I am marking up the article “Rhizomatic Education – Community as Curriculum” in diigo at this URL.
My two biggest thoughts:
- This article talks alot about construction. I thought connectivism was not about constructing?
- I can see having some dynamic infrastructure where the community creates the curriculum. But, speaking from my experience as a techie, wouldn’t this sort of community expect a base level of knowledge before allowing new people to access the community? I mean, no one wants to keep explaining the basics to the noobs that wander in….
This is a rhizome (via sevensixfive.net):
Hi Gina!
About your first thought I am on the same boat.
As noob I have a major drawbak, I would like to have a place to run to with my tech questions without taking time from the techies.
Maybe for the next course.
Great picture! With your rhizomes you enable Vegetative resproduction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetative_reproduction
Love: Maru
[Reply]
Sorry, I left two typos. Serves me right for not checking spelling.
[Reply]
Maru – I am not a noob, I’m the techie.
I am trying to make the connection between rhizomes and connected learning — not quite there yet
[Reply]
Hi gina,
It is being said that connectivism in not about construction. Its one of the things i still cant understand: if knowledge is not (personally) constructed, does the knowledge then just keeps on being distibuted in the network??? I agree with connectvist position that knowledge is being “distributed within a network, social, technologically enhanced, recognizing and interpreting patterns”. But in order to make sense of knowledge and be able to add meaning to it and make use of the knowledge, you somewhere need to contruct bits of information into knowledge before your able to distribute it and be off value for the network…. maybe you can share your thoughts on that.
Gr. joost
[Reply]