I find this table a little unsettling, and I think the reason why has to do with artificial divides.
It’s part of what looks like an interesting presentation by Bonnie Stewart – and I know I am probably taking it out of context – but I’m going to assume the “academic” vs “networked” are kind of akin to “classroom” vs “social media/how Will Richardson’s son learnt Minecraft”.
Dividing like this is great to show the differences and the extremes of the spectrum, but by focusing on the differences there is a danger we ignore how similar many of the practices are or can be. The black & white either-or ignores the grey both-and. And with that quickly comes a polarising “for” or “against” set of arguments.
Source: Ediblegeography
For example, some of the more blurred, messier bits might be
- Product vs Process – Academic can be product and process. Draft, critique, redraft. See e.g. Ron Berger.
- Mastery vs Participation – again, networked learning can be all about mastery and participation. Gamers, for example, do both with prowess.
And plagiarism (grumble, grumble) is not legitimate in either context surely?
None of this is to say we shouldn’t be aware of the differences, just that I think we should remember the spectrum of similarities in-between is both larger and naturally a little fuzzier.
Source: Moosicorn @ Flickr
I see this ‘divide’ as more about how we *approach* the learning rather than how we organise ourselves or label the learning.
Forget the title of ‘academic learning’ or ‘networked learning’ and just look at the terminology used … “authority in role vs authority in reputation” – this means to me that ‘authority’ comes from showing experience, maturity, research, action, etc. is more important than whether the authority is from corporate hierarchical system or not – I will always take reputation as an indicator over a perceived or self-appointed
Using the final context as an example “audience = teacher vs audience = world” strikes a very real balance between an archaic Victorian ‘lecture’ approach to learning or a collaborative, engaged, and inclusive learning process.
I see no artificial divide in the slide or the work, I just see what I want to see which is inclusion, collaboration, engagement, excitement, forward-thinking and enthusiastic learning taking place wherever and whenever the learner wants it.
All the best, David
OK. Would you say that Khan Academy, for example, is archaic Victorian lecture approach delivered on modern tools or collaborative and engaged?
@piersyoung thanks – have left reply @wellylearning @catherinecronin @bonstewart
YouTube offers the advantage of being able to reply, like, and interact with the content and author … But I don’t know how much of this is encouraged or used with Khan Academy.
All the best, David