Connectivism and Connective Knowledge

Hi Frances,

That's interesting.

We have been using the competency based training for some time in Australia.  The issues and challenges include:

(a) competencies are dynamic - one could be competent today but it does not guarantee competency sometime in the near future.  So the concept of competency is sometimes viewed with scepticism even from the academia (even professors think the mere competency is not good enough, especially in higher education).  Also, competency framework may not fit into some areas such as religion, as well as certain disciplines in Higher Education.  So the emphasis has now shifted towards life based learning and life long learning in order to stay competent.

(b) the current debate on what is competency and how it is derived deserves a review on its basis - competencies are developed by industry, for industry.  But how about the learners, the educators and trainers, the community, the employers etc.  What do they think?  We need to see competencies from a broader perspective - and most importantly a learner's perspective as well.  Because learners are the focus of education and learning.  Learners should have more control over what, when, how, where and who they would like to learn with or from and achieve those competencies.  And the employers would also like to have a say on this because they are the ones who would employ and appraise their employees.

(c) from the learner's point of view - many teens and adults acquire learning through informal learning.  Some people argue that such informal learning are far richer and more valuable to formal learning.  And it could be true (subject to more qualification)!  Let's look at Bill Gates, Li Ka Shing who are great entreprenuers.  And they admitted that their best learning occurred when they are in the society, not in the institutions.  Informal learning, however, could also be complemented and enriched with formal learning throughout one's life.

(d) We often found that numerous informal learning does not fit into our formal learning frameworks and networks.  How are we going to map those informal learning into the formal qualification framework.  Quite a challenge.  Just like putting square pegs into round holes.  They may not match.  And so, people think about recognition.  But it is far from easy.... The learner needs to present the evidence in portfolio, or the assessors have to collect such evidence from the learners, or a combination of these..because we are trying to capture informal learning and re-format them into formal learning.  Again, we need to think about the value of such recognition to learners, from a learner's perspective.

(e) when it comes to network learning, informal and formal learning are coming from the neural, conceptual and social level for individuals, irrespective of the mode of learning.  It may all happen in the brain of the individual (learner) first, I suppose.  It could also be initiated by a stimulus to response to a problem at a social level, an immediate "threat" or an educational issue from community or society which calls for attention.  A hen and egg problem, which comes first?  But the society may think that the best solution to such problem or educational issue is to ask the experts first - and that's why we have educational reform proposals, proposals on teaching and learning theories. That's the way how education has been developed based on experience and a scientific approach throughout the past.

(f)  Under the existing education framework, the teachers will consider the teaching strategies and teaching/learning process first, because teachers are there to "teach" - our typical mindset.  This is because we have to fit into a curriculum, under the direction of Board of Studies, if the education and training and the qualification is to be validated within an educational institution. This is mandatory, not an option.  Agree? 

(g) But with a network learning approach, all stakeholders will be involved and engaged, and these will greatly affect the infrastructure of education and the way teaching or facilitation is carried out, how learning occurs and how it is recognised.  So the focus will be back to learning, both formal and informal, not only teaching.  And this could be a huge challenge to educators and learners!

So my next question may be: How could connectivism add value to education and training?  To you, and to your learners...though I know that there is a topic in later part of the course... or we will postpone the discussion if you want.  George and Stephen: what do you think?