chaos and context in which we live.)
In summary, the discussion so far has set the ground for
examination of the on-line screen. The zeitgeist of the Information Age,
lifelong learning, the idea that 'story' is as much in interpretation as in
the telling, and the chaos/ order dichotomy, are all valid mediators. This
is the start of delineating the holistic concepts required. What sort of
pedagogy though, can be valid for cyber-education where the screen reflects
a world simultaneously pre-modern, modern and post-modern?
> John Laurie
> Australian Emergency Management Institute
> john.laurie@defence.gov.au
>
---------------------------------------------------------
List address to send message to everyone:
ifets-discussion@catfish.valdosta.edu
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Wed 14 Mar 2001 - 09:59:44 MET