Alec Couros explores connected learning as a modern literacy where networks matter, then examines digital identity through recent shifts like the EU's right to be forgotten and Snapchat's rise. He asks who controls your digital footprint, whether we need a culture of forgiveness instead of permanent records, and how schools can teach collaborative learning.
Hey, Open Knowledge. My name is Alec Kouros and I'm at the Faculty of Education, University of Regina in Regina, Canada, and I'm really pleased and honored to be able to facilitate this module 2 on technological change, Digital Identity and Connected Learning so before we get into the questions for the week, I think it's a good idea to get a better sense of what connected learning is. For me, that's what the crux of this module is all about. If you think about technological change in the scope of teaching and learning, or if you think about digital identity, these concepts fall very well within the scope of connected learning. So to get started, I'm going to give you a bit of a framework for understanding or at least thinking about connected learning. For those who take on connectivism or connected learning as key theoretical constructs, there are the assumptions that learning is increasingly social and and that humans learn best within and through networks. Thus, the degree of connectivity in our societies, in the sense of both atoms and bits, through other humans and through hardware, is increasingly tied to our modern notions of literacy. Put a bit more simply, being connected and more so, our ability to comprehend, work within, and leverage networks have now become core prerequisites to accessing and making sense of new knowledge. There are a couple of quotes that I'd like you to think about for this next section. First is from Barry Wellman, who says, the developed world is in the midst of a paradigm shift, both in the ways in which people and institutions are connected. It is a shift from being bound up in homogenous little boxes to serving life through diffuse, variegated social networks. The second one is from Joy Ito, who says, I don't think education is about centralized instruction anymore. Rather, it is a process of establishing oneself as a node in a broad network of distributed creativity. Both of these authors allude to the tremendous maintenance it often takes to creating and maintaining a digital identity. Paul Fried and Gasser 2008 Note that our identities are now shaped in large in part by intentional digital contributions such as blogs, YouTube videos, or social networking profiles. The authors note, however, that inequalities exist or arise due to gaps in technology access. The digital divides in the sense of digital identity often means that those without access are less able to control their identities online, they're not able to positively contribute to their identities, and they're often left to rely on what others say about them online. So as it relates to knowledge, connected learning, digital identity, and equity, here's question number one. Who gets to control their own digital identity? How does our society's increased focus on the need for a positive digital identity contribute to the digital dividend to social inequity. Along the lines of digital identity, we've seen a number of recent shifts in terms of tools, policy, and generally shifts in societal attitudes. I assume many of you are aware of the EU's ruling on the right to be forgotten and some of the interesting ideological and practical challenges that this raises. You may have heard of young people moving away from social networking sites such as Facebook in favor of ephemeral apps such as Snapchat. And probably recently you've heard of the celebrity photo leak that makes many of us question if anything is really safe on the cloud. Yet most of these issues focus on prevention and in many cases, shaming. Adults often paint a very dismal picture to young people that their future of employability will be compromised unless they seriously sanitize their digital identities. So, based on this background information, Question two really is about a shift in our attitudes around digital identity. Question 2 simply how do we move away from our digital identity as a notion of a permanent record and move towards cultivating a culture of forgiveness? Question three is actually a set of questions, and I want to get right down to connected learning itself. Connected and networked learning have become large fields of study. Yet for many educators and learners, connected learning principles and pedagogies are very difficult to figure out. So we need to learn a lot more about how do we actually do this? How do we cultivate a culture of connected learners? So here are the three questions. I hope you can think about these and I'd love to hear your responses. First, given the often personal nature of connected learning, how can we leverage its benefits in an institutional setting? Second, how we prepare educators to embrace and normalize social and collaborative pedagogy? And finally, in a culture where we stress individual learning and achievement, how do we negotiate the idea of collective intelligence? So thanks for listening and I look forward to your responses. Take care and we'll connect soon.
Episode 14 - Dr. Alec Couros: The EdTech Explorer – Rethinking Education with AI
Online Learning in a Hurry Guest episode 6 - Alec Couros - Student's in spaces
