Author: Katharine Merrell

What sets connectivism apart?

 In the maelstrom of seemingly unlimited learning theories, evaluating the defining characteristics of particular theories can help to determine the one most applicable to a given situation, or which have the broadest application to learning in general. As I considered the various readings on connectivism this week, one of the most striking assertions I saw was George Siemens’ statement that “In a networked world, the very manner of information that we acquire is worth exploring. The need to evaluate the worthiness of learning something is a meta-skill that is applied before learning itself begins.” (Siemens, 2005) In most previous learning models, increasing internally-held knowledge has typically been seen as the end goal of any learning activity. Connectivism counters that in today’s world, where people will encounter a never-ending progression of new situations and increased available knowledge, a lot of knowledge does not need to be internalized, merely accessible. The theory holds that being able to find relevant knowledge and ignore unhelpful input is likely to be a more useful skill set than memorizing new processes or facts that are likely to change frequently, or be pertinent only rarely. The theory doesn’t preclude the possibility that people can and will internalize certain learning that remains stable and germane to their life or work. It merely highlights the prevalence of tools that can store and retrieve facts that used to rely on individuals’ retaining them. Very few people remember a long list of phone numbers anymore. Instead, they usually have them programmed into phones and other devices. Simple cooking tasks like how to boil eggs, calculate measurement conversions, or substitute ingredients are quick and easy to find online, so many people look them up each time they need to do the task rather than devoting memory to the process.

In a workplace, last week’s procedures for a particular situation may have been updated as outside factors changed. In this case, remembering the older process too well may in fact interfere with using the new one correctly. Many organizations maintain an internal wiki or blog to store the most recent information. Users can check it to make sure they know the most current version. Learning then involves being able to find and correctly interpret the desired knowledge. Searchable email systems make that another viable system to disseminate information. When in doubt, a person can easily search for keywords about the topic, then use the time stamps to be sure they are using the correct version. In this case, a good subject line, and the ability to choose fruitful search keywords are far more important than memorizing new procedures. When seeking a novel solution to a problem, a good learner will pinpoint applicable information in the sea of facts and opinions available across a spectrum of fields that initially may or may not seem related to the subject at hand. With the assembled data, they can create a resolution for the current need and still remain ready to update anew when situation changes.  

Resources:

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved from: https://jotamac.typepad.com/jotamacs_weblog/files/Connectivism.pdf.

What’s Behind the Curtain?

My fourth grade teacher was a novel experience for me in a lot of ways. He was my first male teacher and my first teacher to assign long-term projects. He taught a group of us to play guitar after school. As a first-year teacher assembling a classroom library from whatever he had at home that was remotely suitable for elementary students, he introduced me to several series and characters that I would otherwise not have met that early. (Thank you, Mr. Haas, for my enduring love of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and Get Smart!) He helped our class write and compose two songs, and then record them in an actual studio. I presume that somewhere during that year, we covered the expected academic topics, as well, as we all seemed to be ready for fifth grade the following year.

But one of his most lasting impacts on my thought patterns was the unit we did on advertising. We looked at various strategies used for selling, including both what they looked like and why they worked. We were sent home to find examples of each and describe the components of the ads. I can’t say advertising doesn’t work on me, but I can say that I tend to notice and attempt to deconstruct its methods and goals more often than some folks I observe.  That unit was what caused a flash of recognition in me for Tristan Harris’ line, “what we don’t talk about is how the handful of people working at a handful of technology companies through their choices will steer what a billion people are thinking today.” (Harris, 2017) There are plenty of methods of advertising, and the internet is not the only outlet. It’s just one of the most potent and omnipresent. With a relatively small number of individuals at the helm and making many of the decisions about what we see, how we see it, and whose viewpoints get heard, it’s still a good idea to have some idea about how our experience on the internet is curated and shaped before we even encounter it.  As I investigated the question, I encountered a 2015 multi-part report from MIT Technology Review, entitled “Persuasive Technology.”  It was their May/June 2015 Business Report section. In an article entitled “Technology and Persuasion,” (Byrnes, 2015,) the researcher describes methods to keep people hooked on a particular game by recognizing behaviors that might mean they are getting bored and responding to those, or how a corporate wellness provider group uses data and game designers to maintain engagement from the workforce at a higher level than previously achieved. The researcher also cited an ad firm’s use of tracking data to better choose more effective advertising for individual users. Another article entitled, “New Technologies Persuade in Old Ways,” (Anders, 2015) specifically called out some of the strategies that have been used in some form to guide people’s behavior since time long before the internet was a consideration. Anders described these strategies as: “reciprocity, likeability, authority, scarcity, consistency, and social proof.”(Anders, 2015) If you think about those for a few minutes, you will readily see them at work all around you. Most of us would rather buy from or participate with a company that we see as friendly to us and/or our causes. We like to follow people’s feeds that may respond to us and boost our profile. We readily follow other users’ or experts’ advice and reviews on products and services, and items that sell out or advertise a limited number of opportunities are catering to our need for things that we see as limited.

If you’re interested in how companies may be programming you, take a look at one of these articles, or some of the others in the edition. They all seem to be short and easily digested. What did you learn, and how will it affect your outlook or behavior moving forward?

Anders, G. (2015, March 23). New technologies persuade in old ways. MIT Technology Review, Volume 110, No. 3. Retrieved from: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/535831/new-technologies-persuade-in-old-ways/?set=535816.  

Byrnes, N. (2015, March 23). Technology and persuasion. MIT Technology Review, Volume 110, No. 3. Retrieved from: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/535826/technology-and-persuasion/?set=535816.  

TED. (2017, July 28). How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds every day | Tristan Harris. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C74amJRp730.

Social Media as Community Organizing

I work in a small city of just under 30,000 people. In a lot of senses, it’s a bedroom community, as most people that live there commute to work in one of the much larger cities nearby. The city and residents pride themselves on a very strong sense of community, a vibrant downtown and excellent engagement in causes both local and global. As an example, within my workplace, we have nearly 300 active volunteers per year, which calculates out to an equivalent of approximately 1% of the city’s residents being active in the library, a rather impressive quantity, given that many other causes in town are also well-supported.

I have frequently observed the impact of social media on various causes and information-sharing in the city. I am aware of a minimum of three Facebook groups moderated by local citizens used to disseminate information, share opinions, publicize events, and elicit support for various causes. Various colleagues have joined them as an additional avenue to spread information about library offerings and have an eye on topics of local interest. I subscribe to one of the groups and can think of many times that I have seen its role in shaping public sentiment or garnering attendance for rallies, vigils, or City Council meetings.  It can be a dumping ground for people’s negative attitudes, complaints about traffic, bad manners, or local policies. However, it has also been used to get word out about local candidates and why they’re running, as well as campaign events for folks to learn more about them. I’ve seen organizers use it to get carpool arrangements started for more distant marches and rallies, and to share suggestions on how people can comment on upcoming legislation or potential City policies before they are voted on or enacted. Local hot topics include fracking, intergovernmental relations, and some of the local festivals. All of these have plenty of posts by people sharing their opinions with various levels of civility, and also give like-minded folks a place to hear about meetings or other gatherings where they can learn more about or further advance their causes.

We frequently think of social media being used to organize people that are geographically spread, and that is clearly a major impact it can have to unite people that may never meet. It’s interesting to see it also used to streamline communication for people that live in the same place and want to connect in person but may not know about their joint interests or local manifestations of those causes without the medium of these community stream-of-consciousness style conversations.

Spiders, the web, and me

Flowering plant with a spiderweb attached.

I am pretty phobic about spiders, so when I saw one hanging out (literally) in the shower tonight as I started to step in, it occurred to me that my uphill battle against spiders in the house has some parallels to my efforts to maintain decent barriers within my internet and social media usage. (I would say I’m slightly less paranoid about the internet tracking) First, autumn seems to be on its way, and the spiders are either moving in to the house, or just being more visible. We’ve dealt with a minimum of a dozen spiders in the last week. I think spiders are marvelous outside the house, which I consider to be their proper setting. I enjoy watching them scramble around in our garden space, eating pests and keeping their numbers in check. They have amazing physical characteristics and an ability to go almost anywhere. Various internet providers, online services, and social networks can also be extremely useful and have a similar, more metaphorical ability to be everywhere. I recognize that my house will never be spider-free, and my network interactions will never be surveillance-free.  On the other hand, I’m willing to go to some effort to minimize both spiders and data surrender. We try to minimize obvious cracks and food sources for arachnids in the house, and online, I pay attention to what information I’m willing to share and how I access various sites.

As I read through the various resources about what gets shared, stored, and tracked, I was edified to see that there wasn’t a ton of information that was entirely new to me. I use minimal profiles and background on my social media that I use for truly social purposes, like Facebook. For my more professional usage, I focus on more narrow, work-oriented background and contacts. I use multiple email addresses, including an essentially throw-away option for signing up for online services and the occasional online purchase, which I also try to minimize. I started using DuckDuckGo as my search engine a few years ago, and prefer the interface and results lists to Google. I clear history and cookies with some regularity, and the fact that my job as a librarian has me using multiple different computers in the course of a day or week, and searching for a wide variety of topics and products well outside my actual interests feels like a bit of extra camouflage as well.  

There are certainly levels of privacy protection that I’m not ready to tackle yet and don’t really feel a need to utilize. I’ve been tempted to play with Tor browsing on occasion, but I am not really interested in the attention that can also arise from that usage or that of some of the more anonymous email providers. I’m also not ready to go to a progression of burner phones or drop boxes that start to feel more like I’m playing a role in a spy thriller than managing communication. Since so many industries and jobs expect some form of an internet presence, I’d rather manage and curate one that sends a message I want rather than be completely invisible to potential colleagues and employers.