Spare me the tirades, I’m here to learn
Perusing some of the discussion threads and blog posts on the CCK08 course I’m taking tonight I was met with a stark realisation that I’ve left a crucial element out of the description of my criteria for a personal learning network as well as the people in it: respect for others.
I made an attempt to look at some of the criticisms being leveled against the suggestion that Connectivism is a Learning Theory – and indeed the whole notion of Connectivism itself – and I am appalled by some of the attacks that are being passed off as “academic debate.” Healthy debate can inspire some valuable trains of thought, which in turn can motivate learners to support their opinions – or even realise conceptual holes – but this must be tempered by logic and objectivity and always respectful in nature. Some of the tirades I saw were anything but; and frankly I’m disgusted.
I want to make it clear at this point that I’ve yet to side either in favour or against the suggestion that Connectivism is a learning theory. What I’m interested in first is exploring the concept and underlying theories, discussing their implications and utility with others, and then perhaps eventually down the line coming to a logical, informed decision on where I stand. The end-all and be-all for me is to determine ways that the subject matter can support learning, and observing the different ways people use online tools and environments to support their own learning.
Trying to turn this very negative series of readings into something positive and relevant to the notion of the facilitation of online communities, this provides a valuable example of a really critical issue in online learning and interaction – the need for moderation. I’m not sure whether I’d go as far as saying intervention is necessary in some of the posts I read, but as a concept it warrants exploration.
In my experience, when I see an argument carried too far in a forum I’m immediately alienated and any sense of community cohesion quickly vanishes – often times taking with it my motivation for staying. I’ve left countless discussion groups because of this exact thing; and I suspect I’m not alone there. Group members who hurl verbal attacks and abuse are exceptionally self-centred people who exhibit a complete disregard for the values and wishes of others.
It’s also highlighted several factors about blogging that I highly value and cherish. Blogs are very personal spaces, where the blogger makes and enforces the rules; they need not suffer any conduct they don’t approve of.
Make no mistake though, I have no intention of abandoning this course because of a few bad apples – I find the subject matter too interesting and valuable to do otherwise. I’ve also had some wonderful discussions with people and expect this trend to continue. However I will think twice before returning to some of the centralised spaces again and will be highly selective about the blogs I read. With nearly 2,000 students in the course and a lot of existing literature there is no need to frequent areas where the values and conduct are out of phase with my own.
I’m here to learn, not to argue.
More than that though, my ultimate focus lay with the big picture: How to best and most effectively support the learning experience of others. As Alan Levine said (“I Swear! A Behaviorist Dog Ate My Homework!“):
“Why are people so doggedly tied to a theory? Is one theory fit all? I kind of see useful bits across the spectrum. But the bickering back and forth, the battle to quote the most obscure academic reference, is, well for me… uninteresting.
I care more about what we do with all this.
Glad to make your acquaintance Mike (thanks for stopping by my blog). I too have decided to focus on “how best and most effectively support the learning experience of others” (and myself).
Over the past few years I’ve read a lot of political blogs so I’m used to rantings and ravings, but I hadn’t experienced much of that from the “edublogosphere”. I agree the best way to get past the noise is to concentrate on developing one’s own PLN.
This morning I read all your CCK08 posts and found them very, very useful. I look forward to reading more.
Hi Jeannine,
Nice to meet you. I had a Twitter notification come through saying you added me as a contact and have responded in kind. Thanks for that
It’s great to see networks beginning to emerge amidst all the excitement, chaos, and debate this first week.
I’ve had similar experiences as you actually – my first blogging incarnation was as a political blogger. I managed to avoid flame wars during that period; largely, I suspect, because I tended to take a different tact. I’d rather let the facts do the arguing than the personalities. It seems much easier to emerge on the other end still on speaking terms that way.
Cheers,
Mike
[...] I (non-core) promise that this will be the last post on this topic. I really want to move on to talk about the neuro-psych and conceptual aspects of connectivism, rather than just the social. However I did want to write one more post reflecting on why the social aspect gets me so darn angry. So much so, that my good friend and colleague, the delightful Mr mbogle gets mad at me. [...]
I totally agree with your position you stated so clearly.
Well said Mike, though it’s possibly better to ignore the rants (written by people clearly with far too much time on their hands)rather than resort to censorship.
On a more positive note, I think your blog is great and I’ve just found you to follow on Twitter
Best wishes
Lisa
Hi Lisa,
I’ve been thinking a lot about this topic since writing the post and I must admit I’m beginning to agree with you. Personally I still disapprove of and have a problem with the use of harsh language, but that is just my opinion. Furthermore placing this in a Connectivism context, perspective depends on context; I may not agree with the situation, but that doesn’t make my view any more “true” than the ones leveling the criticism. This and the fact the course is distributed are perhaps the strongest arguments on why people should be allowed to speak their minds.
To quote a comment I left elsewhere:
Cheers,
Mike
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the detailed reply. I think what I’m suggesting could well be within the spirit of connectivism, it is just its flip side. What I mean is, if the group as a whole disapproves of the interventions of an individual, and hence ignores their posts even if they are deliberately provocative, then that person is denied the google juice and other benefits that we’ve been discussing on the course that occur in the interaction between course members and which add such value.
I’m not sure if the above makes sense, but it’s very early and I’ve not had my coffee yet
BW
Lisa
Hi Lisa,
Yes, that makes perfect sense; and I suspect that’s what people (such as Downes) mean when they say the network should manage itself.
I would hope that part of that management by the network would include helping people deal with (cope with, process) the provocation who may not have experienced it before because it’s a shame when people are driven away.
On a slightly different note, Downes’ post in the Daily this evening (“People versus Posts“) speaks volumes about the usage trends of the students.
I may stop my train of thought here because I feel a full blog post coming on!
Cheers,
Mike
Leave your response!
Additional comments powered by BackType
Subscription Options:
Recent Posts
Archives
Recent Comments
Categories
Me @ Other Sites
Tags
Most Commented
Meta
Shared under CC-BY
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Support Open Education
Switch to our mobile site
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia theme by Michael Hutagalung