Your new post is loading...
|
Scooped by Ana Cristina Pratas |
Scoop.it!
Ana Cristina Pratas's insight:
“The future you imagine is probably here now!” So says Steve Wheeler, learning futurist. Steve is Associate Professor at the UK’s Plymouth University, one of Britain’s largest, where online learning is not a fashion—it is a way of life. “New pedagogies are needed to align with the reality that our future visions are rapidly becoming our present” asserts Steve. “Our old ways of thinking will only make the brokenness of education and learning worse. We have to change, and change fast.”
"The implications are massive," says Steve. Like many futurists and learning theoreticians he believes hierarchies are dying. “We have exhausted and moved on from taxonomies. The bottom-up folksonomy has been explored, and we are now entering the rhizonomy, the un-organization (of which MOOCs are an example), chaotic, non-rule-based learning that happens regardless of organization.”
an interesting read indeed.
e.g. the development of voice/gesture interfaces, is not driven by, nor drive the take up of participatory, social, community learning mode. They just happen to coincide with one another. I don't even think gesture interface can promote/encourage participatory/social/community learning mode. The use of keyboard can be sufficient to allow all of that. Of course there is some specific scenario, if “participatory” is understood as being immersive, and 3D holographic come into the picture, then we probably can't interact efficiently if we still use keyboard and mouse, thus gesture interface is needed. But the existence of such specific cases can’t justify generalization of the correlation.
I’m not sure about machine generated content, if it’s the automated curation that another human prepared (e.g. we subscribed to feed and classify them, or some algorithm somewhere silently look at what we read, and based on that pull what it thinks relevant to us and feed us), I would not label any of those as “machine generated”, we can say “machine curated” if we wish. The role of the machine simply as a matchmaker between a consumer (human) with the product (produced by other human), the machine enabled the consumption processes in the scale that is beyond our imagination before, but not actually generate it. there could be more spectacular examples of machine automating some or all processes to serve information to our plates.
So I agree with each of the trends independently, but not sure about putting them together as if they have correlation; however, there is a possibility (of course) to take advantage of the new development in technology and apply it in both old and new approach to learning then come up with a niche interesting innovation. But I think that the old pedagogies won't be going anywhere, although it can mutate into lots of niche variations.
Impact to teacher education: If we jump both feet to the “new pedagogy” and neglect to properly get our heads around the old as much as the new, we might disadvantage our students, as we know that "no one size fits all", not even the so called new pedagogies. IMHO pedagogy is interesting, where we can combine the ancient with the recent.
New pedagogies are needed to align with the reality that our future visions are rapidly becoming our present” asserts Steve. “Our old ways of thinking will only make the brokenness of education and learning worse. We have to change, and change fast.”