I was recently reading the most recent issue of the International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (IRRODL), only partially because an article I co-authored is in it, and was intrigued by the following. To see the article on IRRODL, click the title. Otherwise, I have included it below in this post.
- Ihanainen, Pekka, & John Moravec. “Pointillist, cyclical, and overlapping: Multidimensional facets of time in online education.” The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning [Online], 12.7 (2011): 27-39. Web. 27 Nov. 2011
I appreciated the presentation of online education as a shift in the paradigm of education, that is from a “linear, sequential time conception” to online and physical education (equated with contemporary education) that stresses, or at least allows for a non-linear approach to interaction and learning. Ihanainen and Moravec present the notion of learning events in contemporary education as having these elements:
- pointilist:discontinuous, separate acts that participants can return to
- cyclical: illustrated by clusters of events in which intensive interactions occur for a period of time, and then cyclically reemerge as bursts of activity in the same or different forums after a certain amount of time has passed
- overlapping: the two above being not mutually exclusive sometimes overlap
Online education allows for these three quite readily and therefore diverges from “temponormative” pedagogy, that linear, Cartesian line of thinking that we are all familiar with (if you remember what was life was like before the Internet). Seeing online education as divergent from linear education (traditional education) is quite helpful in making the larger argument that pedagogies for modern education need to reflect that divergence. The pointilist, cyclical, and overlapping types serve to answer the question “but how is it divergent?”. I fully support these distinctions for learning activities in regards to time and am curious what, if any, optimal balance exists for online learning. That is not really the point of the article, but it has me thinking in those terms.
Pointlist Acts
If we establish that pointlist acts, discrete and separate, add value, especially in conjunction with cyclical events, which are also value adds, then does it seem logical to begin to classify online activities in any particular course or program as one of these three and use these classifications to begin to visualize time as an active agent in organizing learning? Can we, for example, graph a ‘return’ to any one learning act (pointilist?), monitor the number of these ‘returns’, and determine impact accordingly? Further, if the nature of cyclical learning is communicative (dialogue) and that underpins the concepts of constructivism, connectivism to some degree, etc. might we use this other facets (overlapping and pointilist) to ‘balance’ a preponderance towards dialogue based learning? I should probably use the author’s own words rather than just subject you to a stream of consciousness question and answer session with my own mind.
A pointillist activity requires the learner to have spatial and temporal independence in the different contexts of (virtual) responses and events. This capacity also creates sensitivity to hectic communication processes and fragmented content items. Within these situations of cognitive uncertainty and obscurity, the question of emotional certainty and trust emerges for the learner. Pointillist learning is, on one hand, learning in separatenesses (separate interactions and content items), and, on the other hand, it is emergent, forming a gestalt of separatenesses based on the learner’s personal interests. Pointillist learning is also tacit, but can acutely and situationally become explicit, only to change again into a tacit form. The pointillist emergent gestalt has both an unexpected and intuitive character: It takes place on its own. Pointillist learning pays attention to culture and activity, and Twitter emerges as a powerful example of this. The attention space or horizon maintains the individual’s attunement to learning, producing her own reciprocal or separate awarenesses. Learning is facilitated by this state of attunement and the attention-producing activity.
Linking this description to a tangible example (Twitter) was helpful so many thanks to the authors. Since pointilist learning emphasizes serendipity (again, Twitter works here) and seems independent in nature (based on the learner’s personal interests rather than a linear curriculum), I see this as a good attachment to lifelong learning, or however one wants to classify empowered learning outside of formal structures. Since it cannot be taught (and is a de-pedagogy-the de, re, and en pedagogical structures could have been a paper in itself), it can only be facilitated, supported (through tool or network creation). Still greatly intriguing to imagine and monitor.
En-pedagogy: Mashups and MOOCs
I am intrigued by the notion put forth in the paper of en-pedagogic examples of MOOCs and mashups as appropriations for creative effect, especially this new (to me) concept of chaordic learning.
Chaordic learning is an en-pedagogy, attending to the chaordic systems of overlapping cyclical, pointillist, and temponormative learning. Chaordic environments balance chaos (elements that cannot be controlled) and order (such as temponormative pedagogies) within a system (Amidon, 2003), and “mold chaos and order for their design serendipities” (Harkins & Moravec, 2011, p. 132). Examples of chaordic learning include videoconferencing with remote experts (pointillist) to overlap a series of lectures (temponormative) or mashups of learning environments with ambient computing. The learning facilitator, however, needs to focus on the interaction between the various elements because they can lead to learning outcomes that may deviate from what he or she formerly planned.
A chaordic approach can maximize the horizontality of relationships between facilitators and learners and engage all actors in the construction of new knowledge. As Moravec (2006) postulates, intelligent applications of information and communication technologies may be best leveraged to facilitate such chaordic learning. As artificial intelligence technologies improve, we can expect the ecology of chaordic learning options to expand and diversify. We believe massive open online courses (MOOCs), originally organized by Steven Downes and George Siemens (Downes, 2008; Mackness, 2010), are examples of en-pedagogy.
Besides being a lovely phrase, “mold chaos and order for their design serendipities” actually is the ethos of learning design when faced with non-linear elements. Establishing limited authoritative control (almost none), allowing a rhizomic exploration of learning as dictated by the learner (as opposed to the instructor) while still adhering to a temponormative pedagy (order). A good exploration of the role of chaos in learning, incidentally, and therefore well suited to the MOOC approach. Using chaos towards pedagogical effect, maximizing serendipity through design (however loose).
This is an article I will need to revisit a few dozen times to extrapolate the full impact. However, I am intrigued enough to want to try and apply this in the next MOOC I participate or administer. Also curious to see how these time based elements of non-linearity affect spatial perceptions of online learning. I (and some of my colleagues) am convinced that space becomes differently important, not less so, in online education and I think exploring how time itself effects this orientation might be a good application of some of these principles. Well done. Certainly considerable food for thought.
Interesting pick-ups for discussion, Michael. Thanks. I will get back later when have better time … be tuned. Pekka I.
Good article @peeii. Still thinking about it and perhaps combining these time based en-re-de-pedagogies with a spatial framework as well. Multi-faceted time activities + multi-faceted spatial or even geographical ones. Simultaneity of place + time. Intersections of time and place would explain much more convincingly network based learning activity. I will blog more on your article as it has me thinking quite a bit. Good work.
Hi Michael,today on Wednesday 7th (after Independence day celebrations of Finland) I had time to pause for responding your important questions. This is more thinking aloud (in finglish) than argued commenting. Hope you can follow my reflections.>”…am curious what, if any, optimal balance exists for online learning.”As a pedagog it is temping to ask for optimal balance of pointillist, cyclical and overlapping diversities, but I still think it is not the right question. It is important to try to explicate more pointillist, cyclical and overlapping time construed learning (and pedagogical) activities and acts, and I guess that is the direction to which put effort.For me it now is a challenge just to try to describe what pointillist, cyclical and overlapping mean in practice. And I´m in the beginning of doing it. I appreciate all kinds of discussions (like this) to make features (structures, learning activities, pedagogical interventions etc.) of de-, re- and en-pedagogy more visible. I started this endeavor by making mind maps of individualization (~de-), personalization (~re-) and cyborgization (~en-). Drafts in spicynodes (see, http://www.spicynodes.org/a/d285337fce3bf40fc3502babfb05557d , http://www.spicynodes.org/a/358e1b7e570970b1dd383acf92765853 , http://www.spicynodes.org/a/13b64c345ca7912da07bd38b1db3a48d ).So, I believe that there is no ´optimal balance´, but only the interplay of trusting in learning as such, organizing of and participating in interactive forums and, everyday use of all kinds of/reasonable ICT. The key question seems to be a dynamics of the interplay of pointillist, cyclical and overlapping (and temponormative)? Any suggestions for views of that?>”does it seem logical to begin to classify online activities in any particular course or program as one of these three and use these classifications …”On the basis of above said I think that instead of classifying courses and programs it would be better to try to perceive (develop perceiving, realizing) the authentic roles of pointillist, cyclical and overlapping acts/activities in unique ongoing and discontinuous settings included in and tangented to certain courses/programs. In general my opinion is that re-pedagogy (cyclical time/learning) is the most essential activity from goal-oriented pedagogical point of view and de- and en-pedagogies only have to be accepted and encouraged as existing realms for modern learning. What do you think?
Terribly sorry for not responding sooner, but many many thanks for the reply. If I read your comment correctly in terms of optimal balance of activities, you are saying it isn’t balance that is the issue, but rather increasing the number of each. That makes sense. As an idea at the beginning stages, it will be interesting to test some of these in critical practice. You mention:”no ´optimal balance´, but only the interplay of trusting in learning as such, organizing of and participating in interactive forums and, everyday use of all kinds of/reasonable ICT. The key question seems to be a dynamics of the interplay of pointillist, cyclical and overlapping (and temponormative)? Any suggestions for views of that?”Trust in learning is an important concept, for sure, and it will be critical (and I applaud your work for attempting this) to understand learning not as highly delineated activity, but overlapping activity that intermixes with pointilist and cyclical. None are exclusive of the other and all will conceivably overlap (if not in activity, then in knowledge accrued from activity). I see these working well with the mix of informal and formal learning that most learners engage in these days. It is important to account for the informal parts and I believe that these distinctions attempt that (or can be used to work with informal learning as well). So we need a learning framework that accounts for the whole spectrum of learner engagement with the object of their learning, whether it be formal and informal. Your theory goes a long way in accounting for that at least in regards to time. I am glad you mentioned authenticity as well (and that is why I was originally drawn to en-pedagogy) as learning occurs in unique/discontinuous, and often indecipherable ways if observed by anyone but the learner themselves. The context in which we learn can be as idiosyncratic as the individual learner (the millions of combinations of space, time, perception, motivation, and environmental variables). Authenticity is in the eye of the beholder. The role of formal education in this context might not be to try to replicate authentic contexts, but rather create cultures of experimentation, where the learner is encouraged to create context and intermix learning variables as if they were an architect. Build, destroy, remix, engage. This authentic learning would occur, I am assuming, mostly outside formal education. That is where I believe your de- and en-pedagogies would be most useful. Trying to understand that framework of often non-linear, skewed, personalized learning that occurs in empowered informal learning. Any more papers you might be working on? Sorry again for the late response.
Tnx , and it´s quite normal that things take their time :). Yup, no balance but increasing the number and efforts to understand new (already existing) stances and manifestations of pointillist etc. as well.The role of formal in this context is really an important case and you raised thoughts I´ve to ponder more carefully. In believe I´ve started reflecting this question when trying to figure out the mediating zone between formal and informal. In my first draft (in finnish) I threw three characteristics for this zone; it is – pointillist-cyclical-overlapping(-temponormative) time-place,- one and single physical-virtual-social place,- human (and humane) orientation and attuning space.I´ll get back later … and btw: John promised to respond to chaordic and en-pedagogy stuff “soon” (probably on Xmas night 🙂 ). More papers … in finnish, yes, and planned some new in english, too. I´d especially like to open my views about individualization, personalization and cyborgization – next spring, maybe.
Hi again and let´s keep the year 2012 running productively. Here is some further ponderings of a mediating zone between formal and informal.1. Pointillist-cyclical-overlapping(-temponormative) time-placeThis kind of understanding of pointillist etc. time-place means that we are simultaneously present in all of them, and the point is to experience and see them in everyday life. This is to say that one feels comfortable and peaceful being in dots, cycles, pulses and temponormative continuums of life and learning, and in dynamics they consist.2. Physical-virtual-social placeIt exits everywhere (reached by internet connections and mentally even there where connections are missing). I.e. every place is physical-virtual-social, there are no separate physical and virtual venues. These places can be kept informal, but when they are given the meaning of learning place, then they become as a mediating zone of informal and formal. The learning place status means for me that all places are permitted to have goal-oriented standing although it can be occasionally and individually unconscious.Second description for physical-virtual-social mediating zone can be found in MOOCs. The open participation of people in them is visible only online, but – as said in your IRRODL article – in practice people are f2f connected as well. Multifaceted and imaginative MOOCs made possible (by pedagogs?) could really be sensible constructions for the pedagogical zones.The third image of the zone could be imagined in studios located in physical places. The studios would be places, in which people (children, young, adults, employed, unemployed, entrepreneurs, freelancers etc.) can ask, share, interact, produce … what ever. Studios would have sufficient facilities for activities, they could be both private and public, one can learn in them for her own fun or for exams, hired teacher work in studios as hosts or the like. Studios can be found from shopping centers, sports arenas, culture palaces, and wildly like boutiques on merchants’ alleys. Internet cafes might already be that kind of studios or they could get new power from “studiosity”?3. Human (and humane) orientation and attuning placeI believe an attunement is the issue here. It means (for me) individual and shared atmosphere or attunement, which can be characterized by equality, respect, valuation, attention of all, listening and response and commitment as persons. In attunement shared, communal and being in contact are essential, not authority, memorizing or (support of) construction.In the said attunement also attuning to cyborgic affordances is important. I mean by “cyborgic” the fact that we already are ICT-connected people, we are part of augmented reality and augmented (distributed ) body. Cyborgic affordances are everything, which are not only physical or virtual and which are always social. This cyborgic attunement is something about which we are becoming more and more aware – gradually :).
“One feels comfortable and peaceful being in dots, cycles, pulses, and temponormative continuums of life and learning.” Great, articulate response. I like this addition as it places the individual as inherently comfortable with a simultaneity of experience, of purpose, of existence. Now, it is up to us as academics to under the dynamics behind this natural purpose of simultaneity and reflect that accordingly in our learning activities. It humanizes complexity, this quote of yours. Great work. #2: Physical, virtual, social space. “It exits everywhere (reached by internet connections and mentally even there where connections are missing). I.e. every place is physical-virtual-social, there are no separate physical and virtual venues. These places can be kept informal, but when they are given the meaning of learning place, then they become as a mediating zone of informal and formal. The learning place status means for me that all places are permitted to have goal-oriented standing although it can be occasionally and individually unconscious.”Yes, the studio and MOOC might work here as it allows for the blend between virtual and physical. I might work with a colleague in an office and then participate in an online forum/course simultaneously. The stress is on learning space as mediation zone (the studio) as opposed to concrete directional, linear progression of activities. I like this notion of allowing for goal-orienting standing (perfectly acceptable in formal environments) even if these goal-orientations are unconscious (learning for learning’s sake?). This could work as a dynamic construct. For example, my motivation for learning might be highly explicit and conscious (formal education? degree? social betterment, etc.) and highly idiosyncratic/unconscious/oblique at the same time, unknown even to me. Just pushing along because there is a tinge of hope that something is out there to comprehend, something that will augment me. I do this by pushing in various times/places simultaneously (much like an amoeba/rhizome), pushing and pulling across various points/overlaps all at the same time. This point (and many thanks for clarifying) helped me to see the scope of your pedagogical approach here. An attempt to capture dynamic learning complexity as a natural, organic process (humans are predisposed to complexity; doing multiple things simultaneously). Actions, even seemingly contradictory actions, occurring simultaneously. Great work here. #3: . Human (and humane) orientation and attuning place”I believe an attunement is the issue here. It means (for me) individual and shared atmosphere or attunement, which can be characterized by equality, respect, valuation, attention of all, listening and response and commitment as persons. In attunement shared, communal and being in contact are essential, not authority, memorizing or (support of) construction.”Interesting and good that you mentioned cyborg mechanisms here as all of this is certainly mediated by ICT. Hard to separate the ‘place’ without the technological support structure allowing for that ‘place’. Attunement is a good idea here, attuning rather than concretely knowing. Working with others towards common understanding and orientation, group dynamics as opposed to authoritative structures. A salon as opposed to a lecture hall (pardon the bad metaphors there). We just need to be hyper-sensitive to the factors embedded within the systems themselves (the cyborg bits you mentioned) that alter collective attunement. How design of a system is politics and authority personified. I am personally interested in mobile learning that facilitates community as opposed to proscribes activity or behavior (concrete learning activities). I want to account for group dynamics (and opportunities for attunement), allow for simultaneity of learning pursuits (pointilist, etc.) and let the social dynamic be self-regulating and defining. That is where I think mobile shines, in this simultaneous place of learning behavior. I absolutely love this conversation and hope to continue it. Any events scheduled for 2012 in terms of conferences, etc.?
>Any events scheduled for 2012 in terms of conferences, etc.?Not fixed any (do you´ve suggestions for good ones?), except half private workshop/holiday with John and some other colleagues in La Gomera/Canary Islands on 9th -17th of March. Want to join us?And yup, we will continue this chatting, absolutely – tnx for your response.
Terribly kind of you for the invite, but heading to the US for all of March (I currently live in Seoul) for work and visits to family. As for as 2012 is concerned, I honestly haven’t been paying too close attention to events as I am sort of grounded this year after a busy year last year. Let me ask some colleagues as they tend to run a much busier conference attendance schedule than I do. More to follow!
“An attempt to capture dynamic learning complexity as a natural, organic process (humans are predisposed to complexity; doing multiple things simultaneously). Actions, even seemingly contradictory actions, occurring simultaneously.”Hey thanks again, it is so nice that when you put it in your words it gives some new views for me, great! (the power of dialogue!) I first formulated an aphorism: ´complexity of simultaneity lives in coexistence of intricacies” (not sure if any sense 🙂 ).We´ve been spoken about simultaneity of times and places in life in general and especially in learning and pedagogy. Now I´m thinking over if it is possible to speak about pedagogy of simultaneity (PoS)? When reflecting this further would PoS mean 1) trust in learning and interaction that produces it even though you don´t see/understand it to happen (de-pedagogy?), 2) presence as equal human beings (personal/emotional, cognitive/in terms of content, active/functional presence) (re-pedagogy), 3) cyborgic attunement (routine capability to use (social) technology) (en-pedagogy). And when going forward, could PoS actually stand for a pedagogy of serendipities? If I look backwards to my own learning history and “pedagogical events” happened, it clearly seems that all the remarkable ones are serendipitous. And when I think of myself as a teacher educator, all successful settings (assessed by emotional intelligence/intuitively) have taken place serendipitously inside or outside of “the planned instructional pace” or when I´ve had courage to go according to immediate authentic process. So, is the next challenge to figure out more the pedagogy of simultaneity in serendipities/serendipity in simultaneities?”I am personally interested in mobile learning that facilitates community as opposed to proscribes activity or behavior (concrete learning activities). I want to account for group dynamics (and opportunities for attunement), allow for simultaneity of learning pursuits (pointilist, etc.) and let the social dynamic be self-regulating and defining. That is where I think mobile shines, in this simultaneous place of learning behavior.”Yes, the mobile is the key, but I´m not sure if we should talk about “something mobile” any more. Nowadays (in digitally connected world) all learning is mobile (has it actually always been when examined from an informal point of view?) – i.e. smartphones, tablets, laptops (who is still using PC 🙂 ). The immersive learning has become visible by immersive (mobile) technology. And because of mobility the learning takes place in those pointillist and cyclical etc. spaces, we´ve spoken. Ok, to be honest, it is wise to develop mobile learning and pedagogy contrasted with industrial stagnant (still existent) education :). Group dynamics and self-regulation and definition of it/them … in pedagogy of simultaneity in serendipities … I´ve to continue mulling. Once again thanks a lot of triggers for creative and innovative thinking!
“An attempt to capture dynamic learning complexity as a natural, organic process (humans are predisposed to complexity; doing multiple things simultaneously). Actions, even seemingly contradictory actions, occurring simultaneously.”´complexity of simultaneity lives in coexistence of intricacies” –I like it! Coexistence is really important here as yes, simultaneity requires things happening at the same time and those things might be contradictory. Coexistence implies a natural state of complexity, of being compatible with that state. I think this poses a unique view for the modern learner. Dealing with that contradiction and simultaneity and opting for coexistence. Sounds like an ideal paradigm for learning. With all that interaction some learning and innovative thought is bound to happen. Let me break apart your next comments on PoS into parts so it is more manageable, but I wanted to say first that I think a pedagogy of simultaneity is something I would love to explore with you more. “1) trust in learning and interaction that produces it even though you don´t see/understand it to happen (de-pedagogy?)”Yes, a trust in pedagogically fertile scenarios even when complex thought processes have yet to be seen or understood fully. Searching for the optimal environment and then trusting in its transformative effects (even if it seems contradictory on glance). “2) presence as equal human beings (personal/emotional, cognitive/in terms of content, active/functional presence) (re-pedagogy),”Absolutely, presence is a big factor here. To be present (intellectually, emotionally, socially, functionally), to actively look for opportunities to be present in complex, challenging environments, there is some pedagogy there for sure. To view learning as process and this first step is trust (in the transformative effects of simultaneity and complexity) and the second step is presence (just jumping right into the madness!). I think presence is particularly important here when dealing with simultaneity, present in multiple viewpoints/activity structures at the same time, even if those produce contradictory results. 3) cyborgic attunement (routine capability to use (social) technology) (en-pedagogy). And when going forward, could PoS actually stand for a pedagogy of serendipities? If I look backwards to my own learning history and “pedagogical events” happened, it clearly seems that all the remarkable ones are serendipitous. And when I think of myself as a teacher educator, all successful settings (assessed by emotional intelligence/intuitively) have taken place serendipitously inside or outside of “the planned instructional pace” or when I´ve had courage to go according to immediate authentic process. So, is the next challenge to figure out more the pedagogy of simultaneity in serendipities/serendipity in simultaneities?”This is really well written and good for thought. I love the line “when I’ve had the courage to go according to immediate authentic process”. Absolutely, and this speaks a bit to the presence part. To know this complex scenario will transform me, to trust in this transformation and be present in it, and then to allow it to carry me towards authenticity. This all makes perfect sense to me (and it helped clarify my thoughts as well). I do believe this is really the essence of modern learning, this repositioning of self in complex learning scenarios full of divergence and complexity. Trust in yourself, trust in your learning environments (once they are optimally tuned), and then trust in your compass (a call for serendipity). This process is learning defined. “Yes, the mobile is the key, but I´m not sure if we should talk about “something mobile” any more. Nowadays (in digitally connected world) all learning is mobile (has it actually always been when examined from an informal point of view?) – i.e. smartphones, tablets, laptops (who is still using PC 🙂 ). The immersive learning has become visible by immersive (mobile) technology. And because of mobility the learning takes place in those pointillist and cyclical etc. spaces, we´ve spoken. Ok, to be honest, it is wise to develop mobile learning and pedagogy contrasted with industrial stagnant (still existent) education :). “Agreed, mobile is fast losing impact as a defining principle precisely because it is so ubiquitous, but it certainly helps to counter it against an old, industrial model of education. This is a great exchange; hopefully, we can continue to flesh this out more.
> Group dynamics and self-regulation and definition of it/them … in pedagogy of simultaneity in serendipities … I´ve to continue mulling.Hi, created something for trying to understand group dynamics. Lets´s see the figure in Flickrhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/peeii/6679644077/in/photostreamand the explicating words:1) Authenticity …- gatherings of people have diverse uniqueness. You can imagine your workplaces, expert circles, hobby folks etc. – see one suggestion to examine this http://peeii.edublogs.org/2010/08/24/verkoston-pauloissa-dived-in-networks/2) Attunements …- I can be attuned to pick up e.g. pointillist acts or only linear performances, behaviors of individuals or a whole setting etc.- here I flag for Shotter´s responsiveness, http://pubpages.unh.edu/~jds/3) Social affordances …- for instance approachability, attractiveness, usefulness, effectiveness of the social setting,- social affordance understood from gibsonian perspective.4) Reciprocally interdependent- for example attractiveness is potentially present in social settings, but its realization is dependent on individual attunement(s), which reciprocally can empower the existence of attractiveness etc.5) Emergence …- well, we all know and feel it personally in social dynamics – and can tell stories about it :).
The emergence of growth, process, etc. is immediately channeled back into the social dynamic where it is tested for validity and adjusted as needed. It also affects the social dynamic as well, if it proves to be valid. Emergence is produced by, transformed by, and transforms the social dynamic.- from your Flickr diagram.This is great stuff and we definitely need to draw this into a Wiki document where we can explore a bit more. 1) Authenticity – see one suggestion to examine this http://peeii.edublogs.org/2010/08/24/verkoston-pauloissa-dived-in-networks/This diagram works as it demonstrates the transformation of the individual and the transformation of the group. Authenticity in terms of pragmatics (actually doing something that has meaning) and in terms of social cohesion (feeling like I am part of a team). One is the engine and one is the glue that holds the engine together. 2) Attunements …- I can be attuned to pick up e.g. pointillist acts or only linear performances, behaviors of individuals or a whole setting etc.- here I flag for Shotter´s responsiveness, http://pubpages.unh.edu/~jds/Very good and in this attunement I think we see the emergence of a tangible learning outcome of discernment/problem solving/literacy (whatever we want to call it). Attuning your learning radar to pick up instances or challenges to a particular learning activity and adjust accordingly. This attunement is very important for complexity as we will be juggling multiple activities simultaneously. By attuning we reorient ourselves towards a different learning/social dynamic and extract evidence/proof/data as needed. A balancing act, for sure, but a very important one for learning and pedagogy as we try and augment our existing capacity for learning in very complex scenarios. 3) Social affordances …- for instance approachability, attractiveness, usefulness, effectiveness of the social setting,- social affordance understood from gibsonian perspective.This is the glue (a clumsy metaphor) of the engine, this social attractiveness and usefulness. It must have emotional properties (positive ones), it must be self-generating and self-organizing, and it must have practical purpose (even if the purpose is to provide emotional support and encouragement for its members). Emotional context will, however, change dramatically as the individual attunes themselves to another learning dynamic. 4) Reciprocally interdependent- for example attractiveness is potentially present in social settings, but its realization is dependent on individual attunement(s), which reciprocally can empower the existence of attractiveness etc.Absolutely. Constantly cycling through the actors in this learning scenario. A complex, yet consistent, interdependence. 5) Emergence …- well, we all know and feel it personally in social dynamics – and can tell stories about it :).I think this collaboration is some evidence for emergence! Happened completely by chance and serendipity (as we were attuned to the topic under discussion). Let’s take this discussion to a Google Doc!
[…] discussion led to me tweeting a few things about it and a blog post and then a collaboration which has since found its way to email and Google Drive/Docs and a few […]
[…] that creates a bridge between the “Pointillist” article and the online collaborative document: “Response to ‘Pointillist, cyclical, and overlapping: Multidimensional facets on time in online … posted by Michael Sean Gallagher on November 27, 2011. To read Gallagher’s response and the […]