Using Multiple Technologies to Put Rhizomatics to Work in Self-Study (original) (raw)

Creating Awareness around Rhizomatic Principles in mLearning

International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 2017

Educational technological innovation to enhance the learning experience of students requires a sound understanding of intended learning outcomes and an understanding of the pedagogical affordances of technology. Literature reveals that an understanding of the application of mLearning in facilitating the achievement of specific learning objectives is limited. This may lead to negative quality perceptions and subsequently have a negative impact on the adoption of potentially rich technological resources. The challenge for educators is to create learning environments based on sound didactical principles. The purpose of this study is to highlight rhizomatic principles in mLearning practice using an integrated research synthesis. This may contribute to creating an awareness of, and a belief in rhizomatic principles in mLearning practice and this in turn may improve their practice. This is based on the premise of the theory of planned behaviour.

Rhizomatic pedagogy in higher education: A comparative analysis

New directions in rhizomatic learning: From poststructural thinking to nomadic pedagogy , 2023

Rhizomatic learning doesn't always align with formal higher education structures and processes perhaps because of its heavy emphasis on nonlinear and community-based approach. In this chapter, we discuss this tension based on our experiences using rhizomatic pedagogy in higher education and identify points for pedagogical praxis. We first provide a review of the literature describing rhizomatic learning with an emphasis on applications in open and networked learning. We then present and discuss two cases of rhizomatic learning in British and Turkish higher education institutions in the context of academic development and educational technology. The case studies demonstrate that rhizomatic learning in higher education should be considered in relation to the macro context of the institution and the disciplinary practice, the meso context of the classroom ecology, and the micro context of the individual learner. We particularly highlight the extent to which teachers may need to facilitate rhizomatic learning in formal higher education for inclusive participation. We also argue that the notion of an independent, or individual, nomadic learner enjoying educational freedom is an imaginary construct that needs to be critically analysed in rhizomatic pedagogy.

Rhizomatic Education: Community As Curriculum.

Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 2008

The pace of technological change has challenged historical notions of what counts as knowledge. Dave Cormier describes an alternative to the traditional notion of knowledge. In place of the expert-centered pedagogical planning and publishing cycle, Cormier suggests a rhizomatic model of learning. In the rhizomatic model, knowledge is negotiated, and the learning experience is a social as well as a personal knowledge creation process with mutable goals and constantly negotiated premises. The rhizome metaphor, which represents a critical leap in coping with the loss of a canon against which to compare, judge, and value knowledge, may be particularly apt as a model for disciplines on the bleeding edge where the canon is fluid and knowledge is a moving target.

AULABIERTA: a collective model of rhizomatic pedagogy

Englis tex for the Aualbierta On line- Library, aviable on the Web: http://aulabierta.info/node/847 In this text I will try to define the collective practice entailed in the Aulabierta project using a rhizomatic work model. To understand this work model the first thing that needs to be made clear is the meaning of rhizomes. For Deleuze and Guattari, rhizomes entail a way of conceiving the sciences and knowledges produced by them that is different to how they have traditionally been constructed. In the eyes of these authors, there exists a kind of science called aborescent which, simulating the growth structure of a tree, appears to firstly necessitate some deep roots, then a body of knowledge or trunk, and then some branches which finally give us the fruits of knowledge. These sciences produce an aborescent knowledge which is based on dialectical structures consisting of a binary logic of dichotomies (the good and/or the bad, white and/or black, above and/or below, the one who knows and/or the ignorant,...). Consequently, the roots always structure and generate compartmentalized knowledges which are monolithically controlled and directed from top to bottom. Tracing and reproducing establish themselves as logics of knowledge, and always according to pyramidal hierarchies which must always bear their fruits at the very top of the cusp.