Does an artifact mean its practical? #rhizo15

This week Dave challenges us to create an artifact that could be added to some form of guide that explains what rhizomatic learning is all about.

My first thought on this is does an artifact equal practical? That is, if we create an artifact does that mean the we are creating something that is practical?

I am reminded by the first artifact I came across in the pre-Rhizo15 discussions – a recipe to help people figure out how to participant in open learning. Maha writes about it here and the actual document is here. I think this is a great starting point for a practical guide to rhizomatic learning.

What strikes me as particularly interesting here is that the beginning is the end and the end is the beginning. We started this before rhizo began and yet it represents also where we have come – although I think that might only be true if the new voices in rhizo join the conversation and add to the recipe. So, although I’m not the original author of the recipe, I will still encourage anyone who hasn’t jumped in, to join the conversation in the Google Doc here – https://docs.google.com/document/d/14-V6ZQgIQ3Mpq6QCPvvFr2y-45zdzxIh721yPSlHbyo/edit

7 Comments on Does an artifact mean its practical? #rhizo15

  1. I would contend an artifact is valid if the creator is expressing insight or inquiry through it. Commendable if it also serves as a signpost or guide to fellow travellers (and I’m supposing that’s what you mean by “practical”). But an artifact can simply proclaim “I was here” even if no one else has the foggiest where “here” is or why it’s significant.

      • I think I just erased my own comment by replying to it. And I’d already typed it twice because replying to the blog by jumping to it inside iPad FB App didn’t post. Oh well, third time’s the charm.

        I contend that an artifact is valid if the author expresses insight or inquiry through it. Commendable if it can serve as a signpost or guide to fellow travellers (and I’m supposing that is what you mean by “practical”. But an artifact can simply exist to proclaim “I was here” or “This was me” even if no one else has the foggiest where “here” is or why “this” seemed significant.

        That said, I’m off to revisit Maha’s recipe.

  2. Yes! I was thinking along the same lines: the recipe, and Keith Hamon’s post about birds taking turns flying in the lead, were the best practical guides I had as a newbie to #rhizo15.

  3. Scott how did you? Rebecca, a most-interesting observation. We started creating things before the ‘practical’ course started. And those things, some of them at least, are very rhizomatic. I think rhizomatic is how we are naturally.

    • Len, missing and forgetting are a feature of being me recently. My worry is if the recipe becomes too formal it will add just another batch of rules to break. Like a mission statement, it becomes the things other people should do receive your approval.

Leave a Reply