Learning 2.0

The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin'.
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin'.

Bob Dylan 

When the World Wide Web first emerged as a global phenomenon, most of us defined it in 20^th Century terms. Many Web users, including educators, still think about the Web primarily as an information repository--even though there is ample evidence it has evolved into something more. Today, as we surf the Internet, we see endless examples of the Web’s ability not just to serve up content, but to empower us to share our imaginations, insights and opinions. If we're "a mind to," we can add to the world's understanding and advocate for positive change.

Web 2.0 – and ultimately School 2.0 -- is all about this two-way or group communication. The Web is no longer just a place to search for resources. It’s a place to find people, to exchange ideas, to demonstrate our creativity before an audience. The Internet has become not only a great curriculum resource but a great learning resource. The second generation Web is in fact, laying the foundation for ideas such as Classroom 2.0, Teacher 2.0 and Learning 2.0.

Personally, I still struggle when trying to explain concepts that simply have out paced the educational jargon we have available to describe them. 

"If you want to project a cool, web-savvy persona, just tack 2.0 on the end of something." - Anonymous

Twitter Takes

I threw the question to my Twitter community to see if they too struggled with the concept or term Learning 2.0. Here are their responses:

Jane Nicholls, " I can understand Web 2.0 and School 2.0 but learning 2.0 is taking it a bit far."
Christian Long, " I am not sure 'learning 2.0' exists if we're sincere about universal act of 'learning'. Tools are another thing entirely.
Paul Harrington, "In my case it is the term learning, as Learning is the pedagogy of School 2.0. I would call myself a lifelong learner - how I achieve it may vary along the way.
Ewan McIntosh, "   Learning 2.0? No such thing. Learning 2.0 is mostly tried and tested pedagogy made more possible with tools that fit the bit: assessment for learning, x-curric, mixmedia."

I think Brain Crosby came closest to how I would spin it. " Learning 2.0 is shared knowledge, constructed through Inquiry based, networked, digitally enabled collaborative conversation, using Web 2.0 applications."

Goodbye, Seats and Rows

Web 2.0, or what others have called "the read-write web" (and most recently called "participatory media"), is transforming the traditional structures of many of our most important institutions, including (very slowly) our schools. 

We have to ask ourselves: What happens to traditional concepts of classrooms, teaching and most importantly learning when we can now learn anything, anywhere, anytime?  How and will Web 2.0 shape the way we learn- Is there such a thing as Learning 2.0?

Roger Schank's thinking suggests that, "technology is not additive, in that it doesn't change some things, it changes everything." If that is true, and I believe it is, then learning has to be impacted when we begin to use different methods and cognitive structures for processing information. As the evolutionary process of the technologies and learning strategies we use in the classroom change and seek to improve pedagogy in an exponential fashion, we are going to realize that the innovation (the mash-up of 20th Century teaching ideas) will begin to build upon itself and continue to accelerate to the point where what takes place in terms of learning in the 21st Century is very different, not just a variation of times past.

Schank's  Law

Because people understand by finding in their memories the closest possible match to what they are hearing and use that match as the basis of comprehension, any new idea will be treated as a variant of something the listener has already thought of or heard. Agreement with a new idea means a listener has already had a similar thought and well appreciates that the speaker has recognized his idea. Disagreement means the opposite. Really new ideas are incomprehensible. The good news is that for some people, failure to comprehend is the beginning of understanding.For most, of course, it is the beginning of dismissal.

Learning is about making schematic connections. Where we attach new knowledge to our existing understandings.  The a-ha moment.  Piaget calls it moving from disequilibrium to assimilation of the new ideas. Learning 2.0 for me is the jumping off place where we not only have attached the new ideas to the old and assimilated, but we have made peace with the fact that we might have to unlearn much of the knowledge with which we started. It is by developing an adaptive expertise that we begin to innovate in such a way where the innovation becomes multiplicative, not additive and that in my opinion is Learning 2.0. It is also the uncomfortable place where we find ourselves as educators- having to unlearn and adapt. Teaching today puts the teacher in the role of chief learner, who ideally is modeling these lifelong adaptive learning strategies for her students.

What's a Teacher To Do?

Think about it. The media rich generation of school-aged kids today have visually pleasing information at their fingertips – "input" that is constantly popping, sparking and competing for their attention. They bring the world into their brains via cell phones, handheld gaming devices, PDAs, and laptops that they take everywhere. They are truly mobile. And at home they "mainline" electronic media in the form of computers, TV, and collaborative video games they play with users from around the world. If they choose, they can go and live a Second Life online, creating an avatar to explore the virtual terrain of a complete world, with its own economy, real estate, entertainment activities and, yes, even schools.

Everywhere the Digital Generation goes in society, technology beacons. The future is rushing at them full speed ahead. Until, that is, they enter the learning zone (cue Rod Serling). When they cross the threshold of most of our public schools, it's like stepping back in time. As one high school freshman said to a national pollster: "When I go to school, I have to power down.” When many of our students are already building networks far beyond our classroom walls, forming communities around their passions and their talents, it's not hard to understand why rows of desks and time-constrained schedules and standardized tests are feeling more and more limiting and ineffective. We can almost hear the our students humming along with Pink Floyd, "Teachers, leave those kids alone."

Learning 2.0 is about these core components:

Knowledge: Realizing, that with knowledge increasing at its current rate "none of us is as good as all of us." No one can master all the content that comprises a particular discipline.  Our job is to help students and ourselves become producers of knowledge and to help each other understand the transformative potential of Web 2.0 tools in a global perspective and context. Learning 2.0 is about reversed mentorship and transforming our classrooms into learning ecologies. 

Pedagogy: Creating an understanding of the shifting learning literacies that the 21 Century demands and how those literacies translate to classroom practice. Ultimately, 21^st Century teaching is constructivist teaching, using digital technologies and the Internet; John Dewey revisited or Alan Levine's Rip Mix Learn.

Connections: Modeling for students (and in some cases them modeling for us) the creation of sustained professional learning networks where we can all begin experimenting and sharing with online colleagues from around the world. Learning 2.0 is about making connections to content experts and using the new tools for 21st Century scholarship.

Capacity: Today’s web technologies make it possible to build formal and informal human networks -- using tools like blogs, wikis, and social networking software -- to build human capital in our students in such a way that they become the visionaries for giving back to society in an effort to end human suffering.

Emergent Understanding

Times are a-changin' - this is not business as usual, but business as unusual. But together we can begin to get our minds around these concepts. We can ask ourselves and each other the tough questions. We can let all the stakeholders, even students, use their voices in finding our way in this new learning landscape as we grasp for new syntax to describe 21st Century learning phenomena.

Comments

[Paul Harrington]

Sheryl and excellent post well argued. I will hold to my view that learning is learning, in my view if we are not too careful we will not carry the bulk of the teaching/learning community with us if we give Learning additional nomenclature. I think that teachers and learners can go with us on Web 2.0 and School 2.0 as with the Read Write Web. However they will rightly demand that we reflect on changing learning. I must admit to not being too happy with the label Learning 1.0, as it appears to devalue the efforts of our predecessors (and indeed for us who have been around long enough - ourselves!!) who were doing the best with technology as it was at the time. I know the arguement that 2.0 builds on 1.0, but for those to whom the term is totally new they may worry about being labeled in this way - it may discourage and dishearten some people( those new to teaching or those with more 'miles under the bonnet(hood US ref auto hood!!!'), where we should be trying to carry them with us to what is undoubtedly the promised land of 'globalised collaborative learning'.
It is an interesting debate which I look forward to taking part in : )
Keep up the excellent work

Paul

[Jane Nicholls]

Interesting post and a great way to get a conversation started. I must admit after reading the twitter sound bytes I had to come here and read more.

My thoughts on learning is that we are not up to learning 2, we are up to about learning 200 and losing count. Learning changes as society and needs change. We can revamp schools and call that school 2, we can improve on the web as technology changes and call that Web 2, but learning has always been evolving and has been around a lot longer than either school or the web. People learn what they need to learn and promptly forget everything else. We can argue that in this world of Excess (Daniel Pink, A whole new mind) students need to learn how to learn more than they need to learn content. This is very true, we have the luxury of indulging our creative side which is not the case for many struggling nations. For them learning is learning how to survive.

So I agree that learning is changing, but I think we would do better to focus as educators on school 2 and teaching 2, let's change the context to support the learning that needs to be done to be effective citizens in the 21st Century.

Mmm, more than 140 characters, hope it makes a little more sense. Great post, really has got me thinking...

[Artichoke]

I suspect that you are not thinking recklessly enough about what Learning2.0 might be Sherry ...

If Web2.0 is all about how technologies revolutionise the ways we participate, then Learning2.0 must imagine how technologies will revolutionise the way we learn -

I'd be exploring how technologies might interact with/exploit the many revolutionary ways geneticists and neuroscientists are already using smart drugs to alter our brain neurochemicals to enhance intelligence and as a consequence revolutionise learning.

We already know that smart drugs that can induce changes in our ability to learn, to connect ideas, to synthesise, to remember -

There is some research (think I read abt it in SA) that shows that Ritalin when used by normal (not hyperactive) children boosts SAT test scores by more than 100 points -so perhaps technology that enhances the conditions of value when learning - Learning2.0 - will be all about technology facilitating the use of smart drugs that enhance processing speed, abstract reasoning, accurate response time and innovative thinking.

Reckless imagining#1: Learning2.0 will see technology being used to make decisions about when to trigger, how to monitor and when to control the release of nootropes (smart drugs) into the bloodstream of 21st Century learners.

[Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach]

Paul,
Thanks for stopping by-- I always appreciate your take on things. and while I strongly agree the focus should be on learning and that is a language all teachers can understand and a strategic place for garnering buy-in, I also feel kids can't wait for teachers to "get-it".

Schools are fast becoming irrelevant in our children's lives. We have to come to terms with the fact we haven't done anything wrong by moving forward. Teachers have done a fabulous job of preparing kids for the 20th Century. Problem is-- we are almost 8 years into the 21st Century, and we are still preparing them for our world as we understand it. And truth be known-- we are in many ways coming full circle. For the "conversations" and collaborations of the Web are very much in keeping with how Socrates himself believed learning took place.

We have to get over ourselves and get on with thinking more about how teaching and learning needs to change to remain relevant. Otherwise, what we are doing now could just as easily be automated and outsourced. Everyone could just attend school online in formal or informal ways.

Change is hard. But be "reckless" with Artichoke and I as we start to imagine what learning in the future will mean.

[Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach]

Jane said, "So I agree that learning is changing, but I think we would do better to focus as educators on school 2 and teaching 2, let's change the context to support the learning that needs to be done to be effective citizens in the 21st Century."

Which comes first- the chicken or the egg?

Originally, this post was simply to meet the request of the conveners of the (Learning 2.0) conference in Shanghai where I will be presenting. But as I have started to think about it, it is becoming much more.

See, I think part of this has to do with how we define learning. Are we thinking in terms of cognitive processing, mastery, memorization, or theory? Is learning like you alluded to,"...learn what they need to learn and promptly forget everything else." Or is it like you also said, "...students need to learn how to learn more than they need to learn content."

I guess when I am imaging learning 2.0 I am thinking about a concept that infers the revolutionary ways that learning will be different based on the advances in sciences, technology, and access to information.

Personally, I know the current technologies have made a difference in how I learn. I am faster, can process two ideas simultaneously, I am more intuitive. The way I learn and retain information is very different than how I did it in high school. In some ways it is stronger and I retain more and in some ways it is damaging.

Be reckless with us Jane-- push yourself to imagine the future. If you were to look at how learning will change as a result of moving forward in time-- what will it mean?

[Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach]

Artichoke said, "I suspect that you are not thinking recklessly enough about what Learning2.0 might be Sherry ..."

Man oh man-- you have no idea how motivating, stimulating, and fiery I find that comment. I crave reckless thinking and running in a K-12 world often leaves me so unsatisfied in that arena.

Ok- so you started us off with this:

Reckless imagining #1: Learning 2.0 will see technology being used to make decisions about when to trigger, how to monitor and when to control the release of nootropes (smart drugs) into the bloodstream of 21st Century learners.

To that I will add (and encourage others to do the same)--

Reckless imagining #2: Learning 2.0 will bring acceptance to students listening to music via their i-Pods while researching, collaborating and creating online in several different windows while they are at school and it will not only be seen as acceptable, but a valid processing style or learning intelligence.

Reckless imagining #3: Just as Bloom's Taxonomy has been revisited (and will probably be again) Gardner's Learning intelligences will be revised to include many other untapped intelligences that are unleashed with the new technologies that emerge.

Your Turn!

[Jane Nicholls]

Reckless Imagining #4: We will finally adopt Dewey's views in mainstream education! Sorry, being cynical.

I think I am just arguing semantics. I can see where you are coming from, if we can envision the future of learning we will have a direction for school, and teaching to move in. As we move from the knowledge age to the conceptual age learning is changing dramatically, the organisation and function of the brain is changing dramatically. Unfortunately school remains in many ways the same.

In regards to the chicken and the egg, we influence learning through changes in the school system and our teaching. Maybe this is the key, we are telling administrators and teachers that schools need to change and are making little leeway, a ripple that is not spreading far out into the pond. But if we can make a real case of how learning is changing and show the discord between our practices and the needs of the students with a sense of urgency, then maybe we can make more of a splash?

As always my thoughts are developing as I express them, my preferred method of learning. My greatest wish is that we allow students the luxury to be able to present their own thoughts in 'school' and not be bombarded constantly by those of the teacher - Reckless Imagining #5.

[Paul Harrington]

This has been buzzing around in my head since the discussion began so I will let it out now :).
Our Learners today are 'Digital Natives', if you look at how they interact with each other without our intervention it is truly 'switched on'. In my own case I have a 'semi tame' 17 yo daughter in the house who has a tendency to talk in mono syllables to us adults (that's if she has to talk to us at all!!!). In one of her more approachable moments I asked her if the way she interacts with her friends seems new/different, she replied no, that it is just the way they talk to each other and let each other now 'what's going on'.
In a rather rambling way I will get to my point - our kids are the 2.0 bit they are already switched on learners who use the internet and create content for the internet - to them it is the way they learn - no need for a fancy title. They just do it that way because they can and it has become the norm for them.
It is the 'digital immigrants' (us) who are trying to impose terms on a generation who think that 'we don't get it', we follow where they lead in seeking out new ways to communicate - if anything they are Globally Collaborative Learners. We need to encourage todays Teachers to become 2.0 teachers in 2.0 classrooms to engage the pupils who are already there, they invented 2.0 without even realising it. Yes we should encourage ourselves to be Reckless to the maximum degree our students will come with us because in the main 'they get it !!'
Excuses for rambling, much as Jane I type on the fly hoping that what I say has some coherence :)
Enjoying the discussion, expecting a response .
Paul

[Jeri Hurd]

Interesting and thought-provoking post. If I can insert one of my own tangents--Learning 2.0 won't happen on a universal scale until we convince teachers it is real, significant and profound in its impact. Too many of us "digital immigrants" use these tools as mere extensions of current practice. (See the article in Education World: "Are You a Techno-Constructivist?" http://www.education-world.com/a_tech/tech/tech005.shtml )
I'm guilty of that myself, but this summer I had a mainly self-directed Independent Study in what I now call the Collaborative Web. It started out as just a chance to hone my tech skills; it ended up transforming how I think about learning and teaching. I spent most of my time reading blogs, testing ideas and tools mentioned in those blogs, then thinking and blogging about their implications for and use in the classroom. As I said, the experience was transformational, and now I'm dead set on doing my best to recreate that experience for my students because I now believe in the power of the process.

As one of the tech leaders for my school, I'm also thinking about how I can give teachers that experience. All the talking I can do in the world won't change their practice until they've gone through the process themselves.

[Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach]

Paul,

As conservative as schools are a little "reckless" should be ok. I mean it will quickly get balanced. Great stories about your own net gener! Thanks for sharing.

--------------
Jeri

Awesome testimony and I have added your very professional blog to my feed. I will be a regular. Thanks for stopping by--come back often.

[Jeri Hurd]

grin--You realize you just made my entire week, of course! Thanks--blogging can be a lonely business.

[Thomas Cooper]

Sheryl, I do think that your post is thought provoking. Humans have always used technology from our first hand-made tools to the Web 2.0. Learning has always been shared; it's not only the a-ha moment where we realize something ourselves, but the passing of knowledge from one generation to the next. Recording our knowledge in stone, on paper or on the internet has provided a foundation for our descendants to explore, make further connections, and add to our knowledge base in order to improve our society. The great advancement in Web 2.0, or the crowdsourcing of knowledge (e.g. Assignment Zero , is that it makes our group global, not just teacher to students or parents to children. Now, more and more, comes the possibility of the entire world weighing in on a topic. The only caution is that many times in history the majority have been found wrong and it took a lot of effort for that one person (e.g. Copernicus) to stand up to the majority and prove that they were wrong. The implication for classroom learning is that it extends our classroom beyond our 4 walls. But it will only do this if we design lessons (or projects) that allow others to build on what the first group of students did. The idea here is cooperative learning to produce more detail and increase the number of connections between the pieces of data that we have in our heads or on the internet. Mashups, such as Google Earth, allow for the creation of layers of information that can be represented graphically. These layers can be uploaded and shared with others who can download them , add more information and then upload them for others to see. Maybe in the end we wont all be islands until ourselves and many of us recreating the wheel, which has happened numerous times in history (e.g. printing press, steam engine, electricity).

[Mary Anne]

Jeri,
You said it all so well. I teach 4th grade and it is amazing how many times our history resources conflict with the information they deliver. Learning 2.0 will allow students to explore, question and pull information from a variety of sources to make sense of their learning.
It is easy to feel like an island, but this forum gives me so much encouragement that we will be able to provide the proper learning tools that will best meet the needs of our technological savvy students. Cooperative learning beyond our 4 walls is an amazing concept.
Personally, it is hard to let go of the control that I have had in deciding what is most important for the students to learn (most of it being designated by curriculum demands), when they will learn it, how they will learn it, and how they will prove that they have learned it. What a gift to all of us, if we can let go of that control, by providing the lessons and proper resources that will lead them to and beyond these educational goals.
I am optimistic that we will get there. I am just being honest about the fear of letting go and feeling like I am guiding them in the right direction. Phew...I hope that makes sense to at least one of you. ;0)

[Karen]

Sometimes I feel that all of the 2.0 aspects are coming at me so fast that I can't keep up. I have to go to students to ask what to do; however, they seem to "go with the flow" or "strong current" so easily. They are relaxed and enjoy the pace.

There are so many teachers that are used to being the "sage on the stage" instead of the "guide on the side". They have to change or be lost in technology. It's an uncomfortable change for them. They haven't realized that when you develop a "we are all in this together" attitude, everyone benefits.

My eighth grade students already collaborate when it comes to making review tools for tests and quizzes. They have been doing this for two years. This was the first class that wasn't impressed with my online reviews since they already do this. We have discussed what my review software can do in regards to what they are using. It's like talking with other teachers instead of students. We talk about what would be the most effective and typically tweak things with each chapter. They are the first to realize how much time I put into creating reviews and they appreciate what I do more. It's very nice!

[Lynn]

Unfortunately, one of the reasons that schools change so slowly is that they must deal with a significant number of cooks in the kitchen making demands and legislating rules. Time usage is one of the most difficult struggles for teachers in that there is little public recognition of the time that is needed to work with these tools that don't involve being in front of a group of 25 students daily.

Many parents want the same educational experience they had and having to justify these new methods to the community add another barrier.