Bauwens mentions here the following:
1. …a transmission from someone that has the knowledge with someone who doesn’t have the knowledge.
2. The value becomes in your experience in tapping the network rather than the particular relationship between teacher and learner.
Doesn’t this first statement put more value on the importance of content while the second statement places more value on the “pipe”? And isn’t the teacher part of the network?
Building a learning community within a class requires that clear objectives be established (i.e., desired results that learners understand), learners have the chance to self-assess, and they collaborate with others (1). Adhering to a connectivism learning theory (based on the description in this video) leaves me to believe that it’s more important to simply “tap the network” and let the learners create their own network set (I wanted to say interpret) that guides them to some intended practice. But teachers are looking for a type of practice that provides the evidence needed to accurately evaluate the learner (based on the class objectives), so learners must be able to distinguish between good and bad content (i.e., understanding, knowledge, skill, process, or concept) as they prepare for their future or ongoing practice. This is where I think the teacher plays a critical role as part of the learning network as a whole.