Beneath the facade...

If we scratch just below the surface of education, and we examine the nature of knowledge, we see an interesting challenge. It is increasingly apparent that knowledge as we 'know it' is inextricably linked to those who are in control of it. The knowledge gate-keepers have been in charge for some time, and knowledge is power. But all of this is already changing, as those beyond the inner circle begin to understand that through technology, they can create knowledge too. Our conceptions of knowledge could be said to be in a state of flux and uncertainty. If we accept that there is no monopoly anymore we need to ask some questions. In an age where anyone with an internet connection can create content, who now decides what we accept as a 'fact', and who is in control of our representations of reality?

Evidence from a number of sources has indicated that our conceptions of knowledge are indeed changing and that new and emerging technologies have a key role in the process (Guy, 2004; Lankshear and Knobel, 2006; Kop, 2007; Kress, 2009). Personalised tools lead to personalised learning, and the impact of this should not be underestimated. It is clear that tacit, informal knowledge resists explicit, formal knowledge. This is largely due to the fact that tacit knowledge includes the concepts, ideas and experiences that we have internalised personally, as opposed to the formalised knowledge we have learnt that is often decontextualised (Wheelahan, 2007). For many in today's technology rich, rapidly changing, networked society, personalised learning has acquired more value than anything that can be offered by organisations. Person-specific, individualised knowledge trumps generic knowledge that was suited to the needs of the industrial era.

Bates (2009) reinforced the view that generic, academic knowledge is no longer enough to meet the needs of the networked society:

"...it is not sufficient just to teach academic content (applied or not). It is equally important also to enable students to develop the ability to know how to find, analyse, organise and apply information/content within their professional and personal activities, to take responsibility for their own learning, and to be flexible and adaptable in developing new knowledge and skills. All this is needed because of the explosion in the quantity of knowledge in any professional field that makes it impossible to memorise or even be aware of all the developments that are happening in the field, and the need to keep up-to-date within the field after graduating."

Lyotard (1984) went further, suggesting that the boundaries between disciplines are eroding (many consider that they were always a false distinction anyway), and that traditional forms of knowledge transmission would be supplemented (and in some cases supplanted) by new methods of knowledge acquisition through technology. 30 years on, Lyotard's predictions are uncannily accurate. Citizen journalism for example, is rapidly becoming a key component of contemporary news reporting, appearing  in many major TV News channel broadcasts. Everyone who has a smart phone it seems, is a potential photo journalist. Wikipedia has for many replaced Encyclopaedia Britannica as the first port of call for knowledge acquisition. The fact that anyone with an internet connection can now contribute to knowledge is anathema to those who believe that knowledge generation should be the sole preserve of experts (Keen, 2007). Regardless of any such objections, user generated content is the dominant form of knowledge available on the web, and continues to grow. The checks and balances being implemented by the likes of Wikipedia are attempts to ensure that such knowledge is accurate and relevant. The users themselves will ensure that it is kept up to date. As Kop (2007) points out, 'knowledge is no longer transferred, but created and constructed', and that 'the validity of knowledge has become judged by the way it relates to the performance of society' (p. 193).

Are we witnessing the demise of the knowledge gate-keepers? Will we now see a decline in the Ivory Tower mentality that for centuries has held sway on learning for higher education? And how responsible is technology as a disruptor of this old paradigm of knowledge representation? Who is now in control of knowledge? We all are. What we do with that knowledge will determine the future of education.

References

Bates, T. (2009) Does technology change the nature of knowledge? Online Learning and Distance Learning Resources (Online publication)

Guy, T. (2004) Guess who's coming to dinner? cited in Kop, R. (2007) Blogs and wikis as disruptive technologies: Is it time for a new pedagogy? in M. Osbourne, M. Houston and N. Toman (Eds.) The Pedagogy of Lifelong Learning. London: Routledge.

Keen, A. (2007) The cult of the amateur: How today's Internet is killing our culture and assaulting our economy. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Kop, R. (2007) Blogs and wikis as disruptive technologies: Is it time for a new pedagogy? in M. Osbourne, M. Houston and N. Toman (Eds.) The Pedagogy of Lifelong Learning. London: Routledge.

Kress, G. (2009) Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2006) New Literacies: Everyday practices and classroom learning. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Lyotard, J. F. (1984) The post-modern condition: A report on knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Wheelahan, L. (2007) What are the implications of an uncertain future for pedagogy, curriculum and qualifications, in M. Osbourne, M. Houston and N. Toman (Eds.) The Pedagogy of Lifelong Learning. London: Routledge.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Beneath the facade... by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.