For a number of years the Gov't, big business, and other commercial groups and organizations have attempted to quash the freedom of the Internet. As is the case in many countries media and the propaganda drives the message. A unified centre of information telling the public what to see and what to believe. The Internet and the mass message has provided new avenues to learn and deliver that message. Just as people will say anyone can say anything on the Internet...so can Government and Big Business. The usage of new technologies can be used for connecting and networking but also can be used for subservience and punishment.
With the Canadian Governments recent efforts to gather information on individuals without warrant and open the Internet to police forces the idea of freedom on the Internet slowly eroded. The idea of fear and the 'boogey'man once again crept up in the political ideology to sway public opinion. This is no different than other westernized governments around the world introducing various bills to limit access and open personal information to them. An big business getting involved with anti-piracy acts veiled in the moral authority of stealing as its underlying ideology. We can berate countries such as Chine and North Korea for limiting information coming out of their countries but is controlling our message only less overt?
The spawn of Internet political movements and connecting people all over the world to unite in one cause has been a powerful tool to staying connected. Allowing professionals and students to learn from each other from east to west, north to south has created a more connective society. Bloggers', Peer to Peer interaction and informal learning allows us to become more diverse. So will the notion of web based cameras on every corner, police monitoring all citizens and big business driving what we can see and use make this an uncertain future? When i think of the Internet revolution i also think of it as an evolution with potential dire consequences yet enormous possibilities.
How will be manage this critical mass of 'good vs evil' ' the Internet as the ultimate weapon of mass destruction' and 'technological darwinism'. I say keep it for the people and allow everyone to use it for the best possible purpose...staying connected and informed through each other.
http://people.oii.ox.ac.uk/dutton/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/5th-estate-lecture-text.pdf
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Understanding the Cynefin....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7oz366X0-8&feature=related
After watching this video i was amazed at the idea that political realities could be shaped by the use of this tool. The notion of our current business structure and models does lend some insight into our complex systems and how many of our systems are hidden from us. We cant see the system at work but we know its there. Like our financial ecosystem and our military fauna both of which interact in a closed state but are extremely complex because they interact with so many other systems.
Taking the ideas of the Cynefin i can see how our simple systems can go into crises so easily, hence our Westernized Capitalist views so linked to keeping the wealth in isolated simple states only to find that because we don't look at the complexity of the entire systems it is ultimately doomed...oil sands???
Not to strictly over analyze this model, because we are in a state of disorder in most cases , choosing what works best in practice might solve some of our other crises situations in the world because then at least as the video suggests, we can explore and develop a framework that works in the environment its in.
The idea of Unpredictability and the diversity of our environments in this disorder framework does provide an interesting proposition to the theory of connective knowledge. Because connectedness requires a distributed knowledge system and having the capability to use multiple systems helps drive our environments toward change and adaptation.
After watching this video i was amazed at the idea that political realities could be shaped by the use of this tool. The notion of our current business structure and models does lend some insight into our complex systems and how many of our systems are hidden from us. We cant see the system at work but we know its there. Like our financial ecosystem and our military fauna both of which interact in a closed state but are extremely complex because they interact with so many other systems.
Taking the ideas of the Cynefin i can see how our simple systems can go into crises so easily, hence our Westernized Capitalist views so linked to keeping the wealth in isolated simple states only to find that because we don't look at the complexity of the entire systems it is ultimately doomed...oil sands???
Not to strictly over analyze this model, because we are in a state of disorder in most cases , choosing what works best in practice might solve some of our other crises situations in the world because then at least as the video suggests, we can explore and develop a framework that works in the environment its in.
The idea of Unpredictability and the diversity of our environments in this disorder framework does provide an interesting proposition to the theory of connective knowledge. Because connectedness requires a distributed knowledge system and having the capability to use multiple systems helps drive our environments toward change and adaptation.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Indigenous knowledge and Connectivism
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17478309/Reinforcing-Indigenous-Education
As noted in this article the notion of a connective knowledge does provide some similarites to the Indigenous way of thinking and could be an important tool for Aboriginal communities to bring meaning to subjects such as math and science.
I believe more research needs to be explored to see how the non - linear method of teaching will work in the Aboriginal cultures. Will the digital age forever change the way of learning and teaching for Aboriginal people? and is that good or bad thing? Can we incorporate this type of knowledge into communities in a manner that is beneficial to the communities yet being respectful of traditional way of knowing and thinking?
As noted in this article the notion of a connective knowledge does provide some similarites to the Indigenous way of thinking and could be an important tool for Aboriginal communities to bring meaning to subjects such as math and science.
I believe more research needs to be explored to see how the non - linear method of teaching will work in the Aboriginal cultures. Will the digital age forever change the way of learning and teaching for Aboriginal people? and is that good or bad thing? Can we incorporate this type of knowledge into communities in a manner that is beneficial to the communities yet being respectful of traditional way of knowing and thinking?
Tips ...moving forward
http://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Ftheelearningcoach.com%2Felearning2-0%2F12-ways-to-learn-in-2012%2F%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2Btheelearningcoach%2B%2528The%2BeLearning%2BCoach%2529%26utm_content%3DGoogle%2BReader?gname=cck-12
I am reposting this as i want a reminder of what i want to do more often moving forward with technology. With the way we communicate changing everyday or brains are being re-hardwired to deal with this new way of learning through technology, whether it is good or not , it is important to keep up or have a greater understanding. In order to expand my portfolio i will need to learn more proactive and meaningful means to communicate with technology.
I just hope we dont turn into AI machines ourselves...
I am reposting this as i want a reminder of what i want to do more often moving forward with technology. With the way we communicate changing everyday or brains are being re-hardwired to deal with this new way of learning through technology, whether it is good or not , it is important to keep up or have a greater understanding. In order to expand my portfolio i will need to learn more proactive and meaningful means to communicate with technology.
I just hope we dont turn into AI machines ourselves...
Friday, February 17, 2012
Diversity of Opinion...
After reading a post by http://cck12-brux.blogspot.com/2012/02/connectivisms-1st-principlediversity-of.html I was led to think more about how we diversify our opinion and can the idea of connectivism truly create more diversity.
In my opinion, diversity of opinion is only diversity if it not related to the constraints of the opinion you are attempting to gather. If one is to get diversity based on a cultural norm or community standard then you have to relate it to the that convention therefore you rely on local interests to drive the diversity but is it truly diverse? So would it be okay to simply gather on the micro level in this case? On a macro level if we were to look at Indigenous rights you could gather true diversity by seeking a more global opinion but would skype, twitter or facebook or these other tools of mass destructive connectivism provide the means to this?
Gathering diversity is tricky and may often be disguised or mused as such by offering the means to do this through such open forums. One may say that diversity translated through an open forum that is widely broad casted may drive the diversity and the opinion as such and therefore it could be diverse. Maybe that is the point, try to get it out to more people and have them join in on the Internet and we can create diversity. Creating diversity however is worrisome. Who are we creating a more connected world for? Are we streamlining diversity of opinion to fit within constructs of the linear world we live in?
Diversity is a word that cannot be summated by simply by utilizing connectivism as a means of driving opinion, diversity is whole other topic for discussion. Attempting to gather information from other sources , which may be the more appropriate way to describe diversity of opinion is more of correct term for connectivism in my opinion. There is value to sharing information world wide and transcending group discussions through the web but i struggle with this being the means to the end.
The concepts of diversity are not easily explained in this theory in fact i would think that the linear nature of the Internet albeit informative may in fact not make the opinion diverse at all. Teaching through webinars , watching broadcasts from classrooms, and chatting through web forums are a good way to share information but diverse? how are we to really know?
In my opinion, diversity of opinion is only diversity if it not related to the constraints of the opinion you are attempting to gather. If one is to get diversity based on a cultural norm or community standard then you have to relate it to the that convention therefore you rely on local interests to drive the diversity but is it truly diverse? So would it be okay to simply gather on the micro level in this case? On a macro level if we were to look at Indigenous rights you could gather true diversity by seeking a more global opinion but would skype, twitter or facebook or these other tools of mass destructive connectivism provide the means to this?
Gathering diversity is tricky and may often be disguised or mused as such by offering the means to do this through such open forums. One may say that diversity translated through an open forum that is widely broad casted may drive the diversity and the opinion as such and therefore it could be diverse. Maybe that is the point, try to get it out to more people and have them join in on the Internet and we can create diversity. Creating diversity however is worrisome. Who are we creating a more connected world for? Are we streamlining diversity of opinion to fit within constructs of the linear world we live in?
Diversity is a word that cannot be summated by simply by utilizing connectivism as a means of driving opinion, diversity is whole other topic for discussion. Attempting to gather information from other sources , which may be the more appropriate way to describe diversity of opinion is more of correct term for connectivism in my opinion. There is value to sharing information world wide and transcending group discussions through the web but i struggle with this being the means to the end.
The concepts of diversity are not easily explained in this theory in fact i would think that the linear nature of the Internet albeit informative may in fact not make the opinion diverse at all. Teaching through webinars , watching broadcasts from classrooms, and chatting through web forums are a good way to share information but diverse? how are we to really know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)