«Talgenism» in the Digital Age: A Domestic History of cMOOC

The authors consider the questions of the transformation of educational space in the modern digital era. They focus on the weakness of the theoretical foundation of e-learning in the context of mass practice of its implementation and application and discuss the legitimacy of applying traditional theories to e-learning in a radically changed educational space and the need to develop a new theory. Cognitivism, constructivism, and behaviorism are the basis of the traditional pedagogical system (class-lesson in school and lecture-seminar in universities). It is shown that a different pedagogical system is represented by connectivism – the theoretical construction of G. Siemens who created it as a “theory of the digital age.” On the basis of connectivism and for its study, G. Siemens and S. Downs have developed the first massive open online courses (cMOOC) – and this theoretical design was put into practice. One more learning technology similar to the connectivism was discovered, which is also based on a pedagogical system different from the traditional one. This made it possible to give the “learning theory of the digital age” a noticeable “historical volume”. The roots of the modern connectivism of massive open online courses have been discovered in Russia. One hundred years ago, the famous teacher Alexander Rivin for the first time realized the idea of collective mutual learning. This method which he called “talgenism” (a derivative of “talent” and “genius”) relied on “dialogical communication” in variable pairs and allowed to achieve incredible results in the joint training of people of different ages and different levels of training. The article traces the historical milestones of the development of the method of collective mutual learning in Russia and adduces the documentary evidence of experiments on the creation of a fundamentally different pedagogical system. The authors argue that the method of collective mutual learning (talgenism) of the Russian teacher A.G. Rivin and the technology of modern connectivism implemented in the massive open online courses with cMOOC of Canadian researchers G. Siemens and S. Downs have common key features. Despite the time and geographical gap (Russia, 1918 and Canada, 2008), each of these technologies makes it possible a fundamentally new learning process focused on the needs of a student, the organization of which is practically unattainable with a traditional class-lesson or lecture-seminar system. Both technologies are presented as effective practical implementations of the new education paradigm, which allows us to carefully and comprehensively study its elements. A conclusion is drawn on the prerequisites for the creation of a new learning theory which would become the foundation for a new time alternative pedagogy which could claim the status of a general theory, a base not only for distance, electronic, but also for classroom learning.

MOOСs (massive open online courses), cMOOC, connectivism, method of collective mutual learning, “talgenism”, Аlexander Rivin

1. Kaplan, A.M., Haenlein, M. (2016). Higher Education and the Digital Revolution: About MOOCs, SPOCs, Social Media, and the Cookie Monster. Business Horizons. Vol. 59 (4). No 4. pp. 441-450.

2. Li, Y., Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and Open Education: Implications for Higher Education White Paper. Available at: http://publications.cetis.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MOOCsand-Open-Education.pdf

3. Babaeva, M.A., Smyk, A.F. (2018). Extramural Education: A Historical Path to MOOC. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. Vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 156-166. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

4. Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a Theory of Online Learning. In: The theory and practice of online learning (2nd Edition). Edmonton, AB: AU Press, Athabasca University, pp. 45-74.

5. Picciano, A.G. (2017). Theories and Frameworks for Online Education: Seeking an Integrated Model. Online Learning. Vol. 21 (3), pp. 166-190.

6. Kop, R. (2011). The Challenges to Connectivist Learning on Open Online Networks: Learning Experiences During a Massive Open Online Course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. Vol. 12, no 3, pp. 19-38.

7. Gonzalez, C. (2004). The Role of Blended Learning in the World of Technology. Available at: http://www.unt.edu/benchmarks/archives/2004/september04/eis.htm

8. Learning about Learning in the 21st Century. Harvardx.harvard.edu, 2014-2015. Available at: https://harvardx.harvard.edu/files/harvardx/files/hx_briefing_1114.pdf

9. Andrews, R. (2011). Does e-Learning Require a New Theory of Learning? Some Initial Thoughts. Journal for Educational Research Online. Vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 104-121.

10. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. Vol. 2, no 1, pp. 1-8.

11. Downes, S. (2011). «Connectivism» and Connective Knowledge. Available at: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-downes/connectivism-and-connecti_b_804653.html

12. Stephenson, K. (1998). What Knowledge Tears Apart, Networks Make Whole. Internal Communication Focus. No. 36. Available at: http://www.netform.com/html/icf.pdf

13. Duke, B., Harper, G., Johnston, M. (2013). Connectivism as a Digital Age Learning Theory. The International HETL Review. Special Issue. New York: Helt Publishing, 2013. pp. 4-13. URL: https://www.hetl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/HETLReview2013SpecialIssue.pdf

14. D’yachenko, V.K. (1991) Sotrudnichestvo v obuchenii: o kollektivnom sposobe uchebnoy raboty [Collaboration in Learning: A Collective Way of Academic Work]. Moscow: Prosveshchenie Publ., 192 p. (In Russ.)

15. Golubev, E. (Ed). (1991). Talgenizm: metod kollektivnogo vzaimoobucheniya: daydzhest pressy i literatury 1920-1980-kh gg. Ch. 1 i 2 [Talgenism: The Collective Learning Method. Digest of the Press and Literature of the 1920-1980s. Part 1 and 2]. Leningrad: Eliana Publ., 114 p. (In Russ.)

16. D’yachenko, V.K. (2001). Novaya didaktika [New Didactics]. Moscow: Narodnoe obrazovanie Publ., 496 p. (In Russ.)

17. Breiterman, M. (1989). [Dialogues]. Uchitel’skaya gazeta [Teacher’s Newspaper],Jan 31. (In Russ.)

18. Breiterman, M. (1994). [A.G. Rivin’s Method]. Na putyakh k novoy shkole [On the Way to a New School]. No. 1(6), pp. 14-21. (In Russ.)

19. Rivin, A. (1930). [Co-Dialogue as a Tool of Literacy Campaign]. Revolyutsiya i kul’tura [Revolution and Culture]. No. 15-16, pp. 64-66. (In Russ.)

20. Vikhman, Z. (1931). [The Method of a Combination Dialogue. Experience of Application] Za kachestvo kadrov [For the Quality of Personnel]. No. 6, pp. 26-35. (In Russ.)

21. Shokhor, M. (1924). [Scientific Organization of Intellectualizing]. Vestnik prosveshcheniya [Bulletin of Teaching]. No. 2-3, pp. 9-24. (In Russ.)

22. Krupskaya, N.K. (1927). [Self-Education in the System of Political Education: The Report at the II All-Union Conference on Self-Education. Moscow, January 15, 1927]. Pomoshch’ samoobrazovaniyu [Help to Self-Education]. No. 3, p.18-20. (In Russ.)

23. Chagan, Z. (1929). [«Wild» University]. Revolyutsiya i kul’tura [Revolution and Culture]. No. 11, pp. 47-50. (In Russ.)

24. Shulman, S. (1932). [Outside the System. About the Higher Engineering School Named after Bubnov]. Za promyshlennye kadry [For Industrial Personnel]. No. 7-8, pp. 83-86. (In Russ.)

25. Golubev, E.B. (2019). [The World’s Single “University without Tutors” and a Method of Collective Mutual Learning]. Istoriya nauki i tekhniki = History of Science and Engineering. No. 3, pp. 63-67. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

26. Sokolov, A.S. (2007). [The Unwritten Name]. Polyarnaya sova [Arctic Owl]. No. 3, pp. 16-19. (In Russ.)

27. Mkrtchyan, M.A. (2010). Stanovlenie kollektivnogo sposoba obucheniya [Collective Way of Learning Development]. Krasnoyarsk: Krasnoyarsk Institute for Advanced Studies and Professional Retraining of Educators Publ., 228 p. (In Russ.)

28. Metod kollektivnogo vzaimoobucheniya: doklad tov. Tal’ na II Vserossiyskoy metodicheskoy konferentsii likvidatorov negramotnosti [The Collective Learning Method: Report by Comrade Tal at the II All-Russian Methodological Conference of the Literacy Campaign] (1922). Rukovoditelyam zanyatiy [For Heads of Classes]. No. 5, pp. 6-10. (In Russ.)

29. Cassidy, F.H. (2001). Sokrat [Socrates]. St. Petersburg: Aleteya Publ., 352 p. (In Russ.)

30. Vikhman, Z. (1930). [A New Method of Organizing Classes for an Enterprise-School]. Revolyutsiya i kul’tura [Revolution and Culture]. No. 4, pp. 35-38. (In Russ.)

31. Barr, R.B., Tagg, J. (1995). From Teaching to Learning – A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education. Change. Vol. 27, no 6, pp. 13-25.

32. Siemens, G. (2012). What is the Theory Underpinning our MOOCs? Elearnspace. Available at: http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/06/03/what-is-the-theory-that-underpins-our-moocs