Myth #1 – Introverts don’t like to talk.
This is not true. Introverts just don’t talk unless they have something to say. They hate small talk. Get an introvert talking about something they are interested in, and they won’t shut up for days.

Myth #2 – Introverts are shy.
Shyness has nothing to do with being an Introvert. Introverts are not necessarily afraid of people. What they need is a reason to interact. They don’t interact for the sake of interacting. If you want to talk to an Introvert, just start talking. Don’t worry about being polite.

Myth #3 – Introverts are rude.
Introverts often don’t see a reason for beating around the bush with social pleasantries. They want everyone to just be real and honest. Unfortunately, this is not acceptable in most settings, so Introverts can feel a lot of pressure to fit in, which they find exhausting.

Myth #4 – Introverts don’t like people.
On the contrary, Introverts intensely value the few friends they have. They can count their close friends on one hand. If you are lucky enough for an introvert to consider you a friend, you probably have a loyal ally for life. Once you have earned their respect as being a person of substance, you’re in.

Myth #5 – Introverts don’t like to go out in public.
Nonsense. Introverts just don’t like to go out in public FOR AS LONG. They also like to avoid the complications that are involved in public activities. They take in data and experiences very quickly, and as a result, don’t need to be there for long to “get it.” They’re ready to go home, recharge, and process it all. In fact, recharging is absolutely crucial for Introverts.

Myth #6 – Introverts always want to be alone.
Introverts are perfectly comfortable with their own thoughts. They think a lot. They daydream. They like to have problems to work on, puzzles to solve. But they can also get incredibly lonely if they don’t have anyone to share their discoveries with. They crave an authentic and sincere connection with ONE PERSON at a time.

Myth #7 – Introverts are weird.
Introverts are often individualists. They don’t follow the crowd. They’d prefer to be valued for their novel ways of living. They think for themselves and because of that, they often challenge the norm. They don’t make most decisions based on what is popular or trendy.

Myth #8 – Introverts are aloof nerds.
Introverts are people who primarily look inward, paying close attention to their thoughts and emotions. It’s not that they are incapable of paying attention to what is going on around them, it’s just that their inner world is much more stimulating and rewarding to them.

Myth #9 – Introverts don’t know how to relax and have fun.
Introverts typically relax at home or in nature, not in busy public places. Introverts are not thrill seekers and adrenaline junkies. If there is too much talking and noise going on, they shut down. Their brains are too sensitive to the neurotransmitter called Dopamine. Introverts and Extroverts have different dominant neuro-pathways. Just look it up.

Myth #10 – Introverts can fix themselves and become Extroverts.
A world without Introverts would be a world with few scientists, musicians, artists, poets, filmmakers, doctors, mathematicians, writers, and philosophers. That being said, there are still plenty of techniques an Extrovert can learn in order to interact with Introverts. (Yes, I reversed these two terms on purpose to show you how biased our society is.) Introverts cannot “fix themselves” and deserve respect for their natural temperament and contributions to the human race. In fact, one study (Silverman, 1986) showed that the percentage of Introverts increases with IQ.

big thanks via Amyy Smiles

It is a work in progress, without set pathways yet, so navigation is yours to enjoy!

So far so good - #Change11

If you do drop by, zoom in for snippets of course related trivia. It’s sure not all about the topics, you think we are covereing.

Is the Internet a fundamental human necessity?

Is a workplace with flexible mobility policies as valuable as salary?

Some interesting, but not really suprising to those keeping up, findings.

Study Highlights:

• Many respondents cite a mobile device as “the most important technology” in their lives
• Seven of 10 employees have “friended” their managers and coworkers on Facebook
• Two of five students have not bought a physical book (except textbooks) in two years
• Most respondents have a Facebook account and check it at least once a day
  • Half would rather lose their wallet or purse than their smartphone or mobile device.
  • More than two of five would accept a lower-paying job that had more flexibility with regard to device choice, social media access, and mobility than a higher-paying job with less flexibility.
• At least one in four said the absence of remote access would influence their job decisions, such as leaving companies sooner rather than later, slacking off, or declining job offers outright.
  • Three out of 10 feel that once they begin working, it will be their right- more than a privilege -to be able to work remotely with a flexible schedule.

    

 Read Cisco’s full report here.

Learning is about coherence-forming…we connect concepts into some type of structure and coherent whole that enables action and guidance in our thinking. When language isn’t clear or when concepts can’t be cognitively apprehended because of too much specialization of language and protocol, coherence is simply not possible.

I’m not at all convinced or comfortable with this. Dissonance, confusion even, when learning allows for cognitive openness and growth.  If the language #Occupiers use is foreign, is that a me or them issue? Is it filter failure of my world view or them mashing up messages unsuccessfully? 

Context of course, but do I dismiss them because to me it lacks clarity, or do I acknowledge their message is still out of my reach? And more importantly what will be my response? Head in the sand grandstanding, “It will fail” end debate and move on, or let ideas ferment, perculate and distil?

Were Lichtenstein, Pollock and Picasso initially coherant to wide audiences? Not at all. 

Pushing creative, mixed and mashed up language boundaries, in this case artistically, allowed debate to flourish. An end came much later. Acceptance, celebration and a new coherant learning.

Using the #Occupy example, I too don’t hear a coherant message, but acknowledge there are messages being communicated.

Where George and I differ is I see that as opportunity, not a lack of resonance. Clarity in leadership or certainty? I wonder?

As others posit, maybe #Occupy is a way of life, and not a protest at all.

Douglas Rushkoff  says

what we’re attempting to move toward is not an end-state with winners and losers but a sustainable scenario where we actually keep the world and ourselves going. That doesn’t require a campaign as much as a slow steady movement toward a greater intelligence and new kinds of behaviors.

Bakunin’s populism, the Chigirin Affair, Land and Freedom, People’s Will and Black Partition were all #failed factions prior to the Iskra Board, ‘What is to be done’ and the Bolshevik’s final ‘success’. It depends on whether you see precursors as separate to, or the cause of, latter events.

Same with #Occupy. I see it as just scratching a societal continuum of  far deeper intent. This iteration may well be incoherant and #fail, but if one brick fails, does your wall tumble? Keystone? yes it may, foundation corner? yes it may. just another brick in the wall? probably not.

 Coherance is not learning, it is end product. Dissonance, disruption and confusion, the messy stuff, is learning.

PLANE - A Journey of TPL Discovery.

During this week’s MOOC topic of OER by David Wiley, perennial assessment questions were raised again. As they should be.

David believes;

there is one primary challenge the (OER) movement faces in the coming decade and it is almost never discussed.

The Complete and Utter Lack of Assessment in the OER Space

Our current research for PLANE and how Australian teachers can best use a self assessment tool (MyRadar) as part of their professional learning portfolio is attempting to address some aspects of the same issue.

How do we know? How to con-currently address ( currently optionally important) change innovation when we have (mandated accountable) outcomes to meet? Assessment is that window.

But which assessments? The cart first and donkey following? Or side by side? Or who’d a thunk it, maybe A New Nag still should pull The Cart? Just  with vastly different thinking engines and passengers.

Any actively engaged teacher, as a master learner with responsibility for student needs, will want answers to some obvious PL questions.

• How do we know how we’re doing on a (shifting and developing) professional learning continuum? Co-operative sharing, collective learning, collaborative peer mentoring?
• After assumed trust and professional responsibility, what litmus can teachers use to guide and inform their own learning? National standards are one offering.
• How do I know what I think is innovative assistive practice, actually is? Or is my say so enough?
• Do I just risk it as an outlier and label it innovative regardless of (poor? worse? positive?) outcomes?
• Why am I being told games based learning, virtual world’s, mobile learning, (insert own latest and greatest here) is one way forward for contemporary learning?
• How do I know snake oil merchants or professional, professional development careerists, have not hi-jacked researched bases to sell change in our classrooms because it pays their bills?

The assessment list of potential self questions needs developing. And critical reflection.

Humans are notorious for over or under estimating their own abilities and progress. It is challenging. “Self” anything is often wide of a reality mark.

So how do we best gather evidence on (is that assess?) teacher professional learning in an open, distributed, complex network?

Establish a quality driving question, set realistic goals, ensure qualitative and formative (and low stakes progressive summatives) involve the learner in every step, make learning public with continuous two way feedback and adjust the learning plan in real time.

Well knock me down with a feather!

That assessment model sounds remarkably close to PBL. And there-in lies my assessment bias. Which I commend to you.

(Please note: The words technology or ICT or 21st Century are not harmed or appear anywhere in this post. TFFT)

It made accessing swirling thoughts, ideas, bias and judgements somehow easier. It was much needed mana, man.

Then I felt momentarily impure. As a Frontier Learner that is.

Isn’t Pure Connectivism via MOOC about the self guided network warrior? Oh well, fail and enjoy my learning anywho.

Thanks  Allison and your team. The following summarises an enjoyable learning week very well.

My bricolage in progress is here.  Warning it’s not at all addictive, but BIG. If you really want more on #change11

With a Bonus Dig Deep for Dung Badge, only for proof of viewing, if you tell me what’s on Martin’s shirt. Where’s Wally style.

After tonight’s critical reflection, it also left me a tad disconcerted. I still believe  network learning resembles a weather metaphor far more than a radar one. I’m attributing my mild disquiet to a subtle but significant perspective difference . Unlearn or learn? Build new or change?

I understand our team needs to pin TPL down to some degree, give structure, guidance and essentially lead others, without them feeling that, to meet standards. But being concurrently engaged in PL at #change11 MOOC, I am questioning many of my past assumptions. In a good way.

But I can’t help feel contemporary research of networks (not groups, CoP’s, or collaborations, all different) suggest a weather metaphor is closer to contemporary TPL, rather than a radar one.

A radar metaphor suggests linear certainty, scientific, known and  proven. And that’s Ok for a 20th century stable learning framework. You know accepted learning theories, use them, pass them on, possibly even re-visiting frequently to re-evaluate as that becomes your known guide.

Even if using over the horizon radar, better, but still a snapshot of what’s present, in existence, right now. For those not even using TPL radar, I guess it is an improvement. But an incomplete one when thinking on heritage, pre network learning should be challenged, not supported by what we offer.

However a weather PL metaphor suggests it just is, regardless. We can moan and groan or we can adjust our attitude and preparedness to mindfully enter the day. Regardless, because the learning in the network is now highly discoverable and we shouldn’t really need a radar to detect it. 

Weather, on the other hand, is just weather. It is our active choices and  interactions with it that are significant. Today’s forecasting is far more exact than even 5 years ago as massive data sets support climate research. But  uncertainty in network weather remains and it is how we embrace that granularity is where future professional learning value lies.  

This represents the pull not push model of Davison, Hagel and Brown and certainly Adam Greenfield’s network weather of it’s happening around you, whether aware or not. Radar suggests control by some with the means to tell others with certainty. Today’s PL  network is far from that.

Best practice PL suggests learners as  autonomous hubs, foraging, compelling, questing as  meta- insight becomes a new default superior to even still nascent knowledge networks. It’s a matter of place on and view of this network circle I guess. Do another lap and your view changes.

Weather suggests we can be best informed by known past patterns (exhibit climate change) but despite these prolific records, we still need to be prepared for unexpected sudden changes. Ever been to Melbourne, 4 seasons in 1 day? You can often tell the newly arrived by how unprepared they are.

Agility in this age of uncertainty, prepared for when technology goes arse up at point of most need and just mindfully making do because a sudden downpour can come from nowhere. Because we can’t change that, never could. That’s the whole point. Network weather is with us, regardless. It is how we deal with that reality.

Learning in the network is gaining momentum, to where we don’t know, so is radar really any use to us? Weather is enduring and will continue to be. It is how we respond, adjust and then re-adjust that will set the digitally fluent and agile apart, not a reliance on stable, seen and known paths. 

PL has also been with us forever. I suggest Weller’s open, digital and networked learners rely more on evidence based, informed meterology than they do on OTH seeing technologies that sufficed last century.

Because I work co-operatively in networks, and the certainty of Radar is as far as most feel comfortable with, then let it be.

Radar can be the PL everywhere icon. We haz deadlines to meet.

And getting caught in the network weather can just be something that happens to someone else :0)

Those who know me, know i dig weird, edge heads into stuff most would consider Of Questionable Taste. Like banjos, baklava and Bathurst. Well mebe not the baklava. Piggy, Piggy. I digress.

Bathurst, A Family Holy Grail, since my Pole position in 1971. And before that for assorted bike and saloon car races with Pop, pre me, of course.

Bathurst is iconic, and I do sincerely ask Our Maker’s (GMH and Ford) Forgiveness for the self admitted, great unwashed who don’t get speed, and Bathurst. Lke Us Normals Do. Pass the burning rubber, man.

Even the inanimate layout of the tar has hero status. (See My Sock Puppet above for details). Originally these glorious cambers and double blind apexs served as a goat track to a hilltop hood called McPhillamy; a scenic vista with a cow paddock adjunct. A rough road hand carved by Mayor Griffen’s desperate men, homeless, down on their luck and on the wallaby as gangers fortunate enough to secure a day of council work during The Great Depression of the early 1930′s. Just to stay alive. Busting their collective arses to hew a gradient up the Mount that would never pass first base with today’s nanny state ordinances. BTW, the gradient up through the cutting (1:6) makes walking it difficult, particulalry on the inside tight line where a ladder could be needed. If you wern’t packing a potent V8SC mumbo maker that is.

Now multi million dollar teams bust arses to stay fast on that black stuff. Canyon kissing, sandcastling, pruning or a winery visits  are the new foolhardy and very exxy.  Just ask Dick. Let alone the breathtaking, sphincter puckering moment of dropping over Skyline, knowing the right welly is a tad ambitious, heading for fresh air or concrete. Or Both. Goolie Tester? Big tick.

Now the oldest inland town in NSW, Bathurst, boasts an internationally acclaimed Tourist Drive with Pits to Die for, for 50 weeks pa as a Goddamed Manicured, Mollycoddled and Prolifically Patrolled Public Place.

For the others. things turn sagely feral as that same tar morphs Into The World’s Most Challenging Track. Our Maker (FORD) determines entry to the club of top 10 finishers, 500 miles solo. Before post metric safety men in hats cried, ”nup, 2 drivers needed, 1000kms now Nancy Boys” that is.

I never intended this space would be anything other than an honest reflection of who i am and what I stand for. In today’s veiled world, where you may not know your neighbour’s been dead for a week, or Steet Party’s are too dangerous, because you might connect, or Real Men dawdle in hairdresser cars, it’s comforting to know the powerful tribalism, the co-operative but intense rivalry of Folden Rabids, lives.  Or The Legendary Events surrounding PHAT C.A.R.N.T*  and their motorised esky’s, lets say enthusiastically, steered toward’s Sergeant Plod and The Plodmobile with the intent to invoke a drag race. No harm caused and no offence taken. The Men (and Women) in Blue Are Tops. And mostly Petrolheads.

The last few years camping has been very civil as Cochrane and V8SC seek to sell the brand as Forrest’s Elbow family, not Bridgstone Bridge bogun. The life moments of Brock’s XU1 1972 epic, to Moffs Form Finish, Bartlett’s Camaro Flip, the dominant A9xs, VCs and Group C VK Commies, Fury’s Bluebird vs Moffs RX7, Williamson’s world first in car camera, Burgmann’s Tragic Loss and the insane chicane insertion at Conrod’s end and Tru Blue Dick’s Rotten 80Rock. Godzilla, Seton’s Wet Skyline Magic or Murph’s insane lap from the Gods. Yes, so many highlights and abundant passion is Bathurst.

A Bathurst MOOc may blend nicely. Hmmm, now there’s a 2012 thought?

Normal transmission will resume, once Our Week is over.

*Chrysler Australia Racing National Team

@mweller alone, abundance entrenches heritage scholarship. Societal value, devolved to ODN new glue 101′s, is anathemic solvent for HE. 

Not unexpectedly, Martin’s return tweet observed thus. Partly my tweet was in response to MOOC structure, which we really don’t follow, remember? 

I’m only warming to #change11 week 3, and it’s already time to keep up with The Big 36 Schedule. Meh, thanks for the offer, but I wanna stay and play here, in week 3.

So deeper sense making to address the <140 above.  ’Scuse the dot points, they’re my flexible framework.

• alone. Choice of alternatives, not best singularity, is ODN futures. Yes?
• abundance entrenches heritage scholarship  We have had abundant content for a long time. Dusty tomes to digital meta. Now abundance in connectivity, choice, network constructs (cracks?) are letting light flood in, but who’s blinking? Emergent ODN’s con-currently function with, and in, academia, by isolated tinkerers. Societal value in quality assurance (The Degree) lays entirely with heritage scarcity, often secured in journal publisher’s bank vaults. ODN value will be added without diminishing heritage cultural stickiness; the best of the past.  But empowered individuals in their own multiple networks need their value to be recognised also, or they’ll flow out the same cracks letting the light in. Blended institutional attendance will still be chosen by most for course convenience and as a mechanism of educational support, but how can value, if any, of growing ODN outliers, like MOOCs, be fairly considered let alone included if we can’t pin down what it is that moves learning forward. Learning analytics may assist (who though, is very tentative) but  addressing value added to networks from an holistic hub perspective is critical.  Otherwise, if new value is not apportioned, by it’s own nature, open, digital, networked (ODN) will simply and very effectively support continuation of heritage practices. Abundance management premiums will grow, but not change. 
• Societal value = recognised credentials for economic imperitives, insight economies, future world economic domination (add your own economic vision fatigue cliche here) but then ADD this
• devolved to ODN new glue 101′s and this is where “to build” from anew, for each knowledge event, will subsume changing from the current. Networks, micro-mentored hubs in blended spaces, align for courses. As needed. Each time. How will societal value, via The Degree, also shift to recognise ODN individuals as fundamentally assistive, discreet cogniscent units of a new learning currency? Institute stamps of heritage quality won’t leave, and will strengthen in those that adapt to incorporate inclusive definitions of value. The new granular 101 subjects; skills, attitudes, connections, contributions that  bind their networks must be value recognised.
• anathemic solvent for HE. Steeped in control, disruption and distribution of knowledge, especially to the masses, has long offended those with it. Networks simply amplify this disquiet. Look at the badge rage reactionaries recently for evidence. How could a self organising, self guided individual in our network add new value to our efficient packaged education? Passing our course is a good start. And we’ll give you our badge with our value attached as a life key. Hang on, careful what we wish for here because isn’t that alreadya feature of HE? Helping individual’s realise their learning potential as self guided questers in their learning networks, with their goals, their affordances and ultimately their value recognised? Therein lies the contested value posing as anathemic solvent to HE, or network glue to ODNs; ours or theirs. Can’t it be both?

@mweller alone, abundance entrenches heritage scholarship. Societal value, devolved to ODN new glue 101′s, is anathemic solvent for HE. 

So if I was allowed more than 140 (thank you twitter!) I would have said;

My mates and I (aka Heritage scholars) lurve our digital (content) abundance. Moar places to set up Regimented Learning Aid Posts and monetise our scarce context services. Ka-ching!

What’s that you say? We have to also have open AND networked as part of the package? Well lemme see. Open? That means any Joe can issue a badge; if the bill payer, on societies behalf, with high expectations, transparent  review, repeatable, relevant and with public standards, that says our quality is ace, then we’ll give ‘em a badge.  Nah, it’d never work. Too much messy objectivity. We need coded algorithms. That only we know. And only we can dole out. After all, Hocus and Pocus, it’s just a job. We’re after.

Now, to this new fangled network bunkum. Whadyamean, I gotta consider their networks, and their goals and their value. They become their own aministrators, own bureaucrats, own course designers and they want our recognition for our redundant services we charge our premium for that they no longer need coz they can get all that in some fancy-smanchy network? Ima telling you straight, I didn’t come down in the last shower and they’ll have ours, on our terms, not theirs, even if I morph into a tokenistic irrelevancy as the last thing I do. Mine I tell you…..bwwwwwahhhhhh.

Yes learning is messy; in open, digital and networked spaces, more so. There won’t be revolutions in the hallowed halls, which aren’t leaving, yelling “Value Me, Value Me”.  Quiet, disquiet and network reputation broadcasting is potentially disruptive. The risk of that is? it needn’t be.

But in abundance of content, connectivity and network memberships,  skilled builders of self foraged learning will emerge for competitive recognition. Fresh single serve learning (disaggregation) tabula rasa out,(discreet specific learning events) will pull in (not have pushed on) heavily curated (network/PLN) micro-needs (micro-needs!), from expert human contextualisers to funmeisters, online project management101.

Finally, in nascent insight society, to have to change will be considered redundently inefficient. A disability legacy that speaks with a heavy analogue accent.

However, networks for specific space and time learning projects, with access to teaching, will be one highly developed feature of HE that the connected are compelled to attend..

I trust carefully curated PLNs, my lighthouses, marker buoys, pilot lights to assist in the filter of that network abundance.

Data is incredibly sticky, sneaky even, if we let it be. If there’s a crack, like light, data will exploit the opening and just get in. Now that nothing ever gets deleted, we need a suite of effective network pilots (crack aids?) for each specific knowledge harbour we enter.

The Dewey system, chapters, indexes and bibliographies sufficed as analogue navigators, pre abundance, when risk, information and specialisation were rarer and more easily managed. The chances of running aground were minimised, unless a chaotic storm caught you out. Or the bloody bulb blew in the lighthouse.

We still need those heritage Dewey markers, maybe more so, as best new fluency builds on strong traditional bases. It always has. If we didn’t have the requisite skills in scarcity, hang on in abundance, we may well get swamped.

So when we want to discover The Essence of A Bottled Message, we know it’s present, washed up to be discovered and not by chance, if we choose that path. Filters quickly scan the grains of Network Beach, and despite trying to be sneaky and hide under the weed, out Ye Olde Bottle comes. (for me that found bottle, learning artefact, would be RSS of highly specific tags I trust my PLN to name as I would) 

At other times randomly picking through the network noise of accumulated flotsam and jetsam is kinda fun too, so we use another channel to satisfy that need. (for me, maybe twitter or 4square)

Accessing, taking from and effectively adding more value to our networks, places different, not new, demands on timeless human skills. (empathy, critical reflection, judgement, creation) I’m not buying into the new skills debate, because they’re not. In fact, I’m tending to tradition, legacy and heritage as emergent value points, but that’s for another post.

Learning times and spaces seem to me, more cyclical, less linear with sufficient meta-cognition to firstly recognise and then positively attach micro connections for our specific goals.

Like purposefully walking a circle beach, not an aimless ramble down a straight one. Where you acknowledge the comfortable known nodes, fleetingly or deeply dependent on needs at the time, connect with new ones that strongly resonate around a shared purpose, like a MOOC bonfire.

If I miss stuff washed up on our beach or a new connection along the first lap of the journey, it doesn’t matter because perpetual opportunity exists in discoverable networks and if I see through new eyes, I’ll eventually discover it on lap 2 or 22. And that’s OK.

There is always value to be pulled in if we are sifting and shifting. What we can’t become is common driftwood waiting to fossilise. Unless you choose irrelevancy of commonality in abundance.

What I used to do far more of (locating, accessing, repurposing) is not as important now as discovering problems on our donut beach worth solving and contextualising (and providing a safe fail framework) as challenges to provoke deeper thinking.

The shift to one of sameness in a flow is critical. If we’re kicking cans along the beach, co-operatively contributing, taking turns, it’s a far better journey than if one is dominating, begruding, exploiting cracks or only taking a compulsory turn because they want it over.

Cajoling collaboration, doing all the work, again, on lap 50, for the New Season Castaways, when group think never exists, is also unsustainable if Network Beach is The Indefinite Spiral.

Now I wonder who I’ll vote off?

pic credit donut beach kake2000