Sunday, 15 April 2012

Final Thoughts CCK12

This course started off with confusion, as to what was expected, leading into an onslaught of information through posts and bookmarks.  I settled down through the middle of the course but was still unable to devote ample time to the demanding expectations and thus spiralling into a heap of staleness.  I did take immense learning from this course although on the sidelines for most of it.  I could make good use of a course on time management.  I think my biggest problem was not having confidence in myself or the content to actually participate within the circle of the network.  I would choose my spots adding comments only when I was confident in my answer.
I was very impressed with the overall structure and concept of an open on line course and think I may pursue others in the future, using the connected knowledge framework as a field to practise my communication skills. 

Thanks for a great 3 month experience!

Kaine.

Tuesday, 27 March 2012

Open Content cck12

Everyone likes free stuff.  But in open schooling, publishing and software is it really free?  Who pays for the overhead, the programers and the educators?

Some sites offer freeware with an option for a donation.  I believe I read a recent blog where out of 50,000 downloads not one person donated $2.  Sounds awfully cheap.  Personally, I have downloaded open programs and never donated either.  For it's not the small fee, rather it's the hassle and security of sending the donation over the internet.  Eventhough I purchase items online, through trusted companies, I feel uneasy about sending money to a small company.

Open education is the way of the future.  Think about the benefits it would bring to those who wanted an education but couldn't afford it.  If credit was given to open education courses, the big universities would have to change as well or they would crash and burn.  Through open courseware, the content is not static whereas; students can share stories, experiences through social networking.

Saturday, 10 March 2012

Complex Adaptive Systems CCK12

CAS are systems that are constantly changing and adapting to their environments.  The elements of these systems interact to form an unpredictable outcome.  The relationship and reaction between the individual agents are more important than that of the individual agents themselves.  Uncontrollable variables, internal or external factors, can effect the agents of the system to produce various outcomes.  Some examples:  Stock Markets, Human Emotions, The Brain, Weather.  In these examples, the agents act individually but when combined with other agents of the system, their contribution to the concept is essential.  CAS's are all around us, we are a part of some complex system.

I drive all day long and everyone knows who drives a vehicle change in road conditions, road hazards or unpredictable drivers, can change in seconds without warning.  The external factors are very unpredictable.  Driving, I assume is not a system but elements of the CAS exist within the activity.  So, would driving a vehicle be considered in some way a complex adaptive system?

Monday, 5 March 2012

Personal learning environments cck12

Ones own personal learning environment contain their  learning resources.  The resources may involve people, digital tools and  cognitive thinking.  Presenting your learning environment in a diagram gives you a visual picture of your own learning centre. 
  

Above is an example of my PLE.  It needs updating due to the cck12 course because of the introduction to new learning tools.  Regardless updated or not, this diagram shows very clearly the relationship I have within my personal learning environment.  These items contained in the diagram are essentially portals that enable me to learn through a vast array of sources.


Wednesday, 29 February 2012

Week: 5 Groups and Networks cck12

Before I started the weeks' readings on groups and networks, I tried to define each one to compare and find the differences.  They were exactly the same to me.  Each of the two require entities of a common interest.  Each are able to share ideas through connections.  Each allow the participants to connect to one another.  George states in his articulate presentation that these two terms "at the core are the same" So, are they?  If not then what is the difference?

After the weeks readings I have a better understanding.  Seeing Stephens' chart,http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephen_downes/252157734/sizes/l/in/photostream/, describing the properties of groups and networks, helped me quite a bit.

Groups are closed discussions, the topic is straight and narrow.  'Now let's stay focused or on track", would be a rule, so to speak, of a group.  Networks are an open concept where anything can happen.  No rules means perspectives and personalities play a big role.

Groups are usually defined in a distributed fashion by an authority eg: radio broadcast or a school classroom.  Networks define their logic and understanding through connections within the network.

Here's a thought, what about a family.  Two parents and siblings.  Are they not a network in which learning occurs through a connective process?  The parents are the authority and often the learning is  not open.  In the confines of a family, standards exist and distributed by the authority.  So is a family a group?  I suppose in some situations, democracy and negotiations can exist.  How would you define the family?