Our development as teachers consists of a process of self-awareness and acceptance, coming to see that we cannot be all things the Good Teacher is expected to be, and understanding that who we are as human beings is at the core of becoming an authentic teacher. -- Patricia Cranton What the late Patricia Cranton, a key contributor to the development of transformative learning theory (and a Teachers College professor), is describing is a journey of personal discovery that directly impacts the relationship between teachers and students. The result is a re-negotiation of the power balance within the learning environment and a recognition that the classroom, real or virtual, is a supportive, communal learning space where everyone can contribute and unique knowledge can be constructed through these social exchanges. This type of supportive environment, as Lee et al. (2011) describes, is a key element in the optimization of student learning in any learning context. It also provi
After reading George Siemens' Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age , I wonder just how radical a theory it really is and whether it represents a blueprint for navigating our digital futures? Where, for example, would you draw the dividing line between social constructivism and connectivist theory? What makes it a 'digital age' theory? Why are Siemens' definitions of technology, knowledge and learning so limited? Is connectivism a learning theory at all? Siemens' theory seems to rest upon two major conceits - the importance and validity of Buckminster Fuller's "knowledge-doubling curve," and the anticipated negative impact of technological determinism on society. Connectivism could be, in fact, viewed as Siemens' direct response to these two concerns. But are his concerns well-founded? And, if so, is his approach an effective solution to these issues? In his book, Critical Path (1982), Fuller describes how prior to the 20th cent