George Siemens has posted much needed rethinking on the role of teachers and experts in Networked Learning. He presents the idea of a curator as a central player in initiating a focus for a learning network.
I very much like this idea of the curator and I’d like to add more to it by describing and preserving the integrity of the teacher and the facilitator.
As many already know I try to reinvigorate questions and discussion on the role of teachers from time to time – all be it a little confrontational 🙂 Lately I have been broadly focusing on the integrity of a facilitator, especially as I reckon the teaching profession is [innocently] corrupting the integrity of facilitation with teachers calling themselves facilitators – but remaining teachers in every sense of the word. I guess teachers do this in response to the as yet illdefined roles needed in a networked learning. They are perhaps prematurely trying to redefine their role of teacher without yet fully understanding why or how, and engaging in the dialogue that George points to. I don’t think teaching needs redifining, it is fine as it is, it just needs to be deinstitutionalised and moved away from being the primary player in people’s learning. Artichoke is in my opinion the deepest and most thought provoking edublogger writing in this vein of thinking, and she is drawing very much from the thinking of Illich.
As George suggests, perhaps the expertise of a curator are more suited to becoming a central role in networked learning – someone that draws on an array of teachers and content to suit a particular purpose. I want to add the facilitator as another important role here, as someone or something that assists people to negotiate the exhibition that the curator has assembled. Not a teacher dressed up as a facilitator – someone who manages to remain impartial while at the same time engaging and interpretive; someone that can respond quickly to various and often unpredictable contributions from participants; and someone who does all this without asserting a sense of authority or even expertise over a topic, but instead calls on teachers and experts to engage when a teacher or an expert is needed. And that’s where networked learning and the Internet really help us. They give us access to a vast number of teachers and experts to call on at any given time!
But where can we find curators and facilitators? I don’t think we can reliably find good facilitators in the teaching sector.. perhaps we will find better facilitators from the fields of journalism, comedy, performance, talk back radio, speakers to the house of reps, etc. And as George points out, we will find curators from museums and art galleries (lets not forget the librarians!) I see the likes of Stephen Downes, George Siemens, David Wiley and so many other “A listers” – or most referenced contributors, primarily as teachers and content providers in this network. People and content that the curator might draw from. Modern day researchers who are available to be teachers and content providers in an exhibition, conference of course. They’re participants as well – especially in areas they are not recognised as experts, but the sustained focus, quality, popularity, experience and depth of their work makes them more teacherly than participants in their field. So it is not them that are the facilitators (although they are often capable as George showed with his facilitation of FOE). But one cannot be both an expert or teacher and facilitator at the same time.
I’m yet to come accross someone in our widened educational network that I would call a professional facilitator and/or curator.. perhaps like the teaching sector, the edublogging sector is not a reliable source for good facilitators. Perhaps the source for good facilitators and curators do not have an online presence and network yet…
But when they emerge I see the roles playing out like this: A curator finds resources and a space to bring together an “exhibition” of content, experts and teachers, then either adopts the different role of facilitator, or employs the services of a professional facilitator who will assist all the participants to negotiate the various aspects of the exhibition.
For example: Someone who organises a conference is essentially curating content, and will either facilitate that event themselves, or hire a professional conference facilitator to do it. The teachers and experts play a secondary role in these sorts of learning environments by providing the content and focus. In a sense, the people and content in this secondary layer are competing with each other for attention and recogniton.. they often choose to collaborate instead/or as well as compete (I mean compete in a very positive sense) for the attention and participation in their topic area. The tertiary level in this type of learning environment are the participants. They move around the content that is presented to them by the curator, and engage in various discussions, workshops and other events with assistance from the facilitator if needed. Often the curators, facilitators, teachers and experts join in and participate as well, but they unavoidably carry with them the status and isolation of their role, while the participants are free to move around unrestrained by an identity as fully formed as a teacher or expert at this “exhibition” that the curator has put on.
An art exhibition (and the opening in particular) is very similar. The artworks, the artists and the critics provide the content; the curator selects the content; and the participants develop the interpretation/learning. The more I think about it, so much of the world works like this. The old practice of classroom, captive audience teaching, and standard set fees is such an abused privilege!
So begins a new/or revisited thread of networked thought I hope… and we may at last be developing a clearer model for networked learning.
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 25, 2007 at 4:38 pm
George Siemens
Hi Leigh,
I appreciate your thinking on this. I reviewed your wikiversity discussion on facilitator and teacher to get a bit of background on your thinking. If I have interpreted you correctly, we have the following roles in our discussion:
Experts: Someone with sustained contribution to a field…and is known for depth/breadth of knowledge. (I’m a bit unclear on how you see experts in general – at times in reading your post, I thought you see experts and teachers as the same…but at other times, you appear to view them as distinct. I’m going to interpret it based on the latter). Experts are also content creators.
Teachers: experts with authority. The authority may be freely granted by the learner – in a decentralized network manner…or may be assigned by an organization (i.e. school).
Curators: play the role of interpreting, organizing, and presenting content
Facilitators: able to guide, direct, lead, and assist learners, not necessarily being a subject matter expert.
While my thinking is still forming on this, I’m currently of the mind that the curator and network administrator (Fisher’s idea) best describe functions of teaching in a networked environment. A facilitator is generally communally focused. Where groups gather, facilitators become important – discussion forums, online conferences, etc. Consider a chef – she has to be competent in order to teach. She is an expert. But in order to bring learners into the discipline, she has to do more than facilitate. She will assist learners in developing practical skills, helping them to create both a network of understanding and an external network for ongoing learning.
The more clear the task/outcome/skill, the more valuable the teacher or expert. The more uncertain the intent (or the “softer” the goal – i.e. understanding a concept instead of mastering a physical skill), the more valuable a facilitator might become. Where dialogue, discourse, or socialization are important, a facilitator plays a greater role. Where content/skills exist, the teacher plays the greater role.
But how does this relate to networks? In a network, learners have autonomy. They are free to go where they wish. Explore what they would like. Many learners, however, are more experienced with teacher-learner relationships. It’s uncomfortable to step out of that role and become an active explorer. Where do I go? What do I need to know? What should I do next? The teacher is still desired. The facilitator can point and direct people to resources, but is not necessarily an expert. A facilitator serves as lubricant for dialogue and learning. But cannot become an active co-creator (of content and understanding) with learners – a role which an expert can play.
So we are left with a teacher who needs to do more than teach, a facilitator who needs to do more than facilitate. At this point, I suggest we turn to curators. Curators play vital roles of fostering understanding, interpretation, and guiding. And not simply content. Concepts, ideas, perspectives – all of popper’s world 3 stuff…or Bereiter’s conceptual artifacts. Curators are not neutral…they have a perspective (or at least represent a perspective – a skilled curator will encourage others to become aware of the filters through which they are experiencing the exhibit, information, or concepts). Curators both teach and facilitate, depending on context.
btw – you’ve described the above roles as being exclusive to an individual (at least as I read it). For example, the curator isn’t the facilitator who isn’t the teacher. Isn’t it possible that at various time in the process of teaching – with the intent of assisting learners in forming networks of understanding – that we will play these different roles to varying degrees? A teacher need not always be a teacher. Or an expert.
…as well, you suggest the expert can’t facilitate and teach at the same time. Any reason why?
As I was writing this comment, I was interrupted by a pleasant skype chat with Dave Cormier…and we got talking about Ramalingam’s six functions of networks: http://www.odi.org.uk/rapid/Projects/PPA0103/Functions.html …which presents some similar thoughts to the role distinctions you’re expressing here. Might be worth exploring…but I think it’s important that we don’t wholesale transfer network concepts from “hard sciences” without first critically analyzing applicability to learning.
Nice to see this conversation occurring. Many of us know what we don’t want anymore. But we don’t have a vision of what we want. And we don’t quite understand the role shifts we’ll undergo.
August 27, 2007 at 5:01 pm
leighblackall
Well George, after re reading my post – I’m surprised you got anything out of it!! Sorry for a jumble of words.. I think I’m having a bad word day/week. I have a feeling this is going to last for a while 😦 sorry.
As for your comment! Where to start. Little by little, piece by piece I spose…
The first thing that springs to mind is the debate that Stephen Downes triggered last year while he was terrorising New Zealand (or was that NZ terrorising him ;). The groups and networks debate. To my mind, this debate – or the arguments that Stephen makes – is some of the most important stuff to consider in terms of networked learning. In there, and the consideration of power dynamics, are the seeds to my ideas that teachers cannot facilitate – it has everything to do with inherent power to the role – and so the appropriate suggestion you make regarding curators. I think my problem is that while I understand the distinction between groups and networks, and even believe in the strength of networks, I too easily fall back to thinking about grouped learning.
The second thing that comes to mind is the realisation that we all tend to speak about Networked Learning as a model that surpasses other models. Some more so than others, I more than some. I don’t think we do this intentionally, but as you point out in your comment, there are many situations were networked learning may not prove to be the best approach for learning. I think I and others get caught up in the social and political implications for networked learning and hope that it will spark the solutions for bigger problems like schooling.
So I think we would do well to attempt to describe Networked Learning and the roles within that model, through a series of scenarios. Personally I would like to see work done in video. Something similar to Will Richardsons Blogging video way back (link lost), but as sophisticated as the more recent MobilEd video scenarios. I think scenarios will be more productive in explaining the notion of networked learning these days and will help us refine our thinking on roles in all sorts of situations… not sure if you have resources on hand for making video scenarios.. its on my to-do list…
I agree with your proposal to introduce the curator as a player in networked learning concept. I did suggest that the librarian might be someone with similar instincts (considering those nice book displays they often put together as you enter the library) add to this newer ideas of the librarian role, such as library 2.0…
More later.. have been stewing on this for a few days now… can’t say I’m any clearer.. not helped by the atrocious post I’ve made that inevitably frames yours and my comments later 😦 need to wash the slate clean and have another try…
October 20, 2008 at 1:52 pm
About to develop another model for open access education « Learn Online
[…] progresses people toward a credential if that has value to them. Hillary’s job is to currate the learning programme (similar to that of a film festival coordinator perhaps), and to facilitate people’s […]
September 22, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Unnamed 09/22/2009 « with an eye at the window
[…] Regarding George Siemens curators. « Learn Online […]