Acquiring knowledge has never been so easy! I lament the days that I had to dig through card catalogs as I wrote my Master's thesis. If I didn't understand something completely, there was not a way to easily find information on just the part I did not understand by refining my search. At this time in my past, information was more scarce and it was controlled by the media (journals, etc.) that took time to publish information after it was submitted. The information had to go through peer review, possible modifications, and then printing. All of these things take time and create a bottleneck for information. Shirky noted that the "professional became the gatekeeper" of knowledge. The professional in this case was the journals.
That changed dramatically with the advent of the internet. As Nancy Dixon stated in her blog Where Knowledge Management Has Been and Where it is Going Part 1, knowledge began to be managed at by connecting people to content. As Web 2.0 emerged, the inter-connectivity of the Web has increasingly connected people with people. Now, not only can I use the internet to search for information about a given topic, I can connect to others through FaceBook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and other social media to interact with others on a particular topic. Blogs and various user groups are also available to acquire more knowledge - often the practical knowledge of a given topic. Part 2 of Nancy Dixon's blog about knowledge management provided an overview of how people gain knowledge from others' experiences. With so many outlets for knowledge to be expressed, Shirky commented that this expansion has led to a "publish-then-filter" system. Individuals can publish their experiences, etc. and essentially get peer review to occur in real-time. This has blown away the bottleneck effect that used to keep information more scarce.
The next step in knowledge management is "leveraging collective knowledge" according to Nancy Dixon's third blog post on this subject. It will require leaders to "include cognitively diverse perspectives", integrate knowledge, and increase transparency. I am trying to imagine what this will look like in higher education. Coursework is changing and both the medium and modes by which we teach or changing. How will this affect higher education administration that is typically very hierarchical? I look forward to riding the wave of innovation an change in this area.
Outside Reference:
Shirky, C. (2009). Here comes everybody: The power
of organizing without organizations. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Julie - I think one way the knowledge creation changes that Shirky and Dixon have noted will affect higher education is through more interdisciplinary programs. I sit on a committee for the University of Nebraska - Lincoln where we are proposing a new PhD specialization for survey informatics - a combination of survey research, computer science, statistics and mathematical modeling. This will move survey methodology from paper-based survey mindsets to modern computer and mobile methodologies. This specialization could be studied in PhD programs of survey research/methodology, computer science/engineering, statistics or math. It is the first of its kind in the nation and a collaboration between private enterprise and the University.
ReplyDeleteThese kind of multidisciplinary programs and the networking of private/public institutions seem to be a direct reflection of changes we are seeing in the way knowledge and its creation occur in today's socially networked environment.
Thank you for your post!
Thank you for adding this! I noticed that you mentioned private enterprise is very involved in this program as well. Do you think that education will become more and more guided by the workforce needs (which are often interdisciplinary), rather than traditional degree program offerings? I've also wondered if the collective knowledge of the workforce needs and the public dollars available for financial aid would form a marriage driving students to particular career choices.
DeleteLeadership Miscellanies,
ReplyDeleteOne item that boomed in my thoughts was the upside of “publish-then-filter”. You noted that with this forced systematic process due to the amount of knowledge that is available, peer reviewing can occur in real time. Of course depending on what is being peer reviewed, this can be a good thing. Upon entering this week’s discussion, my preference is and still is to filter then publish – but you have shown me a bright side. My stance has remained because I fear that while we are able to get our hands on so much more information, which transforms into knowledge, perhaps some of the information that is published isn’t accurate. In this event, I now have negative knowledge that I could possibly be regurgitating to others, spreading innocent mistruths. How can we possibly combat such shortcoming or consequence? I will admit, while I do utilize the internet a lot to find peer reviewed journal articles, etc., I’m speaking more to the journalism that has been published by amateurs. How do we emphasize that although the internet has provided such an upside to communication and information sharing, not everything can be taken as the “Gospel”? How do we teach others what sources to “trust” and what to “not trust”? Hmmmmm…I don’t have the answers… At any rate, I do sincerely appreciate you guiding me down the road towards the positive light.
I think that it is always very important to try to read several sources. I have read many things on the internet that are false, but I often try to find at least two sources that agree. I also warn my students to check a couple of sources when they are seeking answers to questions on the internet. The beauty of the internet is that you can often question the source very easily.
DeleteThank you for sharing your perspectives this week Julie. I find your simple and straightforward observations are on target as usual.
ReplyDeleteI do like the gatekeeper image that Shirky uses to represent previous methods of distributing information and making knowledge available in such abundant fashion. We do live in an age unlike any other which gives us an opportunity to participate in a great adventure.
As an educator myself, I find myself wondering how all of these advancements will affect the way that I do my job – or even if there will be a need to have someone to do my job in a future educational setting. Your point about the hierarchical structures in the higher education can just as well be made at other levels of education and their associated school systems which have their own cadres of leaders. How will the future be affected for these institutions and their styles and need for leadership.
I must confess that it is difficult for me to imagine a system in which there is no need for a governing authority who works with an executive team that implements the policies of the governing authority. However, I do see that it might be possible to replace some of the bureaucratic functions of middle level management in ways that might resemble the way that robots have replaced the factory line worker.
Have you seen the any indications of such changes in your own experience with higher education? Are we simply hypothesizing here or is there evidence that such change is already on the way?
Joe Hollowell
Joe-
DeleteI have nothing to base my thoughts on regarding educational administration. I keep trying to imagine how something as complex as an educational system can be re-done.
I see the competency-based curricula expanding and wonder not if, but how this is going to affect teaching and learning. This new way at looking at knowledge gained through experience and educational systems is theoretically wonderful, but a bit unnerving as well. Will individuals really have the things they need? I teach so much more than Anatomy and Physiology in my Anatomy and Physiology classes. Many of these other things have nothing to do with science, but with life skills. What will this type of curriculum do to administrative needs?
I sometimes fear I have dug myself so deep into the rut of traditional education that I cannot imagine anything else.......even if it might be better.
"...How will this affect higher education administration that is typically very hierarchical?"
ReplyDeleteGreat question, Julie! From what I have seen, most courses are still designed and delivered as if information was scarce. Tests are reused year after year, even though many of the answers could easily be Googled. Couple with this the rising costs of education and the increasing debt load shouldered by our students. It is not a scenario that can scale much longer.
And it is not just the colleges and their faculty and administrators. If you buck the trend and create a constructivist / connectivist course in which students discover for themselves knowledge, you get blasted for "not teaching." We are at a very interesting time in higher education!