Teaching and Learning in a Net-Centric World
Similar posts
  • New Book from AUPress – An Onli... I was pleased to receive in the post a hard copy of a new book in the Issues in Distance Education book series, for which I continue to serve as the series editor. Now of course you can read all of the books in this series as they are available for download  under Creative Commons [...]
  • Qualitative Research Rebooted 2018 For the past two months, I’ve been occupied with a qualitative study of teachers’ use of digital technology in Alberta Schools. The study is sponsored by the Alberta Teachers’ Association.  It has been very useful for me to get down to actually doing a full scale qualitative study after years of teaching grad students research [...]
  • More on Distance Education Journal Ra... Both academics and administrators love to argue about the value (impact) of their academic work.  The old adage of “Publish or Perish” still has currency. Despite the many distribution opportunities besides and beyond publishing in scholarly journals, the bean counters (myself included) love citation indexes. The basic idea is that the more your work is [...]
  • Teaching at Jiangnan University, Wuxi... My 4 week trip to China is a week done, and I thought I would document the trip to date (you know us old guys have trouble remembering the details!). Four years I received a request to host and sponsor a PhD student from Bejing Normal School. Zhijun Wang soon worked her way into our [...]
  • What the FOLC is new in this article? Sorry, but I couldn’t resist spoofing, in the post title,  the unfortunate sound of the acronym for the “new” model proposed in this article. Now,  I’ve got it out of the way and can only suggest that if this “divergent fork of the Community of Inquiry model” is to survive, it needs a new English [...]


  1. March 17, 2008    

    We thought the article you co-authored was so valuable that we wrote about it yesterday here

  2. lucychili lucychili
    March 19, 2008    

    A work in progress on similar themes

  3. simon fenton- jones simon fenton- jones
    March 24, 2008    

    Nice article Terry,

    I hear you about the groups vs. networks pretension, in HE or otherwise. Isn’t the problem = the old networks are built around National institutions, whereas most of the the new (IP) networks are built around (usually) some kind of shared application – e.g. a wiki, blog, utube, etc – and groups which share a common interest (usually by subject).

    As an old broadcast engineer, the biggest problem seems to be the change from broadcast to interactive, and the lack of focus on the (local and global) groups. So can i throw this at you and ask for your feedback. We have (National and Research Networks) NREN networks in every country. We’re also starting to see the beginnings of prototypes which focus on the groups “within them”. And every group will (say) want a different combination of apps.

    If we were to see the .edu network engineers collaborate, and share a space called (say) http://www.groups.edu (.edu.au, .ac.uk, etc) in each country, with a shared bibliographic directory; wouldn’t we have a way of putting together applications and libraries on behalf of, firstly, similar (subject) groups on one network and, secondly, systematizing the development of multicast networks between the NRENs’ global groups. Stupid idea?

    Could you reply here? Thanks.

    P.S. “Group learning has been the norm for formal education for at least two centuries”.
    Hmm.. I think you’d find Socrates, Aristotle, Plato and their mates would have disagreed with you. I guess it depends on what you call ‘formal’.

  4. January 7, 2009    

    1. Part of the definition of a learning network was “self-organizing.” But don’t groups self-organize, too? What differences do you see between the self-organizing of groups and networks?

    2. “The shape of the network is emergent, not designed.” Emergence has the notion of new behaviors or rules governing a new aggregate that differs from the rules/behaviors governing the agents making up the aggregate. Network shapes can change/adapt, as an individual agent changes/adapts, but as the latter adaptation doesn’t necessarily result in emergence, why should changing network shapes? Does all change/adaptation lead to emergence? What do you see as the difference between adaptation and emergence?

    • January 8, 2009    

      Thanks for the questions Charles
      1. Groups can self organize, but I suppose because of our sense of familiarity with the context and other group members, we tend to fall into established patterns when working as groups. These are often hierarchical in institutional contexts. The divergent thinking, contexts and cultures of network members propels self organization, the familiarity of group structure and membership seems to tend towards the established and the familiar.

      2. What do you see as the difference between adaptation and emergence? I see both terms as related with adaptation being a lower level response to environmental conditions, while emergence carries the sense of evolution of new (in this case social) responses to environmental or social conditions/opportunities or challenges. In networks the variation in nodes allows and encourages much wider types of adaptation and then emergence, then in groups in which adaptation is lower level and less radical response to challenges – given the lower levels of variability amongst group members

      • January 11, 2009    

        Thanks for the response. A few more thoughts.

        1. It’s easy to accept that groups are more stable than networks, having norms that are better defined and more constraining, and boundaries that are more porous. Still, this seems to be a matter of degree instead of kind. Cilliers writes, “it must be underscored that systems cannot do without hierarchies. Complex systems are not homogeneous things. They have structure, and moreover, this structure is asymmetrical” (p. 143). Although he is talking about complex systems, any network that has emergence needs to be considered a complex adaptive system, too. In fact, he refers to neural networks as a model of complex systems.

        2. It makes sense that more diversity in node could result in a wider variety of adaptations, which in turn would have a higher probability of “emergence” (or catastrophe with the system self-destructing), but I don’t follow “lower level” adaptation. Adaptation occurs at different levels in a system, or systems, but it’s not clear to me why we would want to call one adaptation lower or higher level. Levels relate to systems, not adaptation, although again, I can see a wider, or narrower, range of adaptations. Perhaps you could explain more on why you prefer the term “level” in relationship to adaptation.

        Cilliers, Paul (2001). Boundaries, hierarchies, and networks in complex systems. International Journal of Innovation Management 5(2), 135-147.

  5. Dave Annand Dave Annand
    January 30, 2010    

    Terry, I was re-reading this post tonight. Is it possible to have formal networked learning activities in an unpaced environment? What tools can facilitate this? DA

No Pings Yet

  1. iterating toward openness - Openness, Networks, and the Disaggregation of Higher Education on March 20, 2008 at 1:37 pm
  2. Distinguishing groups, networks and collectives » P2P Foundation on March 20, 2008 at 9:40 pm
  3. Ryberg’s blog » Blog Archive » Connectivism or Collectivism - relations between the ‘individual’ and the ’social’ on April 26, 2008 at 5:00 am
  4. Reviewing the Annotated Bibliography about Transparency « Beyond eLearning on May 27, 2010 at 8:45 am

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Virtual Canuck via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 332 other subscribers

My posts by Category

My Blog Archives


  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • SlideShare
  • RSS Feed for Posts
  • Email

Follow me on Twitter