In Chapter 7, Colin Lankshear and Michele Knoble describe how the internet can be utilized as a platform to establish social learning. So far this semester we have discussed literacy, Discourse, social practices, remixes, and collaborative literature. To me, social learning really culminates many of these ideas together.
Although the concept of social learning has several conceptualizations, I think the one with the best foundations is what Lanksher and Knoble write about Brown and Adler; “By social learning… learning based on the assumption that our understanding of concepts and processes is constructed socially in conversations about the matters in question” (2011, p. 218). Lankshear and Knoble later write that social learning can be leveraged by virtual environments, giving learners chances to “participate in ‘flows of action’ where they get ‘encultured’ into a practice” (2011, p. 229) Clearly we have experience with this by taking courses online in the Learning Technologies program, but this also reminded me of two major assignments in two classes I’ve taken so far in this program.
First, I was reminded of the Digital Culture and Social Media course I took a few semesters ago, where we built an online environment for social learning. More specifically, these were called PLNs, or personal learning networks.
I built a discussion forum using Google Groups for a budding book club at my company. It survived a few months, but it eventually withered away.
For this PLN, the learning objective I established was “After the first month of the book club, the book club’s readers will be able to interpret, evaluate, and state opinions about the text.” I was going to achieve this by having the club’s readers post recollections, assessments, and arguments about our selected books in the forum.
After reading Lankshear and Knoble, I see that posting on the discussion board were social practices of a book club member Discourse. By posting on the forums, the book club members were successfully demonstrating their literacy as readers. I even had a table listing Overt and Covert Objectives; Overt being the social practice of posting, and Covert being the internal human elements
Lankshear and Knoble describe in Chapter 2.
This chapter also reminded me of affinity spaces, a concept I covered a bit more in depth last semester in my Games and Learning class. In this class, I followed a fan-made discussion forum surrounding the video game Skyrim.
I assessed the forum under the criteria of an affinity space. Here are the characteristics I felt applied:
- Affinity spaces are a ‘fuzzy concept’ in the logical sense that they are defined by fuzzy boundaries and not necessary and sufficient conditions. – Gee& Hayes
- A common endeavor for which at least many people in the space have a passion – not race, class, gender, or disability – is primary. – Gee& Hayes
- Affinity spaces are not separated by age. – Gee& Hayes
- Newbies, masters, and everyone else share a common space. – Gee& Hayes
- The development of both specialist and broad, general knowledge are encouraged, and specialist knowledge is pooled. - Gee& Hayes
- A view of learning that is individually proactive, but does not exclude help, is encouraged. – Gee& Hayes
- People get encouragement from an audience and feedback from peers, though everyone plays both roles at different times. – Gee& Hayes
- Not everyone must contribute, but all must believe they are free to contribute when ready and what they contribute will be appropriately valued. – Jenkins
- Affinity spaces are distinct from formal education systems in several ways. While formal education is often too conservative, the informal learning within popular culture is often experimental. – Jenkins
- We want to argue that human learning becomes deep, and often life changing when it is connected to a nurturing affinity space. -– Gee& Hayes
Through this criteria, affinity spaces seem to demonstrate, as Lankshear and Knoble point out, “not only ‘learning about’ the subject matter but also ‘learning to be’ a full participant in the field” (2011, p. 218). Although I was only playing a video game and sharing my thoughts and experiences with other gamers, I was finding my own place in the community of Skyrim fans.
During the Games and Learning course, I often compared online affinity spaces to PLNs. What I’m now interpreting is that PLNs and affinity spaces fall under this umbrella of social learning. They both seem to be products of the leveraged uses of social learning online.
The War of Art, Pages 149 – 165The final pages of The War of Art do not concern much of the content about social learning that Lankshear and Knoble cover in Chapter 7. Most of Pressfield's book deals with literacies, Discourse, and social practices of being a creator. Steven Pressfield closes the book writing, “Are you a born writer? Were you put on earth to be a painter, a scientist, an apostle of peace? In the end the question can only be answered by action” (2003, p. 165). His book acts as the encoded text for this creator Discourse, but does not provide a social learning environment. A writer, painter, scientist, etc. most definitely could find this type of environment online.
Nonetheless, Chapter 7 does make reference to this interesting notion of “grit.” Lankshear and Knoble write that “grit” is “a disposition that combines ‘persistence plus passion,” (2011, p. 223) and a “perseverance and passion for long term goals” (2011, p. 223). The last pages, and the entirety of The War of Art for that matter, are all about grit. Page after page, grit, grit, grit. Although, much of this grit is not for the “social, economic, ‘globalizing’” reasons that Lankshear and Knoble describe. Pressfield writes “to labor in the arts for any reason other than love is prostitution” (2003, p. 151). Yet, the whole concept behind Pressfield’s The War of Art can almost be best summed up in a few words in Chapter 7: “Pursuing mastery requires ‘thousands of hours of practice’ in addressing issues and problems, in trial and error, learning how others do things, and so on.” (2011, p. 224).
CitationsLankshear, C. & Knoble, M. (2011). New Literacies: Concepts and Theories. In New Literacies: Everyday Practices and Social Learning (3rd ed., p.218, 223, 224, 229). New York, New York: Open University Press.
Pressfield, S. (2003). The War of Art: Break through the Blocks and Win Your Inner Creative Battles (p. 151, 165). New York, New York: Grand Central Publishing.
