Open main menu

User:Leighblackall/Defining Networked Learning

The purpose of this project is to define Networked Learning - less in terms determined by technology, and more in terms defined by social and community interaction more broadly. I want to point to where authoritative definition has been allowed to become technologically determined and document my challenge to that definition. I aim to develop an alternative definition; and a simple-to-replicate research method that can be used by almost anyone to assess networked learning outcomes.

Read current draft

Development notesEdit

November 2014

Combining Redefining Networked Learning with Network Learning a Biomass Heat Transfer System and Network Learning Networked Learning

August 2014

Rejected by Ascilite 2014

July 2014

Submitted for review by Ascilite2014

June 2013

Partly published with Alexander Hayes et al under the title, Identity awareness and re-use of research data in Veillance and social computing through the 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)


  1. Alexander, C. Et al. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction, p99. New York Oxford University Press.
  2. Blackall, L. (2011). Situated art, situated learning - En Route by One Step At A Time Like This.
  3. Blackall, L. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Ubiquitous Learning.
  4. Blackall, L. (2011). Situated art, situated learning - En Route by One Step At A Time Like This.
  5. Blaschke, L M. (2012) Heutagogy and Lifelong Learning: A Review of Heutagogical Practice and Self-Determined Learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning Vol 13, No 1
  6. Castells, M. (2010). Network Theories of Power. Recording of a talk given at the University of Southern California, Annenberg
  7. Editors. (2010) Webism: the Internet as a social movement. n+1, issue 9.
  8. Engeström, Y. (2011). Yrjö Engeström on Networked Learning. Interview conducted by Chris Jones and published on Youtube, see part 3.
  9. Goodyear, P. Banks, S. Hodgson, V. and McConnell, D. eds (2004) Advances in Research on Networked Learning. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers p1
  10. Illich, I. (1971) Deschooling Society. Penguin Books
  11. Lave, J. Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press


Feedback from BronEdit

Hi Leigh My first impression is that you need to make the use of networking more explicit as this is the main focus of the article. At the moment it is lost in the detail about the process you went through for composting. Perhaps for each stage you have a heading to denote: 1. Composting process, and 2. Networking methods or something along those lines. Bron

  • Hmm, thanks Bron. That's a good idea. I'll see if I can create new section headings.. or, add summaries that point out the networked learning in each section, or add an introductory section that outlines networked learning. Many thanks for leaving me feedback. Leighblackall 01:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from ThomasEdit

Hi Leigh, I will be in and out of here for a couple of days. To start less substantive, a bum link grounded theory might need to be grounded theory also, if used I would like a broader explanation.

Let me first say that this is not only a good idea but timely and useful research. I feel that you might do some tightening up around the points you are very comfortable with but might make others pause for understanding. This comment is in line with Bron on Networked learning but extends to the different nodes and tools you interact with. I would broaden the scope of explanation to include more on your experience with the growing CoP in your networked learning for instance. You touch on this in individual sections but a dedicated view of your learning from node to node (in this instance) would be nice (how the tool supported the network traverse even better). Might you give explanation to the blended components of your work, also....You assume local and face to face interactions will be understood through a lens of networked learning....needs more cultivation. I am also interested in understanding more about the applied aspects of this study (design based or participatory action). In the learning process are you galvanizing a critical reference group of new learners or is this causal interaction? How have you contributed to the fields you research....I would like to see you make a claim here and defend (this is important work). Steelemaley 17:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Many thanks for taking the time to read my draft and give this feedback Thomas, you point out several areas where I can improve this article substantially. So I can know I understand all your points well, let me list them off first, then I can systematically go through the article and rework it accordingly, and come back here and add notes on how I've integrated your feedback. Firstly, your points in list form:
  1. Fix link to Wikipedia entry for Grounded Theory - Done.
  2. Broaden the scope for the section that explains Networked Learning, to include an overall summary of my experiences [and observations] networking with a community of practice around Jean Pain Composting and related topics, include how I see local and face to face interactions as also being networked learning.
  3. Clarify that my efforts to network learning around Jean Pain Composting was NOT to galvanise or try and organise people around the learning, but to tap into the latent energies of people casually learning about it, and casually using social media to document it. This clarification would fit in the introductory paragraphs of the Review notes, replicated in the introduction and abstract.
  4. Extend the Concluding Remarks section to make more mention of how this study can be applied. Either for an individual attempting to engage in networked learning, or perhaps for organisations to compliment the practice better. In some ways, the questions I pose at the end are gestures toward this, indicating an intention to study and write more. I will make clear that intention, and go someway towards answering them more, pointing to readings and examples, but still leaving it open enough for me to write another article on it.
  5. How have I contributed to related research? -- hmm, you have me here.. I must admit to being limited in my reading of other research related to networked learning. Over the years, I have been the main contributor to the Wikipedia entry for Networked learning, and in casually studying the topic enough to write that article, I've been less than impressed by what I've found. Almost always institutionally centered for example. Etienne Wenger and Ivan Illich's work I have found to be the most encompassing references. There must be more, its a shame that networking the learning about networked learning has not yielded results like it has for Jean Pain Composting. I wonder if in the context of open and networked PhD/research, it is fair to ask a network for assistance in relating studies to existing studies, and related readings. For sure its not physically possible to be across the 'literature' these days...
  • I'll come back here when I've finished reworked the article based on these points Thomas. Thanks Leighblackall 23:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

All looks good here. On point five, my view is that and open and networked Ph.D. would inspire connect and network research on theory and praxis in the field. I am currently reviewing topics brought up over the month, specifically Participatory Design, Design Based Research, Participant Action Research and how these fields are in nexus with networked learning. A question for you to mull...what is networked learning theory? Is it situated in connectivism....beyond? Steelemaley 17:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Good question, and one I'm looking to answer some day too. I don't think it would be situated in Connectivism, as the jury is still out on that being a learning theory or not.. as far as I know. Personally, I'm looking for a more historic theory, more free of technological metaphors and determinants. Leighblackall 22:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Ascilite 2014Edit

"We have now completed the review of your submission "Networked learning a biomass heat transfer system." Our decision is to decline the submission." August 2014

Reviewer A:Edit

  • Quality of research / scholarship (35%): Strongly Disagree
  • Originality and scholarly contribution (35%): Disagree
  • Relevance and suitability to ascilite 2014 (15%): Strongly Disagree
  • Quality of written presentation (15%): Disagree
  • Paper recommendation: Reject Paper
Summary of contribution
Unfortunately I do not recommend this paper for inclusion at Ascilite. I do not believe it is an appropriate paper for the theme of the conference, and there are issues regarding referencing, content, and research.
While a networked learning auto-ethnographic study is an interesting one, prior research into these areas does not appear to have been completed for this paper submission. It does not acknowledge significant research into these areas, particularly recent research. For example, the question asked at the end (3.What is the relationship or potential relationship between the local educational institution, and the Internet platforms that facilitate wider scale networked learning?) is one that has been discussed extensively by previous research.
The paper indicates the goal is to offer a framework for networked learning, but does not engage with this idea in the discussion. The paper needs to move beyond the personal learning story and provide the "big picture" research and discussion of this topic in order to be applicable for Ascilite, as it is too descriptive and personal at this stage. I understand It is an auto-ethnographic narrative but it still needs to engage with more scholarly concepts. I recommend reading some auto-ethnographies for some ideas on how to proceed.
Thank you for this review. I will indeed read more auto ethnographic papers, and use their example to improve this. I will draw from the literature reviews collected in my related works, specifically An ethical framework for ubiquitous learning and Network Learning Networked Learning Leighblackall (discusscontribs) 02:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Reviewer B:Edit

  • Quality of research / scholarship (35%): Disagree
  • Originality and scholarly contribution (35%): Agree
  • Relevance and suitability to ascilite 2014 (15%): Agree
  • Quality of written presentation (15%): Neutral
  • Paper recommendation: Accept Paper with Minor Revisions
Summary of contribution
The research topic is interesting and can definitely be expanded. The topic seems to suit the theme for ascilite 2014. However, it appears that the knowledge of literature and/or policy is not demonstrated or integrated into the paper. In addition, the methodology lacks academic rigor and appropriate analysis. Better proof reading is required. The paper should be more academic and not written in a conversational style/first person.
Thank you for this review. I will look more into the method and check where my approach is lacking. I've made an effort here to use plain language, and a simplified method for the stated purpose of articulating an easily replicated approach. I hope this is the only place this lacks academic rigor. I will draw from the literature reviews collected in my related works, specifically An ethical framework for ubiquitous learning and Network Learning Networked Learning Leighblackall (discusscontribs) 02:43, 16 November 2014 (UTC)