Skip to main content
Get your Wikispaces Classroom now:
the easiest way to manage your class.
Pages and Files
The Resonance Project ...
Process Page about the Project
Questions about resonance
bout resonant knowledge
Content Pages of the Project
Taxonomies of Knowledge/s
The New Addictions
The Resonant Knowledge Field
General Wiki Posts ...
The new 'artesan' culture
Speaking of Fructose
Speaking of Openness
Speaking of intrinsic learning
Order and fundamentalism
Low knowledge life-styles
Speaking of sugar
Like & not-like, cats ...
Silences of War
Water as text ...
Synaesthesia and Learning
Speaking of Agency (and presence)
Ecologies of Knowledge
Live MOOCs Talking (ii)
Speaking of Thresholds
Speaking of Sex Crimes
Reflection and Data
Speaking of Footprints
Speaking of Openness
Speaking of Taxes ...
Speaking of Jews ...
Bitcoins of Learning
MOOCs, Assessment, Fragile Zones
Zero Growth ?
A Probe is a probe ...
Meaning, consensus, language?
Space for new affordances
Genocide and genetics
Designing for Open Affordances
Open Sesame - understanding Open MOOCs
A Live MOOC talking
Active Learning MOOCs?
Learning or Training
A story of a boy
Popes and Chairs
Next Learning Architectures
Hybrid Flipped Spaces
Knowledge Ecologies .2
Ecologies of Identity
Lines of Desire
Social software (not!)
Footprints of Emergence
Designing Emergent Curricula
Emergent granny cloud +
MOOC is as MOOC does
Complex 3D Footprints
A JAM of Tweets
Seductive Social Software
Hats versus Vampires
From online- to e-journals
Paradoxes of Virtual Choirs
Benchmarking and Mastery
Berlin as Palimpsest
Emergent and Instrumental Learning
CoP and Small Planets
Perfomative or Analytic?
Schulmeisters and hegemony
Integrity and Utilities
The Soft Machine
Designing for Complexity
Top Brain - Bottom Brain
Instrumental and Ontological Reflection
Medium is the Massage
Narrative and Complexity
Conferences and Publications and Events
SCoPE Webinar Series on Emergence: Nov. 2013
Eifel ePortfolio Conference, July 2009.
HEA, July 2009
Greenwich, July 2008
Affordances and Political Ecology
Discourse and Text
There are a range of theories that thrown light on affordances....
Connectivist Learning Theory
I am still sceptical as to whether this animal exists, so here are some thoughts, from a research project, on the Massive Open Online Course, or MOOC (CCK08):
'Connectivism' is a useful in principle to engage with the MOOC definitions of learning. But I think we need to be very careful not to fall into the hole that connectivism seems to have dug itself, namely the idea that a learning theory can be described in normative terms. (The why rather than the how questions).
The 5 principles of connectivist learning in CCK08 look to me to be a theory of humanist culture: a culture in which people can express themselves, socialise, dialogue, find patterns, and extend their humanity. Wonderful stuff, but it is not a learning theory. And I am afraid that ‘sense-making’ is just another word for learning. It adds little in the way it is used here. And even the slide 19 material could be a specification for a theory of ideology, not learning. :(
I use a shorthand formulation for learning, which is framed in terms of affordances (affordances are the ‘capacity for effective action within a dynamic context’):
.....Learning is the process of exploring, mastering and benchmarking new affordances.
.....Affordances in turn include skills, information and strategy: i.e. the capacity to carry out complex
tasks, informed by data about the task, the materials, the context, (the universe, if you like) in
a way that makes strategic sense in the particular context at a particular time.
or ... "learning is the smile ..." (see
To do all of this we require:
A safe environment in which we can
i.e in which we can make mistakes, and receive feedback, and reflect and meta-reflect on the process. Therefore we also require:
A communication system, to exchange ideas, and build concepts, models, etc: intellectual tools, to go with the physical tools.
3. Community [Benchmark]
A community in which exchange and tool-building (physical and intellectual) can take place.This needs some agreement on reciprocal exchange of goods, tools, opportunities to interact and so on.It is desirable that this should be equitable, but that is by no means a necessary condition (Habermas famously based his ‘ideal speech situation’ on this faulty premise).
4. Exchange and Capitalisation [Master]
Basic protocols for exchange of goods, credit, and ideas, so that we accumulate capital in all three, and don’t accumulate them too asymmetrically, as that generally leads to violence and war, and destroys the capital.(Aesthetic goods and ideas can be included if you can afford them).
The difference between the pre-internet and the ‘connectivist’ /networked society is that we now have a number of unique and unprecedented ways of doing all of these things.
We have a virtual environment, as well as an off-line digital environment in which, in principle, we can explore and make mistakes, and give each other feedback.(Child pornography and abuse reminds us that we still have a lot to learn here).
2. Communication [Its more than connecting, no?]
The integrated and globally networked digital ecologies (tools, artefacts/actors, media, social software, MOOCs) we now have allow faster, more efficient and effective communication.
The same digital ecology broadens the community and allows more access and more imaginative uses (including Al-Quaida networks, and junk-security financing, so lots of work still to do there too).
4. Exchange / Sharing / Capitalisation
The same digital ecology (pipes and bytes) improves our ability to produce and accumulate capital in all three areas (good, credit, and ideas) by radically increasing our ability to share, contest, and create protocols for capital formation, including capital formation in the network that allows this to happen (recursive capital formation, if you get my drift). (And ... new dilemmas such as whether the genome for Anthrax should be published in scientific journals reminds us of the work we have to do here, too).
5a. Distributed Cognition #2
What’s new (we must give connectivism its due, no?) is that knowledge / cognition is distributed in unprecedented ways, and resides more then ever in the network [not “in the pipes”, but in the relationships and the bytes between the nodes, many of whom are, crucially, human].Language has always been distributed cognition by definition (#1), but up to now its never been possible to hear what someone else is thinking on the other side of the planet (or in a moon capsule, if you must).
5b.What’s also new is that ‘distributed’ media no longer just means ‘consumed’ media, or ‘read only’ media, it also means ‘writeable media’ / ‘punk production’ / mashups, and even further [5c?] it means executable social software that you can download, apply, and customise.
This in turn provides new opportunities for exploring and making virtual (?) mistakes, and entering the digital ecology as a full member, i.e. a fully two-way ecological relationship, not just a mass media / mass market consumer relationship.
There is a wealth of research on ecological psychology, much of it building on the work of Gibson (1979/86 in particular).
Here are some ideas on
Perception, Action and Culture
There is a lot more on complexity in the
Reassembling the social,
Latour's latest, and most useful book outlines some of the key aspects of
contains the first 25% of most chapters.
is based on relations rather than ontologies or, it is relational rather than representational. Which means it has a 'family resemblance' to 'networks' and perhaps even to
help on how to format text
Turn off "Getting Started"