Archive for September, 2009

h1

liquid learning place, free-floating knowledge, flow experience

September 20, 2009

Today a ‘liquid learning place’ metaphor caught my eye in the blog of Eleanora Guglielman.
It is a S. Warburton brand marking the fluidity of concepts and identity:

Concepts of identity are inherently fluid and flexible and our understandings of learning are becoming less strongly bonded to institutions and specific educational spaces. This is a landscape where the form is contingent on the beholder. A place where learning opportunities shift and adjust to the learner.

It reminds me is a “free floating” metaphor that i first detected few years ago in concerns with elearning (Barron, 2000).

Barron (2000) views the convergence of Knowledge Management and e-Learning as:

“a beast (which) combines formal training as represented by e-Learning, and the free-floating knowledge swirling through organisations that knowledge management practices seek to snare and share”.

Barron T, (2000),“A Smarter Frankenstein: The Merging of e-Learning and Knowledge Management”at http://www.learningcircuits.org accessed 29/05/02

Siemens wrote in his book “Knowing Knowledge”:

Ecologies and networks provide the solution to needed structures and spaces to house and facilitate knowledge flow (p. 86).

Besides associating floating, liquidity and flow to knowledge itself and connecting it with the spaces where knowledge is moved, the flow process has been associated with personal perception and action.

A term of interest is “flow experience”.

This originates from a metaphor people were using: several people described their ‘flow’ experiences using the metaphor of a water current carrying them along.

Some factors that Csíkszentmihályi identifies as accompanying an experience of flow are of interest:

- Concentrating and focusing, a high degree of concentration on a limited field of attention
- A loss of the feeling of self-consciousness, the merging of action and awareness.
- People become absorbed in their activity, and focus of awareness is narrowed down to the activity itself, action awareness merging

My interest is a hybrid ecosystem, combining virtual arnd real worlds, people, knowledge and activities.

I would like to have a bit of time, thinking how people become part of hybrid reality involving knowledge, action and the environment into their activity space, perceiving this flow experience.

Becoming hybrid beings in any moment of an activity, extending yourself out of your physical body by action and merging yourself with the environment, may enable probably to be part of these liquid places where knowledge is free-floating. But how does the fluidity of knowledge enhance the flow experience? Or does it help?

Is it something as “caught by the pipe”?

h1

Ontobranding: how reality promotes itself

September 18, 2009

Yesterday we had a meeting with Nello Barile and Andrea Miconi from Universitá IULM.

Nello’s paper “From post-human consumer to the ontobranding dimension” for forthcoming Mobile communication and social policy conference points to an interesting aspect how new social technologies together with consuming practices within these technologies can create certain ontobrands.

He writes:

To explain this connection between consuming, technology and geolocalized experience the theorists invented several formulas such as hyper-geography, hybrid ecologies and geotagging.

The idea of assigning an IP address to every square meter of our planet suggest that there will be a complete isomorphy between the net and the planet so that every movement in one dimension implies an immediate modification on the other. Every element of our urban and natural environment could be able to interact and dialogue with this integrated system and other system connected with it. In this way when the idea of a traditional branding strategy will be overcome by a sort of diffused kind of branding.

Nello claims that : “branding becomes a flexible and spread technology”.

He writes:

If the traditional branding was just a tool in the hands of companies to build their own image and positioning in the collective mind, the selfbrandig approach demonstrates how the marketing thought is a state of mind that produces an existential positioning

Unfortunately, Nello does not define clearly his ‘ontobranding’ idea, but i can see that it is exactly what we were doing in our Hybrid Narrative Ecosystem studies.

We wrote with Mauri in our forthcoming book-chapter for IGI Gobal “Participatory design experiment: Storytelling Swarm in Hybrid Narrative Ecosystem” that one representation of hybrid ecosystem is ontospace, which consists of ontodimensions – descriptive features of an entity within a domain of information (eg. cool, expensive, cheap, nice).
People take perspectives of ontodimensions that can be fixed with ontocoordinates in this ontological space (eg. i can prefer more cool but cheap dimensions).
Niche is such a range of ontodimension perspectives that certain community members jointly define in ontospace, that effectively meets their understandings, expectations, and behaviour. Practically, niche is an abstract communality of community members personal preferences and perspectives.
Niche defines a subspace in ontospace that constrains the personal selection of perspectives of each community member. (simply you don’t fit to this community if your perspective is out of this range).
We also claim that every person evokes affordances as perceived perspectives in ontospace when they interact within this hybrid space. So they are simultaneously keeping and shifting the community subspace in ontospace. (This can be imagined as brand shift, changes in fashion).
However, this activity is not centrally coordinated, but may appear in the swarming kind of behaviours. In swarming each individual relies on signals left by swarm members into the ecosystem (practically the geotagged content). Again, the more strong is the signal, the more likely it will be picked up and it becomes a brand.

For me this is how the ontobrand can appear. I don’t know if Nello Barile will agree with this explanation :)

Anyway, i think we can continue discussions with him.

h1

Modelling spaces for self-organized learners

September 7, 2009

Today i found that the special number of Journal of Educational Technology & Society “Technology Support for Self-Organized Learners” has been published. There are two articles from Tallinn workgroup of Educational Technology.

Mine is about Modelling spaces for self-organized learners

http://www.ifets.info/journals/12_3/4.pdf

Terje Väljataga and Sebastian Fiedler write about the course that we did in iCamp project “Supporting students to self-direct intentional learning projects with social media”

http://www.ifets.info/journals/12_3/6.pdf

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.