online poker

Learning Conversations

Come sit with me. We'll talk, we'll ask big questions…

Subscribe to Learning Conversations

I was chatting with a friend recently, bemoaning my struggles to “be” different – more authentic, true to myself, putting my beliefs into everyday action. And I was describing how distant I often feel – that despite connecting with some fantastic mentors and surrounding myself with people who are modeling what I aspire to, I still felt really lonely at times…

He thought for a moment and said “don’t forget that you don’t just need your personal truth and wise teachers, you need community too…” He then went on to explain that the foundations of Buddhism are the “Three Jewels” – the Buddha (the wise teacher), the Dharma (the teachings) and the Sangha (the community).

I’m not going to go off into a discussion of religion at this point, but this chat got me thinking about how we learn and what the dimensions of social learning need to include. It got me thinking about how I would design a system to support all of those dimensions? Because we all need a balance of all three to learn most effectively!

To start with, I believe that learning is learning is learning is learning…

In other words, what we want for students is ultimately no different than what we need to provide educators in terms of professional development opportunities, or what we need to help parents experience as they support their children’s learning. It’s an idea I’ve espoused for quite a while and it’s showing up for me now as I look at how to leverage what we know about learning in order to create a supportive technology infrastructure for all participants in our education system?

So, I believe that there are three dimensions of “social” in “learning”:

  1. We “learn from…”
    • This is our “expert learner” network. I like to think of it in these terms because it really emphasizes that we are learning together – but that “experts” will arise from different places. Traditionally, this would be the teacher in a classroom, a mentor or coach when we’re looking for assistance with business or personal growth. It could be a leader of your religious community or your grandma. In less traditional terms, this is anyone who holds a level of experience and wisdom beyond the crowd and is willing to share that with others. It could be one of the students in a classroom. It is often our children, teaching us about using Facebook or how to win at Wii Mario Kart…
    • We all need time with our teachers or mentors because they offer us the perspective of someone who has “done” what we’re trying to do. They look at our efforts objectively and can give us feedback that we can’t see ourselves because we’re too close. They help us by knowing the questions that we don’t even know enough to know we need to ask! And they have a view that allows them to “push” us to develop in ways we don’t know we need because we don’t have the experience of completion or success yet…
  2. We “learn with…”
    • These are our “peer” networks. For a student, it’s their classmates. For a teacher, it’s their fellow educators. For most of us, we have several communities we participate in (local, virtual, centered around our hobbies, interests, charities, work, sports, etc…). Twitter is probably my favorite peer learning network – oh the conversations we have and the depth of learning I experience there!! *contented sigh*
    • When we learn with our peers, we struggle together. Learning that contains some struggle to figure things out, and ends in the creation of meaning, is a powerful thing! We’re all in the same boat, in this case. No one has the “answers” and the process is what we’re after here. How do we work together? How do we ask questions and get curious? How do we scaffold off each other’s ideas or thoughts – creating something greater than we could have done alone?
    • This might be group projects for students. Maybe it’s teachers coming together on inquiry based learning teams. It might be parents talking over coffee about the trials of puberty and having tweens! Often, this works best when we figure out how to be a “team” (incorporating a variety of skills that are used to complement each other), not just a “group” (two or more humans interacting together). And the larger the team/group, the closer we come to being a “network” (enter George Siemens and “Connectivism”)
  3. We “learn about ourselves…”
    • This is the “personal” part of learning – though I don’t think this is what we mean when we talk about “personal learning networks” or PLNs. What we learn this way is what drives the formation of our PLN, but they are two different things, in my mind.
    • This is the time we spend self reflecting or thinking about what really matters to us? Who am I? What matters to me? What am I good at? What would I like to be better at? What causes me grief or pain (and therefore, warrants my efforts to change)? And what do I want to develop in myself?
    • Often, my interactions within groups or comments that my mentors make will help highlight things personally. My patterns, my beliefs, etc… So they’re definitely linked.
    • In terms of the Buddhist model, this is my “personal truth”!

Without a teacher, our learning is incomplete. We quit because we simply can’t imagine that achieving our goals is possible. We lack the wisdom to even know what we need to learn…

Without our peers, we struggle to “Do it all” by ourselves. We feel isolated. We lack all the skills to accomplish the things that we want to do. We get tired of struggling alone – of feeling like we’re “the only one”…

Without time to learn about ourselves and examine who we are, we stay in reactive mode. We trust outside voices rather than our own gut feeling. We lack direction. We’re unmotivated. We make poor choices about what to do or how to do it (since we don’t understand our own strengths and motivations).

As we plan our training efforts, our classroom activities, our professional development programs – are we considering all three of these dimensions? Because they all contribute to a rich learning environment.

And if you’re tech planning, make sure you incorporate all three in the methods or tools you provide…

Tags:
  1. Ira Socol Said,

    I’d suggest one more step: Which is that all three are fluid. Teachers become learners become peers, etc, as the questions change. That non-hierarchical social structure is the biggest gift of our “post-Gutenberg” technologies, and most students, from their game-learning experiences, already know that age/title/credentials mean less than knowledge value and ability to share, before they ever come to school.

    This includes our personal reflection, which often requires the variety of “imperfect mirrors” that our human community provides. This is the advantage of, say, blogging a concept before writing an article – the process of “talking to yourself in front of an audience” has great advantages.

  2. Heidi Said,

    Hi Ira,
    Such good points – and I think the idea of “dimensions” fits the fluidity you talk about really well. Just like we freely move through the three dimensions of this physical world we live in, as needed, appropriate to the needs of the moment – so we move through these dimensions of learning.

    And, as you point out, independent of titles or positions! I wonder how the business world will change as our kids move into it without the same preconceptions about hierarchy? Right now, traditional business complain about the “lack of respect” from this generation. But perhaps we’ll all learn to navigate that dynamic better over time?

    Thanks for your comment!

  3. Pam Said,

    I also think about the idea of the expert sometimes teaches the learner and sometimes learns from the learner -it is a recursive circle for me. Some of the most important experts in my life have been five years old. When I moved from being a secondary educator into the role of an elementary principal, I was astounded at the learning energy in kindergartners which even exceeded that of the middle schoolers, I appreciated. In immersing myself in classrooms, I was mesmerized by the many teachers I found in the kindergartners. “I build my towers sideway, not up and down. “We are playing rose kitties- it’s a story about all of us in here and how we found our way through the rose maze.” “I can count using the ceiling- I don’t need blocks(unifix cubes)” What I learned is that kids figure out learning through multiple pathways that involve borrowing from others’ expertise, sharing their own, and within the context of social meaning-making with each other. I also learned that kids are imaginative learners who also borrow from the learning spaces in which they co-exist with classmates, the teacher, and all kinds of tools- some of which even the adult teacher had not imagined. I fear we adults lose the capability to find learning anywhere, to initiate our own learning, and scaffold competencies. If we could duplicate the best K learning environments in the nation for all young learners and ourselves, the system you describe in theory might simply be the unlearning of what comes after K.

  4. Brian Kuhn Said,

    I agree that learning is social but I think there is a 4th dimension that is not. But, it really depends on the person. We are a spectrum of learners with different preferences at different times for different domains. So it depends… but, I think the 4th dimension is private alone learning. A personal example – I am a passionate downhill mountain biker. I learn and improve my riding socially with my riding buddies. But, I also like solo riding by myself. I find that I can often hone skills, enjoy the ride better without the social aspect. It’s more efficient, pressure free, and a blast. I find the same for learning new knowledge – reading and note taking isn’t normally social. Etc. So, yes learning is social but I think there is also a key element or pathway that is not, that does not involve experts, peers, or reflection.

  5. Heidi Said,

    I wonder…

    If you’re reading and taking notes, isn’t that still “learning from” someone? Isn’t that still “social”, even though you’re not face to face with the author?

    And the bike riding – perhaps that’s self reflection? Self assessment and self guided improvement? More in terms of a physical skill, as opposed to thought processes and self knowledge, but similar…

    I’m thinking that the three types of network/learning I described could still fit the dimension you added, without adding a fourth category. What do you think?

    Thanks for the push back, Brian! :)

  6. Tracy Rosen Said,

    I agree with Ira, the domains of learning are fluid.

    My Masters program was based on those three types of learning – self, community, teacher. The first year was very challenging as we are so conditioned to teacher-based learning. The experience changed me as a teacher, as a person.

    It was an MA in Human Systems Intervention at Concordia University in Montreal.

Add A Comment