This is a classic internet story of networked knowing, written quickly, probably wrong, but at least it is down for others to join in the conversation.
It began with a tweet. How quaintly networked. Follow this feldgang, this fieldwalk, this informal learning if you will.
So I went to Adam Wright’s blog.
“social network hub”by Mathias.Pastwa is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0 I have just finished reading Essential features of effective networks in education (2015) by Santiago Rincon-Gallardo and Michael Fullen. On the first page of the article they make a statement about the level of research regarding social networks.
I walked through the article. It cites some research which is behind a paywall. Luckily, I have access to the paywall so that you can read the article, even annotate it with a tool like Hypothes.is. Here it is:
I think the gist of the post is a call for case studies of social networks that helped students learn. There is more to it than that, but that is what I took from it.
I responded this way in a comment. The comment is embedded so as to allow for you to follow me and add to it or edit it.
For my #clmooc readers who are celebrating July and August with explorations of fieldwalks, this is another example of an effective learning network or what I call a feldgang or what Jon Husband called a ‘wirearchy’.
A feldgang is a wirearchy writ small. It is exactly what CLMOOC sponsored–connectivism. I think that if Adam Wright is looking for something that is institutionally manageable then he would do well to look at what we are doing with feldgangs-effective networks, both within and without ourselves, winding around much like this blog post and knowing that although the walk appears to end now, it just bends down the road a bit, carrying on with learning. Informal. Casual. Open-ended