|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
rhware
Posts:1
 |
| 11/29/2006 8:49 AM |
 Alert
|
How does this apply to social choice theory?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_choice_theory
|
|
|
|
|
kenrufo
Posts:2
|
| 11/29/2006 11:15 PM |
Alert
|
| I'm hesitant to say that it does. One of the things that remains interesting about the various net community formations is that they throw some of the older Enlightenment theories about choice into doubt. Locke and Rousseau, for example, for all the novelty of their approach at the time, still predicated most of their arguments on autonomous concepts of the individual, and those concepts are increasingly less applicable today. There's a debate in pedagogy circles, for example, between constructionist models of education and newer connectivist models, which are more in line with principles that are largely grouped under the web 2.0 phenomenon. It might be worth thinking about how this sort of project revises social choice theory rather than whether or not it's applicable to it. |
|
|
|
|
joe_flum
Posts:151
|
| 11/30/2006 1:35 PM |
Alert
|
| Ken - Could you expand on the "debate in pedagogy circles"? What are the key points of contention that are being discussed? It may be interesting to later look at how these issues could apply to Challenge 12 (training and learning). |
|
|
|
|
kenrufo
Posts:2
|
| 11/30/2006 3:06 PM |
Alert
|
Sure thing. The construction model argues that what education is about is getting individuals to develop the skills and knowledge they need to learn the material. In effect, it's an internalization model - I learn and remember the material, it's mine now, and I can use it as I see fit. The construction model makes a lot of intuitive sense in a print-based classroom, for example, where you're being tested for your ability to retain or use information.
The connectivist approach is different, and reflects the fact that in today's learning process, we don't need to internalize, we need the skills of quickly integrating outside sources of information. We do this already - not sure of a word, we hit dictionary.com, can't quite remember the syntax for a bit of java, try a bit of google code searching. Net savvy users do not expect themselves to internalize everything, but rather to have the archive technologies at hand.
So the trick is to design a training system that encourages ease of interconnection and access. Ideally, for example, something I'd love to see is a wiki with metadata, where any sentence of paragraph could be bracketed and given semantic information - like tags, references, etc - so that then pages could be generated dynamically based upon a variety of tag operators, as well as automated suggestions based on tags or bits of markedup material that have been popular with other users doing related tag work. In other words, a wiki system that allows for markup and socially derived aggregation of markup materials so as to better facilitate access and connections - even when you don't know what connections you're looking for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|