Learning through Connecting

Connectivism is a theoretical framework that explains learning in a digital age (Kop and Hill, 2008). One of its core propositions is that knowledge is not acquired. Existing learning theories, such as Behaviorism, focused on the idea of acquiring and internalizing knowledge. However, Connectivism suggests that “learning is actionable knowledge that can reside outside of ourselves” (Siemens, 2005). With the advent of computer technology, the internet, and learning networks online, knowledge can now be stored externally to a person and easily accessed when needed.

So if knowledge is not acquired, I propose that what a learner must acquire instead is a learning network. Siemens argued that “knowledge is distributed across networks and the act of learning is largely one of forming a diverse network of connections and recognizing attendant patterns” (Siemens, 2008). The World Wide Web facilitates creating such a network. With ample access to blogs, videos, presentations, and online documentation, learners have become more autonomous. They are no longer solely relying on the knowledge and direction of their educator.

However, educators still play an important role. Siemens describes this role as curator. “A curatorial teacher acknowledges the autonomy of learners, yet understands the frustration of exploring unknown territories without a map” (Seimens, 2008). We are experiencing this new role firsthand in our current online class. Our instructor has been introducing us to resources and learning networks that I didn’t even know existed. Take, for example, Twitter chats. They provide a great way to connect with others in your field to learn from each other and bounce ideas off one another. And here I thought Twitter was just for tweeting and getting a few likes or retweets.

There are some arguments that Connectivism is not an actual learning theory, but that doesn’t change the fact that technology is altering the way we learn. And in a world where what we know is rapidly changing and knowledge is quickly amassing, it is more important than ever for learners to acquire learning networks instead of just stagnant knowledge. Without such networks, they may be left behind in their industry or job more quickly than they realize.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for a digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved September 24, 2019, from: https://jotamac.typepad.com/jotamacs_weblog/files/Connectivism.pdf

Siemens, G. (2008) Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing Roles for Educators and Designers. Accessible from: https://www.academia.edu/2857165/Learning_and_knowing_in_networks_Changing_roles_for_educators_and_designers

Kop, R. and Hill, A. (2008) Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. Retrieved September 24 2019, from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1103

Mind Control: Sci Fi or Cell Phones?

This week I am reflecting on a Ted Talk given by Tristan Harris entitled, “How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds every day.” He knows what he is talking about: he was “a design ethicist at Google where he studied how to ethically steer peoples’ thoughts” (Harris, 2017). All of the large technology companies have similar labs and positions, although maybe they are not so ethical. So why do these positions exist? Because cell phone technology has created a competition for our attention.

You are experiencing it every day, maybe without even realizing it. You end up binge-watching a show instead of going to bed because the next episode auto-plays and you get sucked in. A teenager you know asks a friend to continue snapchatting for him while he’s on vacation because he doesn’t want to lose his streak. Videos on Facebook or YouTube start playing automatically so you start watching even though you weren’t that interested. Notifications pop up on your cell phone and send you off thinking about or acting on something you had not planned on thinking about or acting on at that moment. A headline pops up at the bottom of an article you read, and you are off reading another. All of these are examples of a few large technology companies swaying our thoughts and actions to do what they want us to do. They have studied the mind, how to get our attention, and the things that motivate us, like fear of losing something (a Snapchat streak) and outrage. Yes,outrage. This is why you see so many inflammatory posts on Facebook and Twitter. What better way to get our attention?

I admit that I’ve been sucked in. My husband and I don’t watch much television, but when Stranger Things is released all at once and the episodes automatically play one after another, it’s difficult to turn it off. I’ve also seen my teenage kids keep their friends’ Snapchat streaks going in their absence. As Tristan Harris states, “It affects everyone because a billion people have one of these [cell phones] in their pocket.”

He prefaces that statement with the following: “The costs are so obvious…It’s not just taking away our agency to spend our attention and live the lives that we want. It’s changing the way that we have our conversations, it’s changing our democracy, and it’s changing our ability to have the conversations and relationships we want with each other” (Harris, 2017).

That may seem like an extreme viewpoint at first, but let’s look at it a little closer. These technology companies have control rooms full of people trying to decide what will grab our attention, and they are all competing with each other. And as the Netflix CEO flippantly said, they are also competing with things like sleep (Hern, 2017). Seriously, though, what one company does, the other will do also, whether as simple as using auto-play or as disturbing as posting controversial items or telling lies to outrage people and perpetuate conversations online that we might not even want to have.

So what can we do about it? The first step is simply to understand that you can be persuaded and that you might want to protect against being persuaded. Harris goes on to discuss two more steps: a new accountability system for those aforementioned control rooms and a “Design Renaissance.” In a perfect world, wouldn’t it be great if these technology companies were aligned with the goals of those they are trying to influence? He uses the example of a lonely person at home getting on Facebook. Instead of Facebook encouraging him to spend more time onscreen alone, it could encourage him to go out and socialize with friends. However, when the bottom line for these companies is profitability, is that realistic? Perhaps, not. But, I do agree that in order for us to take back some control, the first steps are awareness that we are being persuaded and action to protect ourselves.

So what are your thoughts on the topic? Were you aware of this practice by technology companies? How do you feel about it? Now that you know this is happening, will you change the way you use your cell phone? One small step might be turning off notifications. I’d love to hear your thoughts and suggestions.

Harris, T. (2017, July 26). How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds every day [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tricks_tech_companies_use_to_capture_your_attention?language=en

Hern, A. (2017, April 18). Netflix’s Biggest Competitor? Sleep. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/18/netflix-competitor-sleep-uber-facebook

Blogging: The Beginning and the End

So one of my assignments this week, was to attend an Educational Tweetchat. As I reviewed the list of chats, they were almost all geared towards K-12th grade teachers. Being an instructional designer in corporate America for the past 20+ years, I had a difficult time choosing what might be applicable to me and had some doubts about the assignment.

The assignment, briefly, was to participate in a Tweetchat and blog about the experience. So I found a “Weekly Learning and Teaching in Higher Education” chat that said it was geared towards both teachers and students. As a student getting my Masters in adult learning and education, I thought this might be the one for me.

The first thing that struck me was that most of the participants were from the U.K. and a few shared photos of their cats. That in itself felt so cool to me: not only was I connecting with teachers from the UK, but they were sharing their pets. A personal touch is not a bad thing. I soon found that the questions, however, were a bit out of my area of expertise. For example, one question posed was “What advice might you give to someone considering presenting or publishing pedagogic research?” To be perfectly frank, I had to look up pedagogy. (This is only my second semester, after all.)

After the 3^rd question, I realized I was not going to add to this conversation, but instead listen quietly and try to learn as much as I could. As the other participants spoke about the importance of sharing your findings through publishing and presenting, I realized that this is the whole point of Tweetchat: learning from each other and sharing what you know so that you don’t have to duplicate efforts.

Collaboration became a huge theme of the chat. Even though at first this chat seemed a bit beyond my understanding and experience, I learned a few important points. First, collaboration is a necessity, as I saw just from the Tweetchat alone. It still is an amazing concept to me, having previously not known these scheduled chats even existed. Now I realize that I can search for chats that are more specific to instructional design and my professional endeavors in order to enhance my skills and broaden my knowledge, and I plan to do so.

Another theme that also arose over and over again was blogging. If publishing is too difficult, too expensive, too time-consuming, just blog! So here I am, doing exactly what was suggested. I had no idea when I began this assignment that the assignment itself would give credence to me blogging about it.

The Price of Privacy: What Are You Paying for Your Online Choices?

I find it rather counter-intuitive that my very first blog happens to be about online privacy. I’ve shied away from blogs for so many years because they seemed too personal. I wasn’t ready to put my thoughts out there on the Internet. Yet, this week I’ve learned that I’ve put so much more of myself out there already without giving it much thought.

I use Facebook. I like to think that I’m a fairly savvy user of the site, reviewing my settings often, marking my photos as “friends only” instead of “public,” and requiring my permission for someone to tag me in a photo or post on my timeline. As an Internet user, you may feel the same way I do: you know what you are doing and are at least somewhat in control. You know you are giving up a little bit of privacy for the convenience of the many free applications you use on a regular basis. We all use free applications. They enable us to socialize, save money, and make life more convenient in so many ways. But are they really free? Are you paying for them with your privacy by handing over more information than you realize?

Data mining has become a huge industry, and data collection is widespread in the United States. Data brokers use data, such as public social media profiles and data from your purchases to provide information to marketers and put you in target categories. This means that each piece of data is not anonymous, but associated with you specifically and can be used for profiling – to create a sort of picture of who you are and what you want. To give you an idea of scope, one data broker for Facebook has information on almost all of the households in the U.S. and $1 trillion in consumer transactions. Another data broker associated with Facebook, has information on 500 million consumers world-wide and about 1,500 data points per person.

Of course, the privacy concerns go far beyond just Facebook. Much of your online activity, such as search activity, is saved and can be sold to or used by third parties. Linking multiple accounts by using your Facebook or Google sign-on to create a new account exacerbates the problem of privacy. For the convenience of using your existing sign-on, you are connecting a variety of applications and providing more insight for profiling.

So what can you do to at least get back a little bit of your privacy? The article, How to Protect Your Privacy and Remove Data from Online Services, suggests a number of actions that you can take. I felt the following were simple and effective enough to use as a starting point:

Check your privacy settings in all of your apps and social media sites.
Remove old accounts.
Register with an alternate email address.
Set your browser to browse in private mode.

It can be overwhelming to think about all of the information you are sharing online and what to do about it. There are many benefits to being online so going “off grid” is not a feasible answer for most of us. However, you should do some research on unfamiliar apps and sites, err on the side of caution when sharing information or giving apps access to your personal data, and pause before you post anything online to think about if it really needs to be out there. Remember, just because an app or site is free, that does not mean that you aren’t paying for it one way or another.

Matteo, V. (2018, January 3). Facebook and Data Mining. TurboFuture. Available at: https://turbofuture.com/internet/How-Facebook-Collects-and-Sells-Your-Data [Accessed 2 Sep. 2019].

Howell, D. (2015, April 22) How to Protect Your Privacy and Remove Data from Online Services. TechRadar. Available at: https://www.techradar.com/news/internet/how-to-protect-your-privacy-and-remove-data-from-online-services-1291515 [Accessed 2 Sep. 2019]