Talk:Networked learning

Informal/formal

I don't think there is a real need to distinguish informal and formal networked learning. Networked learning goes on in both and in much the same way. The only thing that formal learning brings is an assessment and recognition process. I'm thinking to delete the references but point to other articles about formal and informal learning, and perhaps mention that NL is useful to enhance learning outcomes in both formal and informal settings...--Leighblackall (talk) 09:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that having the distinction between informal and formal networked learning would be beneficial. It would emphasize the impact networked learning has in both modalities. Perhaps explaining how networked learning goes on in both might clarify the two concepts, especially for those who didn’t know the amount of similarity. Furthermore, I think having examples of informal and formal networked learning would be helpful. 300user (talk) 15:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think I agree now. Thanks for discussing this 300User. The new layout of the page is looking good, and the addition of a History section now opens it up for information about NL prior to its ICTs focus these days... I am having difficulty finding references prior to ICTs.. I might have to revert to the local library! ;) --Leighblackall (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

CSALT's definition a little faulty?

What does "..learning in which C&IT.." mean? Specificly, what does C&IT stand for? Is it different to ICTs? Why not use the full words or link to an explanation?--Leighblackall 22::09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The definition is in current use and it is one of the most widely referenced over the past 9 years. Opinions on the definition may vary but it should be represented as it is in circulation and supported by severla books and the conference series. — Preceding [[Wikipedia::Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by Chris R. Jones (talk • [[Special::Contributions/Chris R. Jones|contribs]]) 16::06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Chris, I think a disclosure is in order from us both. If this Chris Jones is you, then you have some interest in asserting this definition be used. More so however, my own work is focusing on networked learning, where I do not limit the definition to the use of technology. Disclosures aside, I cannot verify (outside the UK) whether or not "The definition is in current use and it is one of the most widely referenced over the past 9 years" as you say. Since 2004 I have referenced predominately Illich (1971), Wenger (1991), Siemens (2005) and Downes (2004), who I don't think would agree that NL is necessarily mediated through ICTs. You may see this perspective on NL as an opinion deviating from the established norm however, so I'll have to dig further to try find citations that show otherwise, or begin working towards establishing it otherwise - perhaps by engaging with the NL conference. Certainly, the work in the UK and the conference should be included, its valuable, thanks for adding more information about it, it has opened a door for me to study through. Leighblackall (talk) 02::01, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

You got the right Chris Jones Leigh and just like you I have an interest in the term. The Networked Learning Conference is not simply UK and it has been established in Europe for several years and it also has a presence through a variety of European projects and networks. The term is not for any one groups to own but the definition I provided is used in several published works and defines the NL Conference series so it has a solid basis. I have tried to base all my contributions on cited evidence. I will come back to edit the page but I hope we don't end up delting each others contributions. I want to include reference to Asynchronous Learning Networks as they are used in North America following Hiltz and Harrasim etc. and I have a different take on the historical timeline you have added. It would be good if you or someone working with you could conect with the NLC which has its next conference in Maastricht 2012. Chris R. Jones (talk) 15::27, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think I have deleted anything. Myself and others have been rearranging information, trying to tighten things up, make some things brief and expand on the history and models sections. Regarding the opening paragraphs, on 15 June an IP address in the USA tried to soften the technological determinant in the CSALT definition by inserting a Gilly Salmon reference above it. I notice you moved the CSALT definition back above Salmon however (links are just to help future reviewers).

These past few days, I have mostly been trying to develop the history some more, adding A Pattern Language to the 1970s, and salvaging some info from a recently deleted article on Wikipedia called Collaborative Networked Learning that was useful for the 1980s.

Also, I understood the conference was international, or became that way, the experience we're having here, defining NL in Wikipedia might make an interesting paper there.. networked learning about networked learning and all. I'm in the process of writing one similar, called Networked Learning a Biomass Heat Transfer System if you're interested Leighblackall (talk) 12::31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Does it have to involve ICTs?

The definition is problematic in that it begs for the definition of "the use of ICT". So if communication happens by talking to your colleagues it's not networked learning, but if you add a video-conference in between, then it is?

Nevertheless, ICT is expanding the ways in which learning can happen, although even before computers people have used non-digital ICT to enhance their learning (granted the ICT may have consisted of paper, a quill, writing letters, but it's still 'information and communication technology').

Is it the Networked Learning definition that needs to more clearly articulate ICTs as being ALL technology that assists with conveying information and communication, or is it the linked ICTs entry itself? A quick look at the ICT entry reveals a mess, so perhaps NetLearning does need to be clearer and extend the definition into what is meant by ICTs. I added the ".. but not limited to.." in for now.

Also, I think networked learning is about technology enabled communication and information. A conversation between people may well be a learning network, but I think there is a subtle but clear enough difference with the term networked learning. Or perhaps the very idea of a network has changed enough...

Thanks for your comments, I hope you don't mind me pasting them here - their conversational tone suggests that they are better placed in the discussion area - which I think is a very important part of any entry, but sadly under used in most articles.--Leighblackall 09:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Good article [HISTORICAL EVOLUTION of ICT] --Leighblackall 00:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Chris Jones, I'm reading the Google book scan of Advances in research on networked learning, Volume 7 By Peter Goodyear (2004) and have ordered a printed copy through my local library. The contents look to be very useful for knowing research methods and networked learning practices in 2004. My question though is whether or not, to your knowledge, the definition used by CSALT and followers, has been challenged before? It has come up a few times in this Wikipedia project - the idea that NL is not limited to the use of ICTs, so I'm wondering if you've come across this question before in the research publications you read? Leighblackall (talk) 22:57, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

History

• In my opinion, the first general thought about the term “networked learning” assumes digital ICTs. I think that if the definition of “networked learning” is to include non-digital ICTs, then the history section needs to encompass the periods before the emergence of the internet (eg. talking, paper, etc). 300user (talk) 15:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• Good idea! --Leighblackall (talk) 00:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• I added reference to Ivan Illich's vision of "Learning Webs" in chapter 6 of his 1971 book, Deschooling Society. Dunno why I hadn't thought of it sooner! Leighblackall (talk) 08:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

• The reference to Illich is good and I use it in the 2009 book I edited with Lone Dirckinck-Holmfeld. Illich was talking about an environment in which computers were already assumed, although this was prior to the PC, so even in his hands networked assumed digital ICTs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris R. Jones (talk • contribs) 16:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• I'm not convinced that Illich was envisioning "Learning Webs" as necessarily being computer mediated. If our shared reference is to his 1971 book Deschooling Society, then it is in chapter 6 where he introduces his ideas of how "Learning Webs" would work, and it comes across to me to more a principle for learning, than one linked to computers and computer based networks. In the interests of helping others into this question, I've picked a few quotes to try and support my reading of it:

"The same people, paradoxically, when pressed to specify how they acquired what they know and value, will readily admit that they learned it more often outside than inside school. Their knowledge of facts, their understanding of life and work came to them from friendship or love, while viewing TV, or while reading, from examples of peers or the challenge of a street encounter. Or they may have learned what they know through the apprenticeship ritual for admission to a street gang or the initiation to a hospital, newspaper city room, plumber's shop, or insurance office. The alternative to dependence on schools is not the use of public resources for some new device which "makes" people learn; rather it is the creation of a new style of educational relationship between man and his environment. "

• The last sentence should be enough to argue that Illich is not suggesting the use of computers per say, he's talking about a new perspective on learning, where it is networked through webs. Admittedly, the Internet gives us this most easily, but it is entirely possible for people to adopt his perspective on learning where computers and the Internet are not available. For example, Illich uses the Bolivian experience to give context to his idea:

"To give an example: The same level of technology is used in TV and in tape recorders. All Latin-American countries now have introduced TV: in Bolivia the government has financed a TV station, which was built six years ago, and there are no more than seven thousand TV sets for four million citizens. The money now tied up in TV installations throughout Latin America could have provided every fifth adult with a tape recorder. In addition, the money would have sufficed to provide an almost unlimited library of prerecorded tapes, with outlets even in remote villages, as well as an ample supply of empty tapes.

This network of tape recorders, of course, would be radically different from the present network of TV. It would provide opportunity for free expression: literate and illiterate alike could record, preserve, disseminate, and repeat their opinions. The present investment in TV, instead, provides bureaucrats, whether politicians or educators, with the power to sprinkle the continent with institutionally produced programs which they-or their sponsors--decide are good for or in demand by the people."

• I've certainly been quick to see the link between Illich's example and the Internet too, but I wouldn't go as far as to say his imaginings are informed by the computing and computer network theories of the time. His is a principled approach to learning (and technology) more broadly "[Learning webs are] the creation of a new style of educational relationship between man and his environment."

Leighblackall (talk) 02:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I do perceive a different. Learning in “Networks” using various forms of communication from F2f work of mouth, text and audio calling, under various terms such as communities of practice, pen pal type study groups, shared correspondence among intellectuals/researchers, conference calls, learning webs etc have existed long before the internet. Of course, the amount of time and number of people involved in the sharing in these “networks” of people was much different from the age of instant—anytime, anyplace connections between individuals and findable content. CNL as I conceptualized it, which was vetted for 5 years on Wikipedia with only minor edits was a form of Networked learning which did involve information and communication technologies as envisioned at the time. "Collaborative Networked Learning (CNL)" is that learning which occurs via electronic dialogue between self-directed co-learners and learners and experts. Learners share a common purpose, depend upon each other and are accountable to each other for their success. CNL occurs in interactive groups in which participants actively communicate and negotiation meaning with one another within a contextual framework which may be facilitated by an online coach, mentor or group leader. The dominate “technology” at the time enable the learning processes. I believe that the networks concept has gained popularity in the computer world and also in the biological based network of humans and other creatures. Networks and networking can be a means to an end for learning; and as the Cisco commercial welcomes us To the human network. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Chuck (talk • contribs) 16:39, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

New Section - Concerns

I'm new to Wikipedia and I entered the Concerns section as an anonymous user (142.150.221.38) by accident. Sorry. I added this section because I felt that there needed to be a contrary opinion to the uses of networked learning. The study by Sammons et all (2007) pointed out there are very few studies to verify the claim of enhancing student learning with networked learning systems. If there are any other studies to be found, I think it would be beneficial to add it on this article.300user (talk) 03:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree 300user, and adding this section will be very helpful to this an emerging field. My concern with the Concerns ;) is that it may tend to focus on NL's effectiveness in formal and traditional methods of education... but as you suggest, if we can gather more research - including stuff that looks at its effectiveness in informal learning, then we may help resolve my concerns with the Concerns. Thanks for joining in on this effort. --Leighblackall (talk) 00:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I've just reread this page after some time away and the Concerns section stands out to me as more info than is required. I tend to think that the information there at the moment is about as relavent as the other helpful information in the See Also and External Links sections.. I reckon it should be removed, with links to the research added in the External Links section... what do you think? --Leighblackall (talk) 06:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

See Also-- Collaborative Networked Learning

Thank you for including the link to Collaborative Networked Learning about the early work in ghe 1980's. Unfortunately, the deletionist at Wikipedia has decided to remove this entry. Please feel free to include the concept and the content as it relates to the general issue of Networked Learning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Chuck (talk • contribs) 14:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

• That's a shame Dr Chuck, I hope you brought content across to here. Our history section needs the 80s covered more Leighblackall (talk) 23:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

The Learning Exchange

In a Twitter message from rogre and leighblackall (rogre/status/82263124706725888) Rogre points to a blog post on Adventures in Free Schooling that talks briefly about the Illinois Learning Exchange of the 1970s. Will the post references John Holt's book Instead of Education (Sentient Publications, 2004 - 250 pages) it does not directly link to more information about the Learning Exchange. A web search of Learning Exchange reveals a number of initiatives with similar titles, such as the Teaching and Learning Exchange TaLE in NSW Australia, which appears to merely be an initiative of institutionalised learnings, directing people to institutions of education. It may however, have a different history in its beginnings.. worth investigating at least. Interestingly, there are a number of Learning Exchange community initiatives in a number cities and towns, but there is not yet a Wikipedia entry for this shared program of Learning Exchange.. Leighblackall (talk) 00:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)