Collaboration
History is the study of past events in particularly in human affairs. Some of these past events ended up in positive outcomes or negative outcomes in human affairs. Humans can study particular the negative outcomes, so they can avoid repeating them over and over again in the future. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it (Santayana, n.d.).
In addition, history tells us that humans have traveled long way to get where they are now. Humans started with the development of agriculture approximately 10,000 years ago (Rheingold, 2008). The development of agriculture allowed humans to establish the first big civilization. Then, the establishment of the first civilization enabled humans to build the first cities and first empires. The existence of empires forced the administrators of the empires to hire people to keep track of the wheat, sheep, wine, and the taxes that were owed to them by making marks (Rheingold, 2008). Then, the alphabet was also invented and civilizations continued to grow until communication technology arrived and humans became literate (Rheingold, 2008).
It is easy for someone to see that humans always worked together with collaboration to accomplish things in the past. Therefore, I agree with Rheingold that humans have a basic instinct to “interact and work as a group” (Rheingold, 2008). We have to open our eyes and look around us to see that there is a new form of wealth that must have emerged. Technology enables us to come together in different ways and create new forms of production such as peer-to-peer production (Rheingold, 2008).
There were two economic games that were created the in the early years of nuclear war. It was the time of the period where the only person you could trust was yourself. The two economic games were the prisoner’s dilemma and ultimate game. Two players can play in each economic game. Both players have a chance to survive in game if both payers want to collaborate with each other. If the two players can’t trust each other, they can make suboptimal moves. In fact, they have to prove to each other that they are trustworthy to allow cooperation to take place between them (Rheingold, 2008).
Moreover, Capitalism is a system that is a few years old and that works with collaboration among humans and the use of technology (Rheingold, 2008). In science, cooperative arrangements have moved from a peripheral role to a central role in biology (Rheingold, 2008). Regardless of what is being learned, constructive processes operate and learners form, elaborate, and test candidate mental structures until a satisfactory one emerges (Perkins, as cited in Driscoll, 2005, p. 387). Therefore, technology can facilitate collaboration among learners based on constructivist principles. We have to ask ourselves, what forms of suffering could be alleviated to have a better future? We have to ask ourselves, what forms of wealth could be created if we knew a little bit more about cooperation?
In addition, history tells us that humans have traveled long way to get where they are now. Humans started with the development of agriculture approximately 10,000 years ago (Rheingold, 2008). The development of agriculture allowed humans to establish the first big civilization. Then, the establishment of the first civilization enabled humans to build the first cities and first empires. The existence of empires forced the administrators of the empires to hire people to keep track of the wheat, sheep, wine, and the taxes that were owed to them by making marks (Rheingold, 2008). Then, the alphabet was also invented and civilizations continued to grow until communication technology arrived and humans became literate (Rheingold, 2008).
It is easy for someone to see that humans always worked together with collaboration to accomplish things in the past. Therefore, I agree with Rheingold that humans have a basic instinct to “interact and work as a group” (Rheingold, 2008). We have to open our eyes and look around us to see that there is a new form of wealth that must have emerged. Technology enables us to come together in different ways and create new forms of production such as peer-to-peer production (Rheingold, 2008).
There were two economic games that were created the in the early years of nuclear war. It was the time of the period where the only person you could trust was yourself. The two economic games were the prisoner’s dilemma and ultimate game. Two players can play in each economic game. Both players have a chance to survive in game if both payers want to collaborate with each other. If the two players can’t trust each other, they can make suboptimal moves. In fact, they have to prove to each other that they are trustworthy to allow cooperation to take place between them (Rheingold, 2008).
Moreover, Capitalism is a system that is a few years old and that works with collaboration among humans and the use of technology (Rheingold, 2008). In science, cooperative arrangements have moved from a peripheral role to a central role in biology (Rheingold, 2008). Regardless of what is being learned, constructive processes operate and learners form, elaborate, and test candidate mental structures until a satisfactory one emerges (Perkins, as cited in Driscoll, 2005, p. 387). Therefore, technology can facilitate collaboration among learners based on constructivist principles. We have to ask ourselves, what forms of suffering could be alleviated to have a better future? We have to ask ourselves, what forms of wealth could be created if we knew a little bit more about cooperation?
In conclusion, collaboration is an effective tool for learning that humans should use to promote learning. Added Value Model of Collaboration in Higher Education is a research paper that has been conducted in 2010. This paper describes teaching strategy using an online collaborative methodology with added value based on: (a) generating student profile, (b) online knowledge building and (c) evaluation strategy (Béres & Turcsányi-Szabó, 2010, p. 203).
Reference
Béres, I., & Turcsányi-Szabó, M. (2010). Added Value Model of Collaboration in Higher Education. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 6.
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Rheingold, H. (2008, February). Howard Rheingold on collaboration [Video file]. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html
Santayana, G. (n.d.). BrainyQuote.com. Retrieved April 10, 2014, from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgesant101521.html
This post was very informative. I will have to take some time this week and read the research paper you linked in your blog. You asked very good questions at the end of the blog. What would you say if someone asked you those questions?
ReplyDeleteLori
Lori,
DeleteI can say only this to you about the two questions that you liked. These questions are telling us that we are all capable of changing ourselves to become more productive citizens. All I am trying to say is that these questions are asking us to wake up and see the world from a different prospective. Therefore, I can start with myself by looking at myself in the mirror. I should try to change the man I see in the mirror to think in a positive way about the future. No matter what it takes I have to learn how to use cooperation in a way that I can help other people in our society. Therefore, the winds of glory will have a change to return back and life on earth will change tremendously in the years to come.
Thanks,
Konstadinos
Konstadinos, I too loved the questions at the end of your blog. Insightful and informative. Highlighting your last two questions, do you feel that education reform has fully exhausted the ideas of technology in the classrooms? Do you also feel that in order for true education reform to take place, technology must be at the fore front of this charge? Your thoughts, Konstadinos.
ReplyDeleteOrin,
ReplyDeleteI feel that this is only the beginning of technology we are experiencing in the classrooms and online. In addition, I feel that we will see more amazing things about technology in the years to come. I am not sure if technology must be at the fore front of this education reform. I know that technology cannot be apart from this educational reform.
Thanks,
Konstadinos Alevriadis