Category Archives: learning

Minds on Fire

John Seely Brown is a pioneer in the realm of the computing, working as Chief Scientist for many years at Xerox PARC, which was the incubator of many of the most common place technologies we use today. JSB is also passionate about education and collaboration.

Recently, he co-wrote an article for EduCause, entitled Minds on Fire. (1.4MB PDF link!)

Below are a couple passages that got me excited. They’re more exciting in context, so I invite you to read the full article at JSB’s site, as linked above. (hyperlinks below are of my own insertion to help illustrate)

On Social Learning,

Compelling evidence for the importance of social interaction to learning comes from the landmark study by Richard J. Light, of the Harvard Graduate School of Education, of students’ college/ university experience. Light discovered that one of the strongest determinants of students’ success in higher education—more important than the details of their instructors’ teaching styles—was their ability to form or participate in small study groups. Students who studied in groups, even only once a week, were more engaged in their studies, were better prepared for class, and learned significantly more than students who worked on their own.

On collaborative, open to the world learning,

An example of how the power of participation can be harnessed within a single course comes from David Wiley at Utah State University. In the fall of 2004, Wiley taught a graduate seminar, “Understanding Online Interaction.” He describes what happened when his students were required to share their coursework publicly:

Because my goal as a teacher is to bring my students into full legitimate participation in the community of instructional technologists as quickly as possible, all student writing was done on public blogs. The writing students did in the first few weeks was interesting but average. In the fourth week, however, I posted a list of links to all the student blogs and mentioned the list on my own blog. I also encouraged the students to start reading one another’s writing. The difference in the writing that next week was startling. Each student wrote significantly more than they had previously. Each piece was more thoughtful. Students commented on each other’s writing and interlinked their pieces to show related or contradicting thoughts. Then one of the student assignments was commented on and linked to from a very prominent blogger. Many people read the student blogs and subscribed to some of them. When these outside comments showed up, indicating that the students really were plugging into the international community’s discourse, the quality of the writing improved again. The power of peer review had been brought to bear on the assignments.

This is why I’m working on designing and creating software and techniques to enable social interaction that encourages learning.

On Rothfork’s Review of Dreyfus’s On the Internet. (619)

I must admit, I almost didn’t make it through John Rothfork’s Review of Hubert Dreyfus’s On the Internet.

I almost didn’t read far enough to note that the reviewer didn’t agree with Dreyfus. My immediate reaction is that someone (Dreyfus) had not spent any time actually in any online communities, and used his place of piety to lob stones at it. It would be the digital equivalent of renouncing some newly found culture in the Amazonian rain forest, without ever having spent time within the society.

I decided that I should probably finish reading the review.

Once I had done that, I figured I should do some more research, seeing that this book was written in 2001, which is approximately 70 years ago in Internet time (yes, it’s kind of like dog years). I found Dr Dreyfus’s homepage at Berkeley, and firstly found this Los Angeles Times article about Dr. Dreyfus’s podcasts being of the 20 most popular downloads on Apple’s iTunesU podcast directory. The Times story was a wonderful read, and I recommend it highly. I, too, have listed to a few lectures from there.

One of the articles main points is that people around the world, from all walks of life want to learn. Online education gives them capabilities that have never before existed so broadly or freely. I thought it a bit ironic that Dr. Dreyfus, who still stands by his 2001 work, nevertheless moved to a classroom with audio equipment to improve the recordings, of his own volition. From the article…

Dreyfus says the chance to disseminate ideas softens his reservations. And the e-mails he receives from the listening audience—”you podcast people,” he calls them during class—are touching.

To conclude, I still think Dr. Dreyfus’s assessment of communities on the Internet is critically lacking. I believe (without a lot of hard evidence to back me up) there’s a significant chance that the (at the time) 71-year-old Dreyfus read some philosophy books on artificial intelligence, communities on the Internet, then sat down with very little first hand experience with quality communities on the Internet and wrote his luddite screed against learning on the internet. Ironic, since he sees about 25% of his in-person class missing each class he holds in person, in a large lecture hall. It seems his own model is broke, as well.

“I’m pretty honored to take the class, but at the same time, when he does his lectures, it’s not like I’m there with Dreyfus the man,” Diaz said, referring to the impersonal feeling of sitting in a large lecture hall.

Quality communities can absolutely exist online. To say they do not is simply misinformed. It’s hard to say exactly what Dreyfus said from reading a book review alone. Did he mean communities cannot thrive, or they cannot thrive to the extent that they can be effective enough to promote learning at an advanced level? The bigger question I feel is, “Can quality online communities form quickly enough to be an effective environment for a limited-duration online class?”

Howard’s First SMC Update

Howard has posted his first update on the Social Media Classroom project. Another nice overview of all the hard work we’re putting in.

More coming soon!

(In case you missed it, here was my latest update)

Michael Wesch’s Modern Teaching Techniques

My first introduction to Michael Wesch was through a video posted on YouTube entitled “The Machine is Us/ing Us.” I wasn’t the only person introduced to him that day. What started as a video discussing digital communications with his colleagues, was within a few short days the most talked about video on the Internet, and has now been viewed literally millions of times.

I didn’t realize until later that Michael was a college professor. One who was really rethinking his role as a teacher. Many of Professor Wesch’s ideas meld neatly with the andragogy that we investigate in our Adult as Learner course.

This October, I was reintroduced to Wesch through another video which was making the rounds on the Internet. “A Vision of Students Today” was video made by Wesch with his introductory anthropology seminar, engaging the participation of his students. All couple hundred or so of them. Clearly, this was no traditional lecture class.


After viewing this latest video through the lens of a graduate program in instructional design, I determined I needed to discover a little more about Professor Wesch. With a little digging, I discovered a guest blog post of his at a blog called Savage Minds. “A Brief Philosophy of ‘Anti-Teaching’” is Wesch’s description of the techniques he is auditioning on his students at Kansas State University.

He found himself teaching two and four hundred students at a time. The only tools he was given was the tradition of college lecturing. And much of his audience was only there because the course fulfilled requirements for graduation. Many didn’t not know what “Anthropology” even was before stepping into the classroom. Student motivation was clearly low, and participation seemingly oppressed by the logistics of an en-masse classroom environment. Anyone brave enough to ask a question, would also have to be brave enough to ask it in front of 399 of their neighbors.

Wesch wanted to convey information about anthropology, yes, but more so, he wanted to create “active, lifelong learners, with critical thinking skills.” Critical thinking requires asking great questions, and answering great questions with more great questions.

Unfortunately such great questions are rarely asked by students, especially in large mandatory introductory courses. Much more common are administrative questions such as, “What do we need to know for this test?” This may be the worst question of all. It reflects the fact that for many (students and teachers alike), education is a relatively meaningless game of grades rather than an important and meaningful exploration of the world in which we live and co-create. I don’t think it is the student’s fault for asking this question. As teachers we have created and continue to maintain an education system that inevitably produces this question. If we accept Dewey’s notion that people learn what they do, the lecture format which is the mainstay of teaching (especially in large introductory courses) teaches students to sit in neat rows and to respect, believe, and defer to authority (the teacher). Tests often measure little more than how well they can recite what they have been told.

Clearly, this format is losing college-aged students’ interests, just as we see that non-participatory formats don’t motivate adult learners. To motivate the students, we find Wesch establishing inclusion and enhancing meaning with his techniques, a la Wlodkowski’s Motivational Framework. [Source, Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn: A Comprehensive Guide for Teaching All Adults ( or Amazon link)]

But while the sheer numbers of students are a burden in one sense, there is also tremendous potential. Think of the knowledge and life experience that is in that single room, if only I could find a way to harness it! I wanted the students to be fully engaged, talking to one another, grappling with interesting questions, and exploring any and all resources to find answers (and more questions).

Wesch takes his position as “teacher” and converts it to a learning manager, aggregating information his class created and directing a product of their experience, the video “A Vision of Students Today”. He clearly takes what could be a bad situation, an enormous class with the potential loss of human connectivity, and made the best use of the situation. This inclusion makes all the difference.

Wesch cites Postman and Weingartner’s Teaching as a Subversive Activity (or Amazon link) as a major influence of his, and I now have that high on my own reading list. The authors make the argument that teachers should concentrate on the learning environment they create at least as much as the content, or message, they have set out to express.

The classroom is the means, not the ends, of the information that circulates within it. So teaching to the test is a good idea… when you realize the test isn’t multiple choice, it’s life.