Twitter as Fractal, Ethical, Pedagogical Institution

I am writing this from my bed laid up with a sore back. There is nothing like being unable to move or function in a way that one is used to moving and functioning to force you to think about unlearning. Most of our learning comes away from schools but we do not spend the time to reflect on it properly. Most of our learning does come from the social spaces we engage with on a regular basis. As such we are never really distanced from our “learning spaces.”

This is why I think the concept of “unlearning” requires a lot of reflection and unpacking. Can we ever truly “unlearn” if we are surrounded by spaces of learning? And what does it mean to unlearn? I often ponder unlearning and what it can mean in my life and practice but I think my hang up is actually about terminology and nomenclature not process or concept. Unlearn seems like a false name, a pseudonym for fractal pedagogy (but more on that later). 

So our social spaces are spaces of learning that is a given. As an extension to this architecture thus becomes firmly grounded in education. Understanding our relation to space, the space we take up and the spaces we interact in is a deeply ethical inquiry that gets at the heart of pedagogical reflective practices. Acknowledging this space and architecture is about respect, themselves for your learning, your peers and the value of this space.  This wonderful article that @jessifer tweeted the other day by @jenansley touches on this and it is a great read. 

 

Reading Illich this week, I was struck by this line of thought: Twitter functions as a contact zone or a zone of high contact, a space of reflection, a fractal pedagogy. Twitter is a space that resides both inside and outside media, both inside and outside institutions and institutionalization. It is an ironic equalizer that provides access but is also predicated on access. I will let Dave Cormier (@davecormier) have his rhizomes for I prefer fractals much more. Similar to the line of dialogue by @Bali_Maha and @NomadWarMachine, about how thoughts or ideas sometimes blur in Twitter chats, I referred to it tongue-in-cheek as the borg which has much more negative connotations than considering it as fractal pedagogy. Fractals provide beautiful geometric patterns from afar but if you look closer each individualized part is a repetition of the larger pattern. It is a geometric synecdoche, parts are wholes. As a zone of high contact and a space of critical engagement (especially when you glance at hashtags like #highered, #moocmooc, #rhizo14, etc.) you see patterns repeating in Twitter yet holistically we are all parts of wholes. Each individual moment of engagement, each tweet, reformulates the pattern, recreates the totality. It is an active moving social space of learning. We are disestablishing and re-establishing every second and it’s wonderful. Want to see this visualized? Just go here

Outside of these spaces only accessible to those with technological and social access are trusts that are doing this educational work on an experiential scale. Last week two separate non-related in any way academics let me know about Ruskin Mill Trust ( http://www.rmt.org/). I have been doing a lot of research on what they do this week because I am not a believer in coincidence especially in relation to Ruskin ;)  Ruskin Mill is a perfect example of incorporating reflection and imagination into an established yet truly personalized curricula (as all learning and education should be). It is an example of critical pedagogy in that it promotes various types of literacy and highlights and provides the space and supports for agency in educational pathways.

Sometimes being forced to renegotiate your living space and engage with ideas from a hacked writing space/ working architecture opens up ideas and suggests new geometric interpretations. Hopefully, this adds to the discussion of how Twitter can function as our fractal pedagogical outside institution.