Empires of the mind

In a speech given at Harvard University in 1943, British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill famously declared: 'The empires of the future will be empires of the mind.' 

70 years on, futurist and physicist Michio Kaku echoes Churchill's sentiments, arguing that intellectual capital is rapidly replacing commodity capital as the most desirable and lucrative means of commerce. Our future will not be built on traditional foundations, but will be different than anything we can imagine. Leading nations will found their success on their ability to develop their intellectual capabilities, and by creating and innovating to solve problems that don't even exist yet.

Kaku warns that it is no longer what lays beneath our feet that is our most valuable commodity. Where once oil, gas, minerals and real estate were the most valuable natural resources a nation could own and trade, now the rapid evolution of technology, economic turmoil and processes of globalisation have privileged  intellectual capital above all other commodities. Natural resources run out over time, but the intellectual resources of any nation are constantly being replenished. This is precisely why education is so vitally important. Any nation who fails at providing a state wide world class education system runs the risk of falling behind.  In a world where empires of the mind dictate which nations lead economically, socially, politically and culturally, failure to educate a population effectively is courting disaster. Nations who do not understand this they must nurture their education systems will fall into poverty, warns Kaku. I was intrigued whilst visiting Saudi Arabia recently to see that there is now less emphasis on the commodity that made them such a rich a successful nation. The Saudis know that the days of the petrochemical industry are numbered, so they are now turning their attention to trying to develop their education systems into some of the best in the world. Vast construction projects are in evidence everywhere, as the Saudi government pours its money into building new university campuses and research centres, purchasing world class expertise and developing an infrastructure that will harness the potential of learning edge technologies. All across the Middle East, similar projects are also in evidence.

Any nation that roots itself in the past, and fails to prepare for the future is courting economic disaster. Old technology such as telephony has been the subject of radical change in recent years. The old circular dialling interface that was an integral part of every telephone was replaced by buttons and more recently touch screens. And yet many who lived through the transition still talk about 'dialling up' their friends. Such thinking is a remnant of a long gone past, and indicative of a mind set that yearns for yesteryear. It's similar to the way some of our politicians think.

Around the world, governments are attempting to reform their education systems.  Leaders everywhere are waking up to notice that traditional, industrial age education systems are lagging behind, that they are deeply flawed and mired in problems that in some cases are intractable. What they may not know though, is that what is needed is not a patch up or a quick revision. In many cases what is needed is a radical rethinking of what education should be. Systems that are not fit for purpose need to be replaced, not repaired. What is required for any nation to succeed is an educational system that is responsive to the needs and demands of its information society, a world where knowledge workers replace production-line workers, and where creative and critical thinking skills are more important than rote learning or following instructions. Schools, colleges and universities simply cannot and will not survive by peddling old ways of teaching in a world where knowledge goes quickly out of date and where new technologies are changing the nature of learning. The empires of the future will truly be empires of the mind, where intellectual capital holds sway. In this respect, we all have a lot of work to do. How is your own education system doing?  

Photo by Robin Kaspar


Empires of the mind by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Is all learning social?

Just about every day I find myself embroiled in discussions about fundamentals of learning, the nature of knowledge and the processes of education. It comes with the territory of working as an academic in a university, and I expect to do it much of the time. When I'm not talking about learning, I'm reading about it, researching it, thinking about it, and writing about it. Today was particularly interesting because I had a conversation on this blog with ePortfolio Keith (Keith Brennan aka @wiltwhatman), who was commenting on my Three Things post. In the post I made the remark that today's learning needs to be personal, social and global, all of which can be mediated through technology. Keith asked me 'Does learning always need to be social?' This of course is a profound question, and one which demands some good theory and reflection. I told Keith that his question deserved a more protracted and considered response than I could provide within the constraints of a blog comment box. I said I would write a full blog post and I therefore present my response here:

Just about everything we learn is situated within a social context. We learn during our early years by observing and mimicking others. No first language is learnt in isolation. Much of an individual's sense of conscience, social justice and even compliance to authority are thought to derive from social modelling processes in early life (see Bandura 1977). We also learn through experimentation, but even though some of this is conducted in a solitary context, our thinking is still shaped by previous social encounters and conversations.  Much of our thinking about learning over the past few decades has been influenced significantly by the writings of Russian psychologist Lev Vygotskii, who proposed the theory of social constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978).  In essence, Vygotskii's argument is that all humans learn within rich social and cultural situations, and that children and novices learn better when they are in the presence of knowledgeable or more experienced others than they do when they are on their own. This is known as the zone of proximal development (ZPD). This does not preclude good learning in isolated settings, but ZPD does hold that learning is strengthened and extended through the presence of others.

Tools also play a part in what we learn. One theory that has emerged from the social constructivist school, Activity Theory, suggests that all learning is shaped and motivated by social influences (Engeström et al, 1999). We act upon our environment and with the use of tools, mediate our understanding through them and use them as mind tools to construct, negotiate and develop our learning. The manipulation of tools, a very specific human activity, carries with them an accumulation of cultural and social knowledge. They are infused with social meaning. Even a tool such as a book, when read by a solo reader, socially mediates learning. The reader in effect has an internal conversation with himself (thinking) which is shaped through reading text that has been written by a knowledgeable other person - the author. Even consciousness is social. It is not seen as 'a series of disembodied cognitive acts', but rather is located in the everyday practice of social interactions (see Nardi, 1995).

Another theory derived from social constructivism has been proposed by Lave and Wenger (1991) who argue that the formation of communities of practice can explain much of the informal learning that occurs for example in the workplace. Development of this theory placed emphasis on the sharing of knowledge within the community of practice, enabling members to situate their learning within their community. Further development in the digital age has led to such theories as connectivism (Siemens, 2004) which suggests that knowledge is not exclusively something we internalise, but can now also reside outside the individual within the social context he inhabits and the tools he employs. Anyone who maintains a personal learning network will clearly recognise this phenomenon.

I trust that in this brief essay I have been able to outline and highlight some of the key arguments for learning as a predominantly social process. I will not have convinced everyone that all learning is social, indeed I have some minor doubts myself. But I intentionally leave plenty of space for discussion. There is a great deal more that can be said about the social nature of learning, but that will need to wait for the next blog post.

References
Bandura, A. (1977) Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice Hall.
Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R. and Punamäki, R-L (1999) Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nardi, B. (1995) Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Siemens, G. (2004) Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Available online at http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm (Retrieved 19 February, 2013).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Is all learning social? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Future learning environments: professional, powerful, personal

Once again, thanks to Don H Taylor and his crew, this year's Learning Technologies conference was a highly successful event. 50 speakers presented talks at the event in London's Olympia over the two days, in what has become one of the premier, must attend events for learning professionals in Europe. High profile speakers including MIT's Nicholas Negroponte, futurist Gerd Leonhard, Lord David Puttnam, Professor Stephen Heppell and author Tony Buzan took to the stage to talk about their visions for the future of learning. All of the videos of their presentations can now be viewed (complete with synchronised slides) at this link.

My own presentation in the main arena at Olympia is entitled Future Learning Environments: Professional, Powerful, Personal. In it, I give my own vision for the future of learning, featuring new pedagogical approaches, emerging technologies and speculation about what we might see in education and training over the next few years. Do take a look by clicking on this link and if you wish to comment, please feel free to do so in the comments box under this blog post.

Future learning environments by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Learning is changing

Learning is changing. In some ways learning has no need to change. In other ways, it is vital. The human race still has an innate desire to discover, to survive, to innovate, to explore. As we get older, we consolidate what we have learnt, modifying our knowledge and skills as new information and techniques become known to us. What we learn in formalised settings such as school, college and university is merely the foundation of our knowledge and the rudimentary skill sets that enable us to build our own minds and construct meaning, through individual and social contexts later in life. That has always been the nature of learning. So why am I claiming that learning is changing? This is contentious, but I believe learning is changing because what we can learn no longer has any boundaries. Learning is also changing because we can contribute to knowledge on a global scale. We now have tools at our disposal that enable us to connect to any knowledge we want, anywhere, and at any time we prefer.

It hasn't always been like this. Libraries and 'seats of learning' were traditionally the places to be when formal learning was required. All around, communities and families were also there for informal learning processes to be supported. Then along came the printing press and within a short time, mass literacy was achieved, books because widely accessible, and ordinary people were able to create their own personal libraries at home. Radio and television and eventually satellite communication gave us windows on the world, passive connections to world events, news and features, brought directly to our homes. Learning began to change as we were all exposed via mass media to a vast and previously mysterious world that was suddenly open to limitless discovery and exploration. Around this time many new disciplines began to emerge. Our opportunities for learning began to reach around the globe, across cultural and geographical boundaries.

Probably the most disruptive technology to emerge over the last few years is the computer. Specifically, I mean personalised, handheld, internet enabled mobile computing. Now passive learning has been replaced by active participation within global communities, and the ability to create, share, repurpose and organise vast amounts of knowledge content. We can also manipulate context. This in turn promotes new forms of learning. People are now auto-didactic - they teach themselves any skill and acquire any knowledge, simply by clicking, watching, making and doing.

Lord David Puttnam, the celebrated former movie producer and Oscar winner, believes that the digital tools we now have at our disposal are driving significant changes in the way we learn. He argues that our ability to use social media to connect with, and learn from, world class experts is unprecedented, and he is right. He also sees a future of learning where we will be astounded by what is possible. This is supported by other high profile commentators such as Stephen Heppell who argues that 'everything technology touches goes exponential'. Already, says Puttnam, we are witnessing our expectations changing though our demand to be informed faster, our need for instant connection and our impatience with delays. He believes we are also seeing a blurring of the boundaries, between formal and informal learning, between formal education and work based learning. Our increasing ability to work seamlessly across time zones and to connect together into global communities of practice and interest is also something we could never previously achieve without the internet and personalised technology. Lord Puttnam suggests that learning is being transformed so quickly that many of the changes will be ones 'we can only begin to guess at'.  

Whatever the changes will be in the future, learning is changing. The demands of the next generation of learners will be different from the generation that has passed before it. This has happened before, but never on the grand scale or vast differential that is happening right now. The question now is, how will schools, colleges, universities and work based learning keep pace?

Photo by Xin Li


Learning is changing by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Slaying giants

Futurist Gerd Leonhard speaking at Learning Technologies 2013

Listening to media futurist Gerd Leonhard speaking at the recent Learning Technologies Conference in London was both engaging and thought provoking. Leonhard is not a crystal ball gazer, nor is he a modern day prophet, but what he does manage to do quite successfully is gauge the technological trends and contextualise them in real situations. One of his most powerful statements was that our concepts of space and place will never be the same again. For centuries humans have created and maintained spaces and places around them, and have conducted their lives, their businesses and their play within them. With the advent of pervasive technologies, especially smart mobile technologies, he argued, we are no longer confined or constrained by the environments we find ourselves in. Leonhard postulated that work and learning no longer need to be location (or even time) dependent. New technologies liberate us from temporal and spatial constraints, and this will have a radical effect on the future of Learning and Development departments in organisations. He believes if companies do not begin to realise that things have changed around them, we are likely to see many going to the wall. Even the large companies are vulnerable, and if they fail to adapt we may witness some giant slaying.

In an equally thought provoking article in the Inside Learning Technologies and Skills Magazine, Leonhard outlines some of the tough dilemmas and challenges facing business over the next few years. A key problem he suggests, emerges from the 'Free Culture' movement described by Lawrence Lessig. Can businesses hope to compete when all around them content is available for free?  Copying of content is rampant, he warns, and 'the internet is a giant copying machine.' His solution is for content publishers to wake up and realise that their goods and services must be offered in a way that no longer relies on distribution as a key factor. He recommends a major rethink, because the game has changed, and consumers who know how to use the internet are more empowered than they ever were. His main point is that the 'if you want it you pay for it' mentality many businesses still adhere to, is increasingly anachronistic. Leonhard believes the major social media platforms have it right. Companies such as LinkedIn, Flickr and Slideshare start by offering a free entry level and then, once they have the attention and loyalty of the user, offer premium services that provide access to better and more sophisticated features.

Gerd Leonhard also talks about voluntary (consider the ongoing funding of Wikipedia through this method) and crowd sourced funding as revenue models that are already increasingly popular in the social media world. He believes that the 'feels like free' approach to content and service delivery will become increasingly prevalent for companies as technology becomes even more pervasive in society. Organisations who do not wake up and adopt these new business models will be in danger of suffering a similar fate to previously unassailable corporate giants such as Kodak.

Photograph by Steve Wheeler



Slaying giants by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Through a child's eyes

We are constantly developing our understanding about how children learn. Research from the behavioural and cognitive sciences, neurosciences and pedagogical research fields is regularly yielding new findings. One of the most interesting reports I have read recently appeared in the February 2013 edition of The Psychologist. In an article entitled 'Learning from Learners', Rachel Wu (Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences at the University of Rochester, New York) discusses some recent findings on how infants learn. She reveals that by the age of 8 months, infants learn better when they are in the company of people than they do through solo exploration. She shows that when a human face is present with an object, infants become more interested in the object and examine it more closely (Wu et al, 2011). It could be argued that these findings support Vygotskiian social constructivist theory (Zone of Proximal Development - Vygotsky 1978) over Piagetian cognitive constructivist theory, confirming to those who adhere to ZPD theory, that human brains are naturally wired to learn better in social contexts. Indeed, Vygotsky was particularly vocal in his opposition to Piaget's theory that children were naturally egocentric, suggesting that it is only when children are deprived of social contact that they resort to egocentric behaviour (p. 27).

Another equally fascinating finding is Wu's claim that infants are extreme explorers. They possess qualities that are discarded by the time we reach adulthood. Young children are naturally curious, seeking novelty, and they are constantly learning without hesitation, and without a fear of failure (Wu, 2013). Unfortunately, as children grow older and begin to receive formalised schooling, they tend to lose these natural traits, and become much more risk averse, because, as Sir Ken Robinson has intoned, they become 'educated'. Wu is not as pessimistic however, believing that we don't actually lose the abilities we had as children. She recommends that schools and universities adopt 'immersive' approaches to learning where little structure is imposed upon new learning in much the same way that infants perceive no boundaries to their exploration. She advocates doing and making, rather than receiving instruction as the best way for students to excel, especially in creative areas of learning.  She cites Schwartz (2008) who promoted the idea of being 'productively stupid', or learning like a beginner with no previous assumptions. Children maintain an explorative state, because this is the only way they know how to learn, she argues. They are unable to impose previous structure onto their learning and are therefore much more flexible and responsive to new information they receive from their exploration of the world. Adults often approach new learning with preconceptions or assumptions that prevent them from engaging or immersing themselves fully in the learning experience. Perhaps the best way to learn really is to see the world through the eyes of a child.

References

Schwartz, M. A. (2008) The importance of stupidity in scientific research. Journal of Cell Science, 121, 1771.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wu, R., Gopnik, A., Richardson, D. C. and Kirkham, N. Z. (2011) Infants learn about objects from statistics and people. Developmental Psychology, 47 (5), 1220-1229.    

Wu, R. (2013) Learning from learners. The Psychologist, 26 (2), 154-155.

Photo by Ashrei Halom

Through a child's eyes by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Mobile gives the edge

Smart mobile phones continue to disrupt our society. They are increasingly pervasive and accessible. For everyone of us who own them, mobile phones are changing our lives, influencing our decisions about how we interact with each other, how we access and consume information, how we work, entertain ourselves and purchase our goods. Most significantly for those who are immersed in schools, colleges and universities -  mobile technology is disrupting education. There are many accounts of the effects of mobiles on education (see for example this blog post on 5 views on the future of mobile learning). Just why is such a small object such as the smart mobile phone so disruptive?

Firstly mobile technology is disruptive because when students are no longer tethered to specific locations such as classrooms or computer suites, different types of learning become possible, and in many cases, inevitable. Students who are on the move can interact with their environments in more meaningful ways when they have mobile phones. They can engage with learning content with more freedom. They are no longer location dependent but they are still connected, and can maximise their available time to learn whenever they want, and wherever they find themselves. Potentially, there is no more 'down time' when students have a mobile device in their hands. It's a jaded expression now, but 'anytime, anyplace' learning is not only within the reach of most of us, for many it is in fact common place. Furthermore, the available infrastructure is becoming less of an issue. Arguably, students are no longer completely reliant on internet connectivity with the advent of the mobile app, and the capability to download vast amounts of data during the times when they do have wi-fi connection.

Secondly, mobile technology is disruptive because it encourages creativity. Students now have the capability to capture images, audio and video recordings of their experiences. The creation, repurposing and sharing of content has never been easier. Potentially, with new AR and wearable technologies emerging, we will be able to make a record our every minute of our lives. One student said in a recent lesson that their whole life was in a small device. The caveat here of course, is the calamitous potential of losing your mobile phone, or having it stolen.

Thirdly, mobile technology is powerfully social. Access to powerful social media sites enables students to maintain perpetual contact with their peers, family and tutors, providing constant new opportunities to learn informally, on the move, and in many modes and formats. Howard Rheingold argued as early as 2002 that mobile phones harness the 'power of the many', which has manifested itself in recent years in social phenomena such as citizen journalism, flash mobs and crowd sourced funding projects to name just a few. We need to be aware though, that clashes between authority and individual usage of disruptive technology is problematic, and as Agar (2004) pointed out, their are fierce tensions between centralised power and the democracy afforded by mobile technology. Other warnings about the social and cultural challenges of mobile technology disruption can be found in Distraction by Mark Curtis (2004).

Finally, mobile technology is disruptive, because it enables personalised learning within rich social contexts. Every student is uniquely individual, and each can create their own 'desire lines' and personalised pathways to learning through the flexibility of smart devices and tools. Smart mobiles are crammed full of useful technologies that can support creative learning. We are only witnessing the beginnings of the disruption that is possible with mobile technology. What will happen when the convergence of GPS, cameras, augmented reality, voice control and mobility becomes mainstream, and everyone has access to information about everything, everywhere? What happens when all objects you encounter become context aware, and your mobile phone helps you to interact with them and learn from them? Whatever happens will be totally different from anything we currently do in education. Mobile will certainly give learning the edge.

References
Agar, J. (2004) Constant Touch: A Global History of the Mobile Phone. Cambridge: Icon Books.
Curtis, M. (2004) Distraction: Being Human in the Digital Age. London: Futuretext Ltd.
Rheingold, H. (2002) Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

Photography by Steve Wheeler


Mobile gives the edge by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Being Negroponte

'Learning when there is no school'

In 1995 I read a little black paperback book that changed my view on the world. The title of the book was 'Being Digital' and the author was Nicholas Negroponte. Several key elements of Negroponte's book stood out for me and challenged my thinking. Firstly, he talks of a time when all media will be transformed from atoms into bits. This premise, written in the middle of the 90s, looked forwards to a time when newspapers, movies, music, television, photography, and a host of other media would reside exclusively within the digital domain. The repercussions would be that large businesses who relied on shipping 'atoms' would go out of business, whilst those who sent bits would thrive. Negroponte is a gentleman and doesn't have the hubris to declare 'I told you so', but a quick look around at the world of business will tell you that he was right. Large photographic companies, the music industry, book and newspaper publishers, high street chain stores and even the mighty Hollywood film industry are struggling to adapt, survive or maintain their preeminence in a world where everyone has a mobile phone with a camera, downloads of e-books exceed print based sales, iTunes is the favourite method of purchasing your favourite music, movies can be streamed online, and people are migrating en masse to online stores such as Amazon. Negroponte's vision was prescient indeed, and we ignore the man's ideas at our peril.

Secondly, Being Digital featured further predictions about touch screen computers, artificial intelligence and convergent technologies such as TVs and computers combining their functionality. The entire book is crammed full of these instances, and it is not hard to see why it had such a huge impact on me and many others like me almost 20 years ago.

It was a delight and a privilege to be invited to meet Nic Negroponte over dinner in the run up to the Learning Technologies Conference. I sat and chatted with him for more than two hours as he regailed me and my co-diners with story after story of his many exploits. Negroponte established the now legendary MIT Media Lab, and was also founder of Wired Magazine. I first became aware of his work by reading his then regular column. He is well connected too. Close friend and LOGO inventor Seymour Papert married author and cyberspace researcher Sherry Turkle in the living room of Negroponte's home. Negroponte and his then wife met with Alan Turing's mother and brother, and were given all his 'baby photographs'. He worked alongside legends such as artificial intelligence pioneer Marvin Minsky and in so doing, became something of a legend himself. In his opening keynote speech at Learning Technologies, Negroponte stalked across the stage reminding his audience that it is a big mistake to assume that knowing is synonymous with learning. 'We know that a vast recall of facts is not a measure of understanding,' he declared, 'and yet we subject kids in school to constant memorising to pass tests.' His answer? What we need to do in schools, he said, was to find ways to measure curioisty, creativity, imagination and passion, as well as the ability to view things from multiple perspectives.

Negroponte is now celebrated for his high impact initiative to provide children in poor countries to access learning through laptop computers. His One Laptop Per Child project has now given children from Ramallah to Rio access to the learning they previously never had a hope of having. The total number of laptop computers distributed through the 1LPC project now exceeds 2.5 million in 40 countries, and there are many heart warming stories to be told. Children are now teaching their own parents how to read, using the laptops as tools. In Ethiopia, over 5000 children are learning to write computer programs using Squeak. Plans to begin distribution of touch screen tablets are well underway, and it won't be long before we are talking about One Tablet Per Child. All of this is run on a charity basis, and is philanthropic to the core, with supporters including the Bill Gates Foundation and Salman Kahn's Academy.

If we have learnt one thing from the 1LPC project, says Negroponte, it is that children learn a great deal on their own, with little or no help from others. This echoes the work of pioneers such as Sugata Mitra, whose 'minimally invasive education' was demonstrated by the 'Hole in the Wall' experiments. Negroponte said that Mitra is now working with him and others at MIT - they have joined forces to advance these projects further. Children have a natural curiosity, Negroponte is at pains to point out, and discovering, making and sharing things is second nature to them. We should nurture these characteristics he warns, rather than stifling it in rigid school systems.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Being Negroponte by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Three things

There are three things we need to know about learning for this generation. The first is that learning needs to be personalised. As I argued in a previous post, learning must be differentiated, because one size does not fit all, and standardised curricula and testing are not fit for purpose in the 21st Century. Personal learning is unique to each learner. The tools and devices students choose, and the pathways they decide to take are in many ways beginning to challenge the synchronised and homogenised approaches we still practice in schools, universities and organisations.

Secondly, learning needs to be social. Much of what we learn comes from contact and communication with others. Increasingly, such contact and communication is mediated through technology, and social media tools are ideal for this purpose. The celebrated Russian psychologist Lev Vygotskii proposed the idea of learning being extended when children are mentored by a knowledgeable other person. His Zone of Proximal Development theory has been central to our understanding of how we learn in social contexts. Yet in recent years, with the proliferation and equalisation of knowledge and the strengthening of social connections through digital media, new theories such as connectivism and paragogy have emerged to challenge the central place of ZPD in contemporary pedagogical theory. We need to ask whether we now need knowledgeable others such as subject experts to help us extend our learning when we have all knowledge at our fingertips. Now many learners are exploiting the power of social media to build and engage with equals in personal learning networks.

Thirdly, learning needs to be globalised. As we develop personal expertise, and begin to practice it in applied contexts, we need to connect with global communities. Students who share their content online can reach a worldwide audience who can act as a peer network to provide constructive feedback. Teachers can crowd-source their ideas and share their content in professional forums and global learning collectives, or harness the power of social media to access thought leaders in their particular field of expertise. Scholars who are not connected into the global community are increasingly isolated and will in time be left behind as the world of education advances ever onward.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Three things by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

You can't walk where I walk

Someone once told me that life is like a fast moving stream. You can put your foot into it, and even let it flow over you for a while, but you can never put your foot into the same river twice. That's quite profound, but there is something even more profound. It is this: You can't walk where I walk. In other words, you can't experience what I experience. We may be sat watching the same movie or TV programme. We may read the same book, participate in the same conversation, or sit in the same lecture. But your experience will be different to my experience. We may come away with similar messages or impressions of what we have observed or experienced, but because we are unique individuals, we are by nature different to each other, and our perceptions will also be different. That is one very important reason why in schools, standardised testing, homogenised curricula and batch processing by age need to be changed for more personalised approaches to education.

It's all down to individual perception - what psychologists call the 'representation of reality'. My reality is slightly different to yours and yours from mine. It has little to do with you and I viewing the same thing from slightly different angles, although sometimes that can be a factor in creating different perceptions. No, it's not about different angles, it's about different perspectives. A number of variables cause each of us to view life uniquely, and to represent reality from different perspectives, including our age, gender, culture, background, health, preferences, personal beliefs, in fact just about everything that wire our brains uniquely, and make us individuals. When teachers attempt to differentiate learning, they generally focus on aptitude and ability or in some cases, whether a student has a disability. Some teachers are sidetracked into considering 'learning styles' but that is a big mistake, as I have previously discussed. Carl Rogers advocated 'unconditional positive regard', a philosophy that plays out when every student is considered to be of equal worth in the classroom, regardless of their previous 'form'.

What teachers should be focused upon is the whole child, and how they perceive life and represent reality differently to everyone else in the room. Differentiation should encourage diversity not simply make provision for it. It should celebrate the fact that we are all different, and include every single voice in the classroom, giving each an equal weight. That's hard to achieve, but with some fore thought and practice, and a great deal of patience, teachers can encourage each student to participate fully and play to their individual strengths. We are not that different from each other really. We all have the same needs, to be respected, to feel we belong to the group and to have a voice. Each of us is the same, but in uniquely different ways. If you can understand that, then you will understand why you can't walk where I walk.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


You can't walk where I walk by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Changing the world

It's not often you get to talk with someone who has changed the world. That's exactly what I did this week in a glittering lounge in the Carlton Ritz Hotel, when I sat down with Steve Wozniak, co-founder (with Steve Jobs) of Apple. Wozniak designed the first Apple computer, and together with Jobs, set in motion a company that continues this day to mould our use of digital technology. If you use an iPad, iPod or iPhone, if you have an Apple Mac computer or laptop of any sort, you undoubtedly have Steve Wozniak to thank. Apple, and its co-founder Wozniak have shaped our desires and crystallised our dreams with innovation after innovation. Steve Jobs may be no longer with us, but Steve Wozniak - 'Woz' - lives on, larger than life, and as effusive and buoyant as ever about the future of technology and its role in education.

This week, Woz and I were both invited speakers at the 3rd International Conference on eLearning and Distance Education in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He was already sitting in the speaker's lounge, ready to present his opening keynote, when I wandered in, unaware that he was there. There was no-one else in the room. I walked over. We shook hands. We sat down. Then we talked.

The world according to Woz is one of sustained wonder at the many ways technology can be made to do our bidding. As a young boy growing up in the 50s and 60s, he told his father that he would one day own a computer. His father laughed and told him a computer would cost more than a house to buy. Computers in the 50s and 60s were indeed expensive. They were also almost the size of houses. But Woz's dream of one day owning a computer was realised when he began work for the Hewlett Packard computer company. Within a short time he was taking computers apart to see how they worked, and had soon had drawn up the plans to construct his very own computer - the Apple 1. He met Steve Jobs, who said 'we can sell this', and the rest, as they say, is history.

Now aged 62, and with a life time of achievements behind him, Woz has a great deal to say about schools and education. He even became a school teacher for a few years after he had made his fortune and had put Apple behind him. He believes that computers and digital technology are now our prime scientific and academic tools, but balances this with the view that regardless of the impact of technology on society, we still need rich personal and social interaction for effective education to take place. Hence, he says, teachers will always be needed. He is very determined to enforce the idea that children learn best when they are interested. When you have the desire to learn, he says, no-one can take that away from you. And yet, he argues, school is the one environment that currently teaches children that taking a test determines how 'intelligent' they are, but cramming for that test it is certainly not learning. He asks, are schools sending out the wrong message to children, when we ask them to study for test after test? Children are born curious, he says, and all of us - teachers, parents, society - should keep it that way.

On computers and design, Woz is adamant - he is only interested in designing devices that are interactive. 'They need to respond when I use them', he said, 'otherwise I lose interest'. On the nature of knowledge, he told me, all of us need to gain some 'fact' based knowledge, but that this is only the starting point, as we gain skills that will enable each of us to take our place in society. The man is insightful, inspirational and iconic. Yes, it's not often you get to speak to someone who has actually changed the world.

NB: The above content is taken from my conversation with Steve Wozniak, and also excerpts from his Keynote speech in Riyadh on February 5, 2013.

Photo image courtesy of Steve Wheeler


Changing the world by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.