Knowledge Socialism in the COVID-19 Era: A Collective Exploration of Needs, Forms, and Possibilities
Saved in:
| Title: | Knowledge Socialism in the COVID-19 Era: A Collective Exploration of Needs, Forms, and Possibilities |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Crain, Daniel E. (ORCID |
| Source: | Educational Philosophy and Theory. 2022 54(6):761-782. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 22 |
| Publication Date: | 2022 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Evaluative |
| Descriptors: | Foreign Countries, Pandemics, COVID-19, Information Utilization, Global Approach, Indigenous Knowledge, Democratic Values, International Cooperation, MOOCs, Electronic Learning, Computer Games, Instruction, Knowledge Economy |
| Geographic Terms: | China, Thailand, Pakistan |
| DOI: | 10.1080/00131857.2021.1952864 |
| ISSN: | 0013-1857 1469-5812 |
| Abstract: | The inspiration for this collective writing project began with a digital conference entitled 'Knowledge Socialism, COVID-19 and the New Reality of Education' held at Beijing Normal University. In this conference and through this article, multiple researchers spread across six continents have engaged in the collaborative task of outlining emerging innovations and alternative contingencies towards education, international collaboration, and digital reform in this time of global crisis. Trends associated with digital education, knowledge openness, peer production, and collective intelligence as articulated by Michael A. Peters' conception of Knowledge Socialism are given careful analysis and exploration. Some of the members of this collective endeavor to identify problems, others, begin to draw boxes around potential solutions. Overall, this article engages with real world challenges and innovations that look beyond dominant neoliberal trends in the knowledge economy to build bridges toward novel possibilities in this era of rapid digital change. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2022 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1348856 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGNaUa8EtDp-vPDcpZBKyyWAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDOJeuFuA6tfyVTdeYwIBEICBmmkJRIP8qvQygC9UrGSx30o1KTzely3t2krx12hBHgBFli5KGTzKVD84-4Z31vbywboElQgP90R-_tP2KpV5gW-8yLcAFOzkRwkv4eug9meqtEtq5jr7QRloUUpRiFBE8SpATaPOQX1gwi6qD51Xvxiums0RmBKwt08CzY7_a9eHTGDc27EDCKk7LSQN5FttX7GpBwaskp51nkQ= Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0156784810;54l01jun.22;2022May12.05:23;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0156784810-1">Knowledge socialism in the COVID-19 era: A collective exploration of needs, forms, and possibilities </title> <p>The inspiration for this collective writing project began with a digital conference entitled 'Knowledge Socialism, COVID-19 and the New Reality of Education' held at Beijing Normal University. In this conference and through this article, multiple researchers spread across six continents have engaged in the collaborative task of outlining emerging innovations and alternative contingencies towards education, international collaboration, and digital reform in this time of global crisis. Trends associated with digital education, knowledge openness, peer production, and collective intelligence as articulated by Michael A. Peters' conception of Knowledge Socialism are given careful analysis and exploration. Some of the members of this collective endeavor to identify problems, others, begin to draw boxes around potential solutions. Overall, this article engages with real world challenges and innovations that look beyond dominant neoliberal trends in the knowledge economy to build bridges toward novel possibilities in this era of rapid digital change.</p> <p>Keywords: Collective intelligence; gamification; indigenous knowledge; knowledge socialism; knowledge socialist pedagogy; MOOCs; peer production; virtual education</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-2">Introduction (Daniel E. Crain)</hd> <p>Evolving conceptions of <emph>Knowledge Socialism</emph> (KS) focus on the development and application of new practices, ethics, and reforms within our digital ecologies to facilitate more opportunities for knowledge openness, collaborative knowledge production, and collective intelligence in an era defined by global knowledge capitalism (Peters et al., [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref1">75</reflink>]). These concepts have never been more relevant than in [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref2">71</reflink>], as for so many of us, our lives have become ever more defined by constant engagement through digitalized network connections as COVID-19 lockdowns and stay-at-home measures made digital engagement one of the only remaining pathways to maintain our social relations, our educational endeavors, and professional responsibilities. Despite spatial separation, digital connection has sustained our ability to participate in the 'knowledge economy,' to search for knowledge, to read knowledge, share knowledge, make knowledge, and react to knowledge instantaneously. But what goes for knowledge also goes for its opposite; we must acknowledge that during this strange time, misinformation, rumors, conspiracies, and other forms of corrosive content have been equally if not more likely to spread unimpeded throughout our digital ecosystems. Indeed, much has changed since the early days of techno-optimism when so many intellectuals harbored the idealistic belief that connectivity would inevitably supercharge civic progress. More recently, many influential scholars have turned towards pessimism as dysfunctional online ecosystems have been linked with rising political radicalization (Benkler et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref3">13</reflink>]) democratic dysfunction (Sunstein, [<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref4">89</reflink>]), mental health crises (Odgers &amp; Jensen, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref5">54</reflink>]), exploitative surveillance practices (Zuboff, [<reflink idref="bib100" id="ref6">100</reflink>]), and general burnout (Petersen, [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref7">77</reflink>]).</p> <p>The COVID-19 pandemic is a convenient example to consider how popular sentiments towards these digital systems of connection and production tend to understandably bounce between hope and despair. In some ways, the pandemic response from the international scientific community vindicates a cautiously hopeful sentiment. Shortly following the global recognition of the viral threat, we saw in real-time the budding of new precedents for international collaboration and openness. After China shared the novel virus's genetic data with the WHO, international scientific collaboration, interdisciplinary exchanges, and research breakthroughs soon followed. Our digital ecosystems facilitated the open exchange of knowledge as many academic journals decided to temporarily remove paywalls and make papers and data related to the pandemic open to all for the sake of accelerating our ability to come to grips with how to prevent, treat, and vaccinate against COVID-19 (Xu et al., [<reflink idref="bib97" id="ref8">97</reflink>]). Despite geopolitical tension, international research cooperation increased considerably over the course of the pandemic, and the highest numbers of co-authored papers on COVID-19 involved collaboration between the U.S. and China (Lee &amp; Haupt, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref9">47</reflink>]). Meanwhile, international digital education has enabled students to enter online learning communities across vast distances and time zones, and to still connect, learn, collaborate, and support one another in an otherwise destabilizing period of uncertainty. Meanwhile, the crisis has forced governments, school systems, and universities to begin considering the new possibilities of digital technology in education, and how potentially, such technologies could open up new capacities for expanded access to quality education for the marginalized.</p> <p>At the same time, it's not hard to see grounds for digital despair. During the height of the pandemic, the internet's most visited websites saw an explosion in fake news, conspiracies, and even false scientific data visualizations, all fueling anti-mask movements, conspiratorial protests, and general resistance to lockdowns, vaccines, and public protection measures (Galvão, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref10">29</reflink>]; Lee et al., 2021). The same sorts of methods reminiscent of digital peer production, where scholars and volunteers around the world can collaborate on the creation of new knowledge products, have been eerily employed in a mutated fashion via decentralized and networked group delusions like 'QAnon,' where digital users have volunteered their time and energy to expand the annals of perverse crowdsourced conspiracies (Hannah, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref11">34</reflink>]). Furthermore, even though digital ecosystems have facilitated the rapid knowledge sharing that aided the development of vaccines, IP laws and vaccine nationalism have hindered the distribution of these vaccines worldwide, essentially prolonging pandemic related suffering in the developing world in particular (Ranjan, [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref12">80</reflink>]).</p> <p>These opposing trends in this momentous time highlight the potentials and challenges of our digital futures. We have the means to open-up knowledge worldwide, to collaborate internationally, to foster more informed citizenries. And on the other hand, we must recognize that these same open networks facilitate caustic misinformation, conspiracy, and discord, something Hannah has described as the 'information dark age' (Hannah, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref13">34</reflink>]). All this back and forth should bring us to something that may become a truism for our postdigital age. It is not worthwhile to dwell on any kind of binary opposition as to what something as vast as 'the internet' is; it is not as simple as good/bad, emancipating/enslaving, informing/misinforming. It's an extension of us, our cultures, our institutions, and our systems that we have collectively created, for better or for worse. Our digitalizing futures are not inevitably going to be liberating or harming, they are going to be whatever we, collectively as users and citizens, make of them. The student writers in this collective, having the firsthand experience of being locked either inside or outside our own countries during the past year, living our daily lives behind our screens, being required to collaborate on assignments internationally with one another, we have seen the potential of digital collaboration, of peer production, of collective intelligence, of openness and sharing. We have also experienced the downsides to the educational shift of being 'online all-the-time;' we have experienced digital burnout and the distress that this is all harder than it should be. The lasting cultural, institutional, and political impacts of COVID-19 remain to be seen, but if we learn the right lessons, it could be a catalyst for our governments and institutional arrangements to take advantage of the possibilities that our digital technologies have long promised but not yet delivered.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-3">Roadmap</hd> <p>This collective writing project brings together writers from Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, South America, and Oceania to highlight some of the problems and potentials undergirding our digital arrangements of education and knowledge distribution in this era of global crisis. The first entry, by Stephanie Hollings, Hazzan Moses Kaode, and Moses Oladele Ogunniran considers the deep value of indigenous knowledge, and in particular, the African conception of <emph>ubuntu</emph> in understanding the global implications of the COVID-19 pandemic and potentials for more interconnected, international humanist values to emerge alongside a digital shift to knowledge socialist practices and pedagogies. The second entry by Daniel E. Crain documents the disorienting nature of contemporary information ecosystems and considers some hopeful avenues for digital reforms and pedagogies linked to knowledge socialism to potentially upgrade democratic civil society where it has been faltering in recent years. The third entry, by Yodpet Worapot, analyzes the international collaborative efforts between citizens in China and Thailand during the pandemic as a source of peer production that could signal new possibilities in regional relations and cross-border knowledge production. The fourth entry, by Paola Guañuna, looks at the possibilities of MOOCs to broaden the reach of accessible international education in the context of a pandemic that seems to have accelerated an evolution towards new online education possibilities. The fifth entry, by Tahira Yasmeen, deeply analyzes Pakistan's experience with COVID-19 and the employment of virtual education (VE) technologies to deal with the ongoing contingencies created by the pandemic. In the sixth entry, Anum Riaz and Stephanie Hollings look at the educational trend of gamification and its potential to synchronize with the ethics and practices of knowledge socialism. Finally, an extended conclusion by Artem Samilo, Jiang Yuhan, and Ogunyemi Folasade Bolanle explores new pedagogical necessities and possibilities in light of the challenges and opportunities provided by the pandemic. This collective endeavor not only tracks sources of knowledge socialism in this unique time, but it itself employs the practice of collective writing to make these developments known from an international perspective spanning multiple academic institutions, disparate time zones, and continental divides. As such, it is a unique contribution to the exploration of knowledge socialism as a concept and as a practice.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-4">COVID-19, knowledge socialism and the rise of indigenous knowledge (Stephanie Hollings, Hazza...</hd> <p>The world is increasingly experiencing problems and challenges that are not confined within national boundaries. Like COVID-19, global problems have created an imperative for knowledge sharing and more openness in knowledge, i.e., a turn to 'knowledge socialism.' Ndlovu-Gatsheni ([<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref14">64</reflink>]) explains that beyond just being a pandemic, COVID-19 is a crisis, a crisis of civilization, a crisis of modernity, a crisis of capitalism, and further than that, multifaceted in terms of ecology and epistemology. It would not be remiss to then label COVID-19 also as a crisis of knowledge.</p> <p>While some scholars like Tanabe ([<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref15">91</reflink>]) and Cherkaoui ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref16">22</reflink>]) note that the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted many of the neoliberal system's failures, therein lies the potential for a change in perspective on knowledge. Viewing this crisis in light of de Sousa Santos' perspective (2016), perhaps this marks a wake-up call for the Global North to learn and not teach. As for different purposes, different types of knowledge are required. To narrow down this look at indigenous knowledge, we collectively assess African indigenous knowledge and how it can be used as a way of exploring the present globalized problem of COVID-19 as it relates to both knowledge socialism and a new reality of education based on principles of knowledge socialist pedagogy. However, it may be apposite at this juncture to assess the concept of 'community' as it relates to knowledge socialism and the context of African philosophy of community. Knowledge socialism as a collective approach to knowledge is based on openness, inclusivity, giving people a voice, creating communities, peer production, and peer-to-peer exchanges, the nature of collective intelligence and collective approach to knowledge which is of increasing importance in a pandemic world. There is an imperative within knowledge socialism for indigenous knowledge and the sharing of indigenous knowledge. There is also the recognition in knowledge socialism of indigenous knowledge's benefits in terms of land claims, property rights, justice, climate, science, citizenship, and education: the notion that the sharing of such knowledge could amass a vast archive of knowledge (M. Peters, personal communication, December 17, [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref17">81</reflink>]). Likewise, as an alternative to knowledge capitalism, knowledge socialism chooses to recognize that knowledge and the value of knowledge retain roots in social relations (Peters &amp; Besley, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref18">72</reflink>]) or community. Hence, a focus on the community could be advanced if the concept of community can be perceived through indigenous perspectives, for example, an African sense of community.</p> <p>One of the central themes found in indigenous African epistemology is 'the discourse of community' or communalism (Higgs, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref19">36</reflink>], p. 2416). <emph>Ubuntu</emph> is an African philosophy centered on community, as '<emph>ubuntu</emph> holds that community is essential to inter-subjectivity and that a person is incomplete unless he or she maintains an active connection with the society or culture of which he or she is part of' (Letseka, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref20">50</reflink>], p. 352). Espousing on the nexus between community and morality, Menkiti ([<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref21">58</reflink>]) notes that morality necessitates 'beingness-with-others' (p. 324) or, as Ramose ([<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref22">79</reflink>]) explains, 'the logic of <emph>ubuntu</emph> is towards-ness' (p. 382). Mbiti ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref23">56</reflink>]) epitomizes afro-communitarianism with 'I am because we are since we are; therefore I am.' What if we extend <emph>ubuntu's</emph> notion of community to that of a global community or a global village? This would seemingly fulfill Assié-Lumumba ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref24">9</reflink>]) vision of the aspirations behind <emph>ubuntu</emph>, i.e., 'citizenry of the Global Village' (p. 17). The current pandemic seems to be a calling for such a vision, and the impacts of such a turn are limitless. When we imagine a post-COVID-19 world, perhaps a global village is what we should have in mind. Conceivably, the first area that would be impacted is citizenship and what it means to become a global citizen of a global village. It would seem that being a global citizen could come with the same responsibilities that derive from being part of a collective writing assemblage or peer production. This unquestionably would have distinct impacts on citizenship and how it should be taught.</p> <p>No country, continent, or philosophy could claim to have a panacea for this problem. Nevertheless, indigenous knowledge provides an alternative. To solve tomorrow's problems, we must learn from all the people of the world as part of a global community. We can no longer continue to 'subjugate knowledge' in the Foucauldian sense (Peters et al., 2019). We must embrace other types of knowledge and change what composes a 'good education' (Peters, 2020) to include more knowledge types as well as embrace inclusivity of various strands of knowledge globally. Even the way we view humanity could be part of the problem and could be altered to reflect a global community or village. Pandemics challenge the way we think about community and who is part of our community. <emph>Ubuntu</emph> provides a way to extend how we view community, from a research community to the world community. Our new normal must consider that we still, as a global community, have much to learn from each other. That being said, indigenous knowledge is rising, as can be seen as the similarities between African universal humanist values acknowledging one's shared humanity and connecting to ideas such as knowledge socialism and even the Belt and Road Initiative's common destiny of humanity. Ideally, it will continue to rise as a part of knowledge socialist pedagogy.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-5">The crisis of public knowledge and digital discord: knowledge socialism and the democratic ta...</hd> <p>The contradictions of contemporary digital information ecosystems can be disorienting. Functionally speaking, if one knows where to look, there is more knowledge at our fingertips and more opportunities to collaborate digitally than ever before. However, this knowledge, these avenues for genuine insight, connection, and collaboration, what Lévy ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref25">51</reflink>]) calls 'the bright side,' is often less visible and less accessible to the average internet user than the 'dark side,' the clickbait, the noise, the shallow infotainment, the provocative editorials, and the snarky 280-character polemics. As the digital utopianism of the early 21st century has largely collapsed, a growing consensus amongst leading scholars recognize that at the societal and democratic levels, current ecosystems seem as likely to misinform, exploit, and divide us as they are to enlighten, connect, and uplift us (Benkler et al., 2018; Peters et al., 2018; Sunstein, 2017; Zuboff, 2019). In this era of digital discord, the necessary symbiosis between public knowledge and functional democracy seems deeply unstable.</p> <p>This problem is not entirely new. Deepening public knowledge for democracy's sake has been a focus of political philosophy in America since the republic's founding, having been emphasized by Adams ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref26">1</reflink>]) and Jefferson ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref27">43</reflink>]), then gaining articulate defense over a century later in the work of Dewey (1921/[<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref28">25</reflink>]). Nevertheless, the problem has undoubtedly mutated in this era of rapid digital change. Take the past year as example, where in the midst of a global pandemic innumerous individuals have refused to abide by social distancing and masking regulations after internalizing fringe misinformation accessed online (Galvão, 2020). Or in January where a mob was impelled to storm the American Capitol based on fictitious conspiracies that were amplified throughout cyberspace by opportunistic and disingenuous content providers (Hitkul et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref29">37</reflink>]; Snyder, [<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref30">87</reflink>]).</p> <p>While the Capitol storming and pandemic denialism may seem like aberrations, they become easier to understand after considering the online ecosystems that facilitate such cynical discontent from the right and a kind of dismissive elitism from many parts of the left and center. Via these digital for-profit ecosystems based in the logics of knowledge capitalism, content providers compete for attention and clicks that can be generated with or without deeper regard for truth value. Platforms then track this click-data, sell it to advertisers, and feed users ever more personalized content (Zuboff, 2019). These same personalizing functions shepherd certain users into polarized corners of the internet where faulty heuristics and confirmation biases can flourish unopposed all the way down a profitable rabbit hole where sensationalized and even fictional content thrives alongside verifiable facts, often times, violently pulling public perceptions away from academic consensus (Graber &amp; Dunaway, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref31">31</reflink>], p. 312; Sunstein, 2017). Benkler et al. (2018) has shown how these features have emboldened right-wing political propagandists and provocateurs in particular. Meanwhile, the highest forms of peer-reviewed knowledge that could potentially serve as antidotes to misinformation are typically locked behind paywalls, confined and commodified by neoliberal publishing industries (Peters, 2020). In these disorienting online spaces, where true knowledge is less visible than the noise and the vitriol, our own understanding of social issues can become manipulated, our anxieties misdirected, and consequentially, building solidarity for collective political action becomes more difficult. With prohibitively expensive commodified knowledge competing with 'free' misinformation and seductive chatter, our democratic systems are likely ill-equipped to deal with the 21st century challenges that face us, from unprecedented inequality, to ecological crises, to geopolitical clashes, to automation and job destruction.</p> <p>These undemocratic digital networks and the discord they facilitate are not inevitable. As Zuboff (2019) has articulated, these ecosystems have been created by choice. They have been designed by capitalists and permitted by regulators, both operating within familiar neoliberal frameworks. Through emerging concepts like <emph>Knowledge Socialism</emph> (KS), we can seek a way out by tracking the glimmers of hope in the under-realized revolutionary potential of our technologies. KS inspires a shift in values and alternative institutional arrangements to serve as a source for the good— an ideal where we move along the spectrum from commodified knowledge exclusion to universal access, from individual atomization to collective collaboration, from misinformation to education (Peters et al., 2019; 2020). Positive shifts towards KS could manifest on multiple fronts, but perhaps the most pressing areas of potential are pedagogical and structural reforms.</p> <p>Students must learn to navigate, critique, collaborate through, and thrive within the digital arrangements of our known presents and opaque futures. Unger ([<reflink idref="bib93" id="ref32">93</reflink>]) envisions a more expansive, democratic, and inclusive knowledge economy where curriculums emphasize four priorities at every level of education: imagination over memorization, selective depth over encyclopedic superficiality, cooperation over hierarchy, and dialectical debate over single correct answers (Unger, 2020, p. 67). To counter the most insidious effects of fake news and sensationalism, Tambini ([<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref33">90</reflink>]) has argued for a twin-track approach where critical media education for the public is combined with soft regulatory frameworks via fact-checking and flagging of fake and sensational news. However, to avoid ceding even more authority to Silicon Valley, it seems worthwhile to explore means to ground internet reform in democratic consensus, rather than simply giving oligopolistic platforms discretion to cosmetically self-regulate at whim (Cammaerts &amp; Mansell, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref34">17</reflink>]; Luke, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref35">52</reflink>]).</p> <p>World democracies should be tasked to envision an internet-based in openness, transparency, and user autonomy over the neoliberal commitments to commodification, exclusion, and commercial datafication. Lévy (2020), as well as <emph>Open Science</emph> proponents like Elliott and Resnik ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref36">26</reflink>]), have argued for maximizing public knowledge through peer-reviewed, free, and open digital commons, or in Neilson's ([<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref37">65</reflink>]) conception, the creation of a 'World Knowledge Bank.' Not only could such architectures improve the pace of scientific innovation, but could also streamline collective intelligence via informing the public and more deeply integrating the marginalized into the knowledge creation processes. Further, Lévy (2020) and Zuboff (2019) have argued to re-up the transparency of online processes, from algorithms to data collection methods, so users can opt-out of data tracking and content personalization. Finally, granting individuals exclusive legal ownership of their data could flip the entire logic of internet architectures to empower the user over the profit-at-all-costs platforms. Not only could such reforms defang the worst of our post-truth environment, but opening up and streamlining access to high-quality information could potentially untether knowledge production from exploitative neoliberal arrangements, ultimately creating more opportunities for collaborative workers, communities, researchers, and governments.</p> <p>While ideas re-thinking new architectures and ethics of knowledge distribution are still in an early form, in light of the ongoing crisis of knowledge and democracy, such ideas demand an unprecedented urgency. The ethics of knowledge socialism —openness, transparency, community, and collaboration should be at the heart of the debate surrounding pedagogical and institutional reform if we are to make our internet ecosystems, and indeed, our democracies, work for us all.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-6">Academic collaboration between China and Thailand after the COVID-19: towards cross-border pe...</hd> <p>Peer Production is a form of knowledge-making through a co-creation between multiple organizations and individuals. Benkler deemed peer production as 'the most significant organizational innovation' to broaden the knowledge economy born out of advances in technological communication and innovation (Benkler, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref38">12</reflink>]). To widen the pool of productive knowledge, peer production emphasizes a decentralized approach, harnessing diverse participant motivations, and separating relations of governance and management from exclusive forms of property and relational contracts. This concept of collective networks can be expanded to promote the knowledge commons and embrace an ethic of radical openness in the knowledge economy. Peters et al. (2020) views peer production as one of the approaches in knowledge socialism that aim to enhance knowledge exchange and promote open cultures based in sharing, cooperation, and collaboration. In the landscape of knowledge socialism, peer production corresponds to the concept of social production (Benkler, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref39">11</reflink>]) and commons-based peer production (Bauwens &amp; Niaros, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref40">10</reflink>]) that facilitate an open and collaborative infrastructure where collectives and individuals can freely co-create knowledge products. Contrary to traditional knowledge capitalism, peer production within knowledge socialism advances knowledge as public goods (Peters et al., 2020) and functions in the absence of bureaucratic structure, exclusive property rights, and relational contracts.</p> <p>The development of China and Thailand's academic institutional collaboration portrays a new kind of regional effort for decentralizing knowledge, attracting cross-border participation, and promoting high-quality cooperation through traditional and new platforms. The milestone of China and Thailand's academic collaboration began in 1978 in response to the Agreement on Scientific and Technical Co-operation (Ministy of Foreign Affairs (MFA), [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref41">60</reflink>]). During the 1980s, the collaboration concentrated on a civil servant exchange which was originally limited to a specific group. This notable attempt to advance academic cooperation for public knowledge goods formally began via the establishment of the Chinese-Thai Strategic Research Center in 2010. To disseminate knowledge and research related to the regional economy and society, as well as to engage a wider range of stakeholders, the center launched the annual Chinese-Thai Strategic Research Seminar in 2012 by co-hosting with Huaqiao University in Xiamen, China. The seminar mechanism reflects the effort of peer production that involves scholars and the public to develop a common understanding of Chinese-Thai issues of deep importance to wider society. All Chinese and Thai scholars are welcome to submit their academic papers. The scope of the seminar content ranges from public policy to international relations, economic development, and social science. The attendance and proceeding papers of the seminars are all open to the public. The call of participation and publication can be accessed from the website (<ulink href="http://www.vijaichina.com">http://www.vijaichina.com</ulink>). The website serves as open storage of China-Thailand cooperative and relational knowledge products and as a bridge to other relevant knowledge producers and stakeholders. Through this cooperation mechanism, the Chinese and Thai scholars are encouraged to co-develop cross-border research projects and connect to a deeper pool of knowledge and resources. Hence, the peer production of scholars within these academic institutions in both China and Thailand tends to open their knowledge products to the public and engage the public with their production process.</p> <p>The unprecedented worldwide challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic have also stimulated international collaboration to sustainably cope with and recover from the pandemic. The official direction of China-Thailand academic cooperation has been reaffirmed in response to the COVID-19 through the ASEAN Plus Three Cooperation Mechanism at the 23rd ASEAN-China Summit on November 12th, 2020. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a regional collaboration to drive political studies, security studies, economics, and socio-culture research within the Southeast Asian region. At the same time, ASEAN has expanded its collaboration with other countries, including China, to highlight shared and mutual benefits. To address the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, the chairman's statement of the ASEAN-China summit states:</p> <p>We (ASEAN and China) highlight the need for joint collaboration on scientific research, development, and the production of vaccines and medicine that meet international health standards and are effective, affordable and accessible to all, whilst building and maintaining resilient, open, and connected regional supply chains and supporting a sustained economic recovery... We also welcome China's participation in the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility (COVAX) to ensure the equitable distribution of vaccines, especially to developing countries, underscoring our support for vaccine multilateralism (ASEAN, 2020, pp.1–2).</p> <p>The research collaborations between Chinese and Thai institutions after the transmission of COVID-19 tends to underscore openness of diverse knowledge and practices geared towards coping with the pandemic, such as sharing medical and healthcare products, expanding cooperation funds, and transferring knowledge related to the recovery experience of economic and education sectors (ASEAN, 2020). From December 8th – 9th, 2020, I attended the Ninth Chinese-Thai Strategic Research Seminar: Sharing Experiences and Cooperation. To develop the COVID-19 strategic plan, several Chinese and Thai scholars emphasized the importance of knowledge products relevant to COVID-19 risk management and they supported openness and transparency of information and the dissemination of research findings to the public. For instance, scholars presented the Organizational Mobilization and National Governance in China based on the analysis of China's COVID-19 prevention and control, the fundamental rights of the mask order, the lessons learned from China's experience for Thailand's post-COVID-19 development. Furthermore, the results of such China-Thailand COVID expertise-sharing is attached to conference proceeding papers, distributed to relevant organizations, and uploaded to the official website where everyone can access.</p> <p>Although there are several collaborations among Chinese and Thai peers to share the common knowledge about COVID-19, the collaboration itself needed further encouragement for increasing deeper engagement. Through the concept of peer production, academic cooperation is pushed to include wider groups, but at the same time, it has been prone to limit its engagement to members because of a contradiction between the capitalist knowledge economy and more socialist forms of peer-to-peer production (Luke, 2020). The domination of knowledge capital is embedded in a form of exclusivity that thrives and retains the power and authority of its elite members. Nevertheless, the open knowledge economy would benefit from the emergence of new socialist practices, such as peer production and open collaboration, which could produce the knowledge necessary for more equitable economic and capital growth (Bauwens &amp; Niaros, 2017). Beyond addressing the embedded powers of knowledge capitalism and encouraging commons-based peer production of knowledge socialism (Bauwens &amp; Niaros, 2017; Luke, 2020; Peters et al., 2020), I believe that deeper trust between peers could stimulate a wider degree of openness to reinforce sustainable collaboration. The transnational collaboration among collectives and individuals may deepen the heart-to-heart engagement necessary for the further thriving of peer-to-peer production within the emerging frameworks of knowledge socialism.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-7">MOOCs, Knowledge socialism and COVID-19 (Paola Guañuna)</hd> <p>As the use of technology to teach and learn from home has been normalized, different platforms and software have been developed to support this kind of education, including Zoom, Teems, Moodle, and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). This entry intends to understand a small part of this virtual learning environment, focusing on how MOOCs answer the requirements and desires to learn from all people without demographic, economic, and geographical constraints (Yuan &amp; Powell, [<reflink idref="bib98" id="ref42">98</reflink>]). Furthermore, their integration with the education system during the COVID-19 pandemic is given additional analysis. This study tries to connect the fundamentals of MOOCs' fundamentals with the philosophical principles of knowledge socialism. However, it must be noted that most courses are not 100% free, though their price is typically affordable and allows people worldwide to interact, learn, and share knowledge. Sharing, access, and affordable (or free) prices are concepts closely linked to knowledge socialism. Peters (2020) mentioned employing new technologies, searching, and learning about different disciplines through a click to defy distance and establish new forms of intellectual commons based on peer production within digital socialism.</p> <p>MOOCs provide virtual learning environments, offer flexible and affordable options to learn new skills, advance careers, and deliver a quality experience at scale. MOOCs include xMOOC (asynchronous learning) and cMOOC (collaborative learning). MOOCs had changed higher education since 2008 when Stephen Downes and George Siemens launched the first MOOC course with 2,200 learners. MOOCs have also transformed teaching and learning and have played an essential role in stimulating the demand for online learning experiences (Freitas et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref43">28</reflink>]). Educational institutions worldwide upload their courses on MOOC platforms such as EDX and Coursera, including Carnegie Mellon University, Johns Hopkins University, Nanyang Technological University of Singapore, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Tsinghua University, Harvard, MIT, among others, helping to support and enable professional, formal, and informal learning (Milligan &amp; Littlejohn, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref44">59</reflink>]). The courses mainly include career development, college preparations, supplemental learning, lifelong learning, corporate eLearning, specialized training, and more (MOOC.org, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref45">62</reflink>]). The courses offered by MOOCs design present four main elements, higher-order thinking skills, interactive learning, learning strategies, and collaborative learning (Almutairi &amp; White, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref46">6</reflink>]), helping the student community interact and build learning networks. Additionally, MOOCs benefit organizations. This is by emphasizing cost reduction, audience capacity, global reach, convenience, and variety (Ong &amp; Jambulingam, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref47">67</reflink>]).</p> <p>Students who are willing to take MOOCs focus on three key elements, searching for appropriate courses, selecting courses in which they participate, and observing courses through participation (Mohamed &amp; Hammond, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref48">61</reflink>]). The participation of educational institutions, academia, and students in the construction of MOOCs is fundamental (Annabi &amp; Wilkins, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref49">8</reflink>]) to ensure students enrolled in MOOCs find applicable content and reduce the rate of dropouts. Several studies describe the relationship between openness, access, and MOOCs, starting with how these platforms encourage people to share knowledge and innovative thinking through the flexibility and variety of xMOOC and cMOOC (Hajdukiewicz &amp; Pera, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref50">33</reflink>]). Both forms of MOOCs offer flexible learning, making education more accessible to people, regardless of gender, race, religion, location, and specific disabilities (Sanchez-Gordon &amp; Luján-Mora, [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref51">85</reflink>]). Finally, according to Hodgkinson-Williams &amp; Gray ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref52">38</reflink>]), MOOCs feature social openness (shareable, authoritative, useful, practical, and accredited), technical openness (interoperable, Internationally accessible, Easily identifiable, Findable, and Indexed), legal openness (sharable, adaptable), and financial openness (affordable and sustainable). All the characteristics of openness and access draw a panorama where teaching and learning on MOOCs platforms provide easier access to education, creation, and knowledge sharing. MOOCs have made several contributions to the education field, including as an effective tool for transferring knowledge and technology; providing higher interaction and collaboration between instructors, lecturers, and peers (Islam et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref53">40</reflink>]). MOOCs also offer education at a minimum cost, offering traditional courses and need-based training, providing learners with the tools for maintaining a decent standard of living (Bordoloi, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref54">15</reflink>]; Srdjan et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref55">8</reflink>]).</p> <p>In 2020, with the sudden disturbance in the educational sector due to COVID-19, to keep teaching and learning, universities started moving their classes online, and MOOC providers were a significant part of the conversation (Shah, [<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref56">86</reflink>]). As such, the ongoing pandemic has increased interest as MOOC's providers have experienced drastic growth. By April 2020, they had acquired 180 million users in four months, 43% more than in the whole 2019 (120 million learners). The most visited platforms include Coursera (45 million), Edx (18.2 million), Futurelearn (6.5 million), and Class central (4.4 million), providing a clear example of the growth of this education sector in the context of this pandemic (Shah, 2020). During 2020, MOOCs significantly impacted higher education, with different outcomes at the student and instructional levels. However, MOOCs' contributions do have limitations, including access barriers because of registration fees, network accessibility issues, and the need for basic technological knowledge. Other limitations worth studying deeply include the xMOOCs lack of interaction and their inherent difficulty in fostering a collaborative spirit, task interdependence, and social interaction to facilitate commitment and learner engagement (Blum-Smith et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref57">14</reflink>]). Even useful content sometimes experiences a lack of active participation and contain content mistakes (Chen et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref58">20</reflink>]). According to this, some xMOOCs are lacking in ensuring interaction and proofreading. Such issues need to be addressed to deliver practical and attractive courses.</p> <p>Several studies were written about MOOCs use during the pandemic; for instance, in Saudi Arabia, a study proved MOOC's use improves students' outcomes by 65%, making MOOCs essential to the curriculum (Alhazzani, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref59">5</reflink>]). On the other hand, at the University of Assam India, the study shows the 71% of students did not complete their courses or did not obtain the results they expected because of their lack of understanding of MOOCs' use, advantages, and mismatched their use with their actual needs. (Purkayastha &amp; Sinha, [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref60">78</reflink>]). MOOCs have helped overcome the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic since they did not include spatial limitations and are accessible to institutions, teachers, and students. However, understanding, promotion, and access to the internet are essential for free and cost-effective MOOCs to achieve their objectives of educating many people, anywhere, without distinction of gender parameters, social class, or institutional affiliation.</p> <p>Overall, MOOCs are rooted in openness, accessibility, collaboration, innovation, and low-cost course offerings, making them a close approach to knowledge socialism in practice. Even though MOOCs generally have an open foundation, it does not mean they can easily spread knowledge to every sector of society just by themselves. COVID-19 brought a new reality to online courses and resources. Many participants and institutions who had accessed MOOCs during 2020 have found new ways to reinforce or obtain knowledge. Like other teaching-learning resources, MOOCs have benefits, limitations, and challenges that need to be deeply studied, contrasted, and improved. Nevertheless, from this study, the most important contribution of MOOCs during the last year is the openness of collaboration with worldwide institutions to offer a variety of courses for many sectors of society to anyone with an internet connection. MOOCs are important protagonists of the education ecosystem now and will no longer be perceived as emergency or complementary tools. Diverse xMOOCs and cMOOCs platforms with more actors will create more platforms, making everyday access easier, helping to spread knowledge everywhere to more people at different social levels. Online education is a reality; it will be the norm for educational institutions in the coming years; however, institutional and government support is essential for proper implementation in different regions with different necessities.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-8">Implementation of virtual education (VE) at higher education level in the universities of Pak...</hd> <p>COVID-19 has gravely impacted every country in the world, including health sectors, education systems, and economies on a large scale. Pakistan, being an under-developing country, is facing considerable challenges in dealing with the pandemic, especially in the health and education sectors. This situation was noticed by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan, and they proposed to launch online classes to safeguard the students' health and education. Most universities welcome online teaching, although there were several issues like signal quality, lack of equipment, and some students lacking smart mobile phones as well.</p> <p>It is necessary to shift traditional teaching into a Virtual Education (VE) system which has been exercised in the developed countries. This mode of learning can derive numerous benefits such as portability, accessibility, flexibility, economic growth, and scalability. It is the objective of this study to show the picture of the adoption of the VE system in the universities of Pakistan and highlight challenges due to the implementation of the e-learning mode in a pandemic situation. At the same time, Pakistan is facing a lot of issues in launching this system like energy crises, economic recession, insufficient ICT infrastructure including high-speed internet access, and the unavailability of affordable modern technology. These issues are affecting Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) of Pakistan to implement the digital mode of learning. It is therefore difficult to adopt synchronous e-learning because of the country's interrupted electric power supply. Another challenge is the lack of ICT skills of students and lack of ICT expertise in faculty. This highlights the importance of computer education at the root level. Despite all these challenges, many public and private universities are promoting e-learning methods that should bring benefits. In this study, systematic analysis has been made based on the higher education commission (HEC) of Pakistan's policies for the adoption and implementation of the VE system in universities. during 2019–20, Pakistan allocated PKR 77.3 billion for the education affairs and services in which HEC will use more than 50% of the allocated money for primary, secondary, and higher education (Akram et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref61">3</reflink>]). It also addresses how digital learning affects students' and instructors' behaviors due to a lack of IT infrastructure. A detailed plan to implement the VE system in the universities has been discussed, which could benefit other under-developing countries' universities to save semesters in this pandemic situation. After the first wave of COVID-19, it is possible to consider reopening HEIs across the country with both the government and World Health Organization (WHO's) Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs), such as social distancing, wearing masks, and other hygiene rules. The government should unlock the resources of federal, provincial, and district education departments to keep education for the most vulnerable students. There should be some goals to improve the quality and equity of education that could bring reforms in the existing education system in the HEIs of Pakistan. After reviewing the detailed literature related to the existing education system of Pakistan, we proposed the following areas necessary to launch the new learning system. Virtual Education/e-Learning system should be promoted because of its endless possibilities in education and because knowledge and the new digital economy depends on openness, peering, sharing, and acting globally (Peters, 2020). It is increasingly adopted by world governments, international agencies, multinationals, and educational institutions as a way of promoting -scientific inquiry and international collaboration (Peters, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref62">45</reflink>]).</p> <p>Education is a public good and should be accessible for all as Peters emphasizes. Knowledge socialism is a new global collectivist ethic focused on shared aspects of digital culture, including sharing, collaboration, and peer production. Thus, socialism of knowledge emphasizes a democracy of knowledge that features truly participatory, interactive, and collaborative modes of knowledge-making and sharing (Peters, 2020). However, looking beyond classification, we will find that socialism of information is still somehow technology-related/digital based online education (Buddharaksa, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref63">16</reflink>]). At this point, we can understand the widest use of technology for the continuation of traditional education through an online learning system during the pandemic that could potentially foster forms of knowledge socialism to develop within Pakistani institutions by fostering collaboration between Pakistani peers, scholars, and students, both between their fellow citizens and with scholars abroad.</p> <p>Although Pakistan's resources are limited, and initially it has a shortage of technical expertise, numerous think-tanks realized the benefits of e-learning on a broad basis. For the implementation of VE, two modes <emph>i.e.</emph> asynchronous and synchronous have been used for e-learning to offer flexible learning, making education more accessible to people, regardless of location, sociopolitical conditions, or certain disabilities (Sanchez-Gordon &amp; Luján-Mora, 2014). VE proves to be an effective tool for transferring knowledge through technology to providing higher interaction and collaboration between instructors and peers. During COVID-19, VE provides the opportunity to understand the importance of online education and the geographical challenges of internet accessibility. To conclude, VE is a necessity, so digital platforms, software, programs, and applications must find ways to make online education more user-friendly, accessible and provide more courses in the coming years within the educational institutions of under-developing countries especially in Pakistan. As Pakistan adopts such technologies, they should adopt the ethics and practices of knowledge socialism as well to maximize positive results in educational access and development.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-9">Gamification as a tool to promote knowledge socialist pedagogy (Anum Riaz and Stephanie Holli...</hd> <p>Today's learners have a modern profile and are internet natives. These new learners have grown up with emerging technology and have diverse ways of learning. Thus, in order to teach them there needs to be new approaches to the learning process and learning standards. Teachers face new challenges and obstacles related to adapting the learning experience to the desires, expectations and demands of students. Since the advancements of information technology, e-learning has become an imperative aspect of education, but as we address this method directly in the educational paradigm, only then can we come to know its value and meaning. One exciting mechanism of e-learning is gamification. In its essence, gamification is 'the use of game-based mechanics, graphics and game thinking to attract users, inspire action, facilitate learning, and solve problems' (Kapp, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref64">44</reflink>], p.10) by using 'game design elements in non-game contexts' (Deterding et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref65">24</reflink>], p. 1). According to some studies, the use of such games-based mechanics actually can increase the ability of a person to learn new skills by as much as 40 percent (Giang, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref66">30</reflink>]). However, it must be noted that gamification is not specifically synonymous with expertise and abilities. More so, it is the notion that gamification can influence student behavior, devotion and inspiration, which then can contribute to the development of skills, competencies and awareness (Huang &amp; Soman, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref67">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>The main feature of gamification is the inclusion of tasks that the learner has to do. Gamification directly focuses on applying game elements in non-playful contexts' so as stimulate specific desired conduct or so to say, nudge behavior (Vanolo, [<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref68">94</reflink>]). Nudging is intrinsic to other elements such as motivation for participation, tenacity and accomplishments (Richter et al., [<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref69">82</reflink>]; Rigby, [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref70">83</reflink>]), which comes from extrinsic rewards such as badges, scores, missions, rankings, etc. (Morford et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref71">63</reflink>]), intrinsic rewards, such as beating personal scores or mastering a skill in a game (McGonigal, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref72">57</reflink>]) and social rewards (Vanolo, 2018). They can thus be said to exploit people's human desire for competition, recognition, accomplishment and even self-expression (Al-Azawi et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref73">4</reflink>]) while learning to achieve predetermined milestones for learning. What elements are used in the training depends on the goals specified (what knowledge and skills should be acquired as a result of the task) and come with individual awards. There is also a social aspect as often participants are in contact with one another, creating large learning groups and even an inclusive community of learners.</p> <p>The specifics behind gamification make it an interesting tool that could be used to promote key aspects of knowledge socialist pedagogy. Knowledge socialism is focused on aspects, such as peer production, knowledge openness, collective intelligence, inclusivity, and creating communities. Each of these aspects are not just skills and knowledge but behaviors that need to be learned or perhaps 'nudged.' Therein lies the potential of using games-based mechanics to aid students in developing the core aspects by actually experiencing them through gamification and having more motivation to do so.</p> <p>We can easily apply these principles to connect with many important aspects of knowledge socialism. We can briefly look at two to expand on this potential. Firstly, we have conferences. Any academic can elucidate the importance of conferences when it comes to sharing and creating knowledge through an open community. What COVID-19 made clear is that the mobility of people to go to conferences can be limited by certain globalized problems. With Zoom fatigue and other such ideas making it into our lexicon, gamification elements could be used to help facilitate conferences in this and at the same time, create new levels of openness and knowledge sharing through conferences enhanced by gamification. At a recent online conference held by ISANA and attended by one writer of this essay, it became evident how gamification was being used as a way to create the missing sense of connection between people attending the conference virtuality. The conference used gamified elements to reward participants for connecting, interacting and participating in different aspects of the conference through points, badges and prizes. All of these encouraged the participants to be more inclusive, open, and participate in knowledge creation.</p> <p>Secondly, we can see this connection through citizenship and virtual mobility. For knowledge socialism to work, we need people to see themselves as global citizens. We are increasingly inhabiting a digital world, in which virtual mobility and technology can be seen as creating a new type of digital passport. When it comes to citizenship, numerous studies have illuminated on the types of adjectival citizenships that can be enhanced. To just name a few we have sustainable citizenship through games like JouleBug 1 (Vanolo, 2018), civic engagement and ecological stewardship through games like Quest Atlantis (Anderson, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref74">7</reflink>]), scientific citizenship through games like River City (Marino &amp; Hayes, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref75">55</reflink>]) and civic engagement through games like Statecraft X (Chee et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref76">19</reflink>]) and Act Now!. Thus, perhaps gamification can lend itself to being a passport for knowledge socialism in terms of creating new ideas of citizenship.</p> <p>These two examples showcase a limited portrait of the use of gamification in terms of knowledge socialist pedagogy. We could just as easily look at the gamification of peer production or the gamification of collective intelligence. Benkler, a name synonymous with peer production, even explores a slight bit about this when discussing immersive environments as 'higher-order learning tools' (Benkler, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref77">12</reflink>]). There is much to explore here, and in the future, any conversation on how to teach knowledge socialist pedagogy should include gamification as a tool for promoting it.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-10">Conclusion: knowledge socialism – historical pedagogies and a new educational reality</hd> <p>History has been full of new pedagogies arising and as much as they often seem disconnected, strands of continuity can always be found. Even those that seem novel, like the emerging pedagogy of knowledge socialism, have principles much in line with established pedagogies. By looking at these connections, we can consider the long lineage of ethical, economic, and philosophical justifications for such moves, many of which have become relevant again in this disoriented COVID-19 era.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-11">Pedagogies of political and economic thought (Artem Samilo)</hd> <p>The modern world is undergoing constant economic and political upheavals caused by amongst other factors, class and social inequality, and in many ways, globalization has exacerbated these tensions. This current pandemic has shown this. However, as has been mentioned throughout the numerous individual essays that make up this paper, part of that inequality spawns from mutations in the distribution of knowledge – knowledge subjugation, knowledge commodification, and knowledge exclusion. In the modern world, accepted forms of human knowledge play an essential role in all economic processes. That is where Peters (2021) submits his argument for Knowledge Socialism as it 'promotes the sociality of knowledge by providing mechanisms for a truly free exchange of ideas enhanced by peer review' and 'unlike knowledge capitalism, which relies on exclusivity – and thus scarcity – to drive innovation, the socialist alternative recognizes that exclusivity can also greatly limit innovation possibilities' (p. 5)</p> <p>Taking a look back at the Soviet perspective, we can see a lineage of pedagogical thought linked to anxieties spawned by capitalism. In a report, Lunacharsky ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref78">53</reflink>]) described the fundamental opposition between the two concepts of education - the socialist and capitalist. Capitalist pedagogy rushes between the ideals of the individualist, who is forced to 'grow animal fangs,' and the ideal of a disciplined person, the so-called 'slave.' This was a notion shared by Lenin ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref79">49</reflink>]). Thus, in a society divided into oppressors and oppressed, the concept of upbringing naturally bifurcates: for the children of the ruling class - an elite upbringing, proclaiming the rise of the individual over society and aimed at educating individualists. For the lower classes, we have a kind of education that often leads to subservience. In many ways, we can see this in today's world with differing levels of access to education for the elite.</p> <p>Keeping in mind that back in 1844, Marx and Engels linked the principles of truly human education and upbringing with the humanistic nature of socialism. A fresh analysis of the concept of knowledge opens up the possibility of finding and approving an alternative project that will continue to take into account all the shortcomings on the basis of the previous notions but could also emphasize and generalize positive experiences and develop promising ideas in collective work with open knowledge embedded within the educational process. Peters (2021) notes, 'knowledge capitalism is parasitic on knowledge socialism for as Marx, Wittgenstein and Bourdieu acknowledge, knowledge and the value of knowledge are rooted in social relations' (p. 280). The formation of a system of knowledge, skills, and abilities to work with knowledge has its own pedagogical characteristics. In order to enhance the potential and prospects of the idea of knowledge socialism and collective intelligence, one should think about how to educate and prepare a society suitable for these values. A person who is spiritually rich, creative, and satisfied with life, can undoubtedly find a better balance between nature and society. That is where the value of knowledge socialism lies, in helping to achieve that through the tenets of openness of knowledge, peer production, and one of the most important, a focus on community.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-12">Educational pedagogy (Yuhan Jiang)</hd> <p>In education, two main pedagogical paradigms, non-directive pedagogy and cooperative learning pedagogy, can be linked to ethics intrinsic to knowledge socialism. The middle of the 20<sups>th</sups> century saw a development of humanistic psychology. The famous American psychologist and educationalist, Carl Ransom Rogers, developed the non-directive treatment of psychotherapy into the non-directive pedagogy of education, which was elaborated in his books named <emph>On Becoming a Person</emph> in 1961 and <emph>Freedom to Learn</emph> in 1969 (Lan, 2018). Non-directive pedagogy, different from self-study without teachers' guidance, refers to attaching more attention to students' self-actualization and whole-person development, especially emotional learning aims and value education in the process of teaching, which requires teachers to use the student-centered teaching methods to show learning content but not to control the students' learning process (Rogers, [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref80">84</reflink>]). Thus, the concepts of non-directive pedagogy can promote the equal relationship between teachers and students and motivate students to express their opinions with freedom (Cheng, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref81">21</reflink>]), which is an important element of academic freedom in higher education. From a knowledge socialist perspective, non-directive pedagogy seems to advance an interesting means to teach students who already have access to vast amounts of knowledge online how to navigate them properly and gain the skills necessary to thrive as life-long learners. In our postdigital age where virtual education, gamification and MOOCs are becoming more of a reality, these skills become even more crucial. Similarly, in a world of fake news and post-truth sensationalism, the skills necessary to discern quality knowledge from misleading provocation must be established.</p> <p>Likewise, we can see the roots of knowledge socialism in Cooperative Learning pedagogy. Based on the cognitive development theory raised by Jean Piaget and the goal structure theory proposed by Morton Deutsch, the theory of cooperative learning became popular from the 1970s in America and inspired many teaching methods to promote students' different generic skills through group work in the process of learning, such as cooperation, interaction, innovation, and leadership (Jacobs &amp; Renandya, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref82">42</reflink>]). Along with the development of cooperative learning pedagogy, many researchers combined cooperative learning pedagogy with other teaching theories or pedagogies, such as example teaching pedagogy (Zhu, [<reflink idref="bib99" id="ref83">99</reflink>]), inquiry learning (Fan, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref84">27</reflink>]), flipped classrooms (Ren, 2020), and blended teaching (Ma et al., 2020). Thus, perhaps it is also natural to extend these practices to a more horizontally-oriented knowledge socialist pedagogy. In terms of higher education, the application of cooperative learning pedagogy is necessary for the process of students' knowledge acquisition and research. Such pedagogies are also meaningful for the improvement of cooperation, interaction, and teamwork skills, all of which are crucial elements of professional success after graduation from institutions of higher education.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-13">A pandemic reality (Ogunyemi Folasade Bolanle)</hd> <p>The look at the pedagogies above provides a context to where knowledge socialism has come from and branched from, while also hinting at where knowledge socialism could evolve. Although this thinking remains in an early form, it shows how many of these pedagogies could be considered in our new post-pandemic reality, the reality that the world is facing right now. We have a world emerged in a war in which the only capable weapons are not guns or bombs but knowledge, openness, and a sense of community. Unlike the wars of the past, this war has a common enemy, an enemy that will leave unimaginable consequences in its wake, not only on individuals alone but on the collective psyche of humanity through changes to the global political, economic, social, and geopolitical landscape. We have seen these effects on the financial and economic status of the world, in the loss of jobs, industrial setbacks, border shutdowns, and its numerous effects on the educational sector. This paper in particular has emphasized many of the challenges in the educational sector. What is accentuated herein is not just the problems but also potential solutions. Where there is despair there is also hope.</p> <p>By the time the global fight against this coronavirus has ended, it will have left behind a trail of death, misery, job loss, poverty, and hunger. The predictable steep decline in economic fortunes should now compel leaders and policymakers to design long-term policies and action required to undertake necessary and drastic changes, political and economic reforms, and a structural redesign. The COVID-19 pandemic could encourage people to realize that they depend on each other on this small planet. Whether it is global warming, inequality, or environmental degradation, we either sink or swim together. For years we have discussed what it means to live in a globalized world, yet despite our unprecedented connections, it often seems we are living in a world of more isolation instead of a global community. However, as Topol ([<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref85">92</reflink>]) stated, the pandemic in which we are currently engulfed could be seen as 'a turning point' that brings back trust in science and helps people throughout the world come together.</p> <p>A new reality is emerging, one that shows the need for a new pedagogy and digital architectures based on the ethics and practices of sharing, collaboration, and community, of some turn towards knowledge socialism. It is a reality that emphasizes that knowledge, much like health care, should be a guaranteed public good. One way to fight these globalized crises is through peer production, openness, the appreciation of all types of knowledge, community, and the goals of modernizing education through technology and teaching children to decipher the reality from the noise. We have come a long way in pedagogical development, and COVID-19 has provided the context in which we can feasibly see that in our globalized, postdigital age, knowledge socialism, as an extension of numerous past pedagogies and ethics, has facilitated glimmers of hope in facing these challenges by acknowledging needs, conceptualizing reforms, and imagining a new world of possibility.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-14">Open review 1: knowledge socialism and the imperative of east-meets-west dialogue (Liz Jackso...</hd> <p>In 'Knowledge Socialism in the COVID-19 Era', an international team of scholars discuss new and not-so-new traditions of community and collectivity in scholarship and academic research, moving away from a western-oriented, neoliberal view marked by knowledge individualism and privatization and academic competition. One of the key strengths of this article is that it shows by doing: The piece is strengthened intellectually by the substantive global-level diversity of experiences among the authors, who discuss knowledge socialism in relation to COVID-19 and the activities of students and scholars in such parts of the world as Africa, Pakistan, Thailand, the United States, China, Europe, and South America. This level of discussion, as broad and globally oriented, helps orient the reader away from and beyond a, for lack of a better word, 'WEIRD' context (Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democrat), also known as the 'western liberal democratic' sphere, notwithstanding important questions about the relationship between liberalism (and neoliberalism) and democracy (e.g. Jackson &amp; Peters, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref86">41</reflink>]; Peters &amp; Jackson, 2021), and the stereotypical association of 'the west' with these phenomena.</p> <p>At the heart of such an inquiry, in my reading, is recognition of the value of dialogue, alongside an understanding of the experiences of 'west' and 'the rest' as inherently dialectical. That is, while the non-WEIRD have intellectual traditions and values worth elaborating and claiming as their own, the WEIRD take pride in being liberal and democratic in relation to a sense that historical traditions, in the western world and elsewhere, had other risks and challenges, related particularly to individual rights and notions of equality. <emph>Ubuntu</emph> is praised by authors of this article, as it has been in other recent western and English-language scholarship, but it also has its challengers. While its inherent relationality provides significant insights, the nature of relationships it inspires has been questioned by some for entrenching relationships marked by social hierarchy and nepotism (for instance, in South Africa). More generally, we can at one level applaud the development and enhancement of relationships between different stakeholders around the world—be they nation-states, students and teachers brought together through new technologies, and so on—but we cannot assume these relationships are devoid of political complications, as we often see old hierarchies reemerge related to identities (like gender, race, age, and ethnicity) and capacities (including resources).</p> <p>This article therefore invites readers to question their views about the nature of social and interpersonal relationships in the COVID-19 era, in western and other parts of the world, and in-between. How does one's epistemology relate to an ontology of human relationality, to a sense of how people belong together in the world, and to what makes knowledge globally valuable? I thank the authors of this piece for providing an impetus for these reflections and questions, which are just one possible trajectory one could pursue given the many openings and insights the essay provides.</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-15">Open review 2: 'miracles of the multitude': the commonwealth of knowledge (Sean Sturm)</hd> <p>Let me begin by summarising Paolo Virno's ([<reflink idref="bib95" id="ref87">95</reflink>]) story of post-Fordist labour in 'Virtuosity and Revolution,' which provides some back story for the practices of 'knowledge socialism' described in this article:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Human beings are versatile and collaborative producers (i.e., 'labourers').</item> <p></p> <item> Today they produce not only stuff but also knowledge (via the 'immaterial labour' of the 'general intellect').</item> <p></p> <item> But that knowledge – along with the knowledge makers themselves – tends to become commodified (as 'virtuosic performance').</item> <p></p> <item> Because the State is captured by Capital, knowledge production is regulated by the State (via concepts like intellectual property and rank[ing]) [Virno says as much].</item> <p></p> <item> Because the interaction of human beings is reduced to the collaborative production of knowledge as a commodity, they become co-dependent with Capital (as 'universal servile labour').</item> </ulist> <p>I would add a twist implicit in Lazzarato's 'Immaterial Labour' ([<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref88">46</reflink>]) from the same volume (and later acknowledged by Virno ([<reflink idref="bib96" id="ref89">96</reflink>])):</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Knowledge production is facilitated by the advent of the digital.</item> </ulist> <p>If this story sounds like a dead end, made all the more decisive by the advent of the digital, there is an alternative ending:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Human beings can resist producing knowledge as a commodity by creating a knowledge community not captured by the State (i.e., 'exodus,' a.k.a. 'engaged withdrawal').</item> </ulist> <p>But what does this resistance look like in practice? It involves what Virno (1996, p. 198) calls 'non-servile virtuosity,' that is to say, 'a free-thinking inventiveness that changes the rules of the game and disorients.' This virtuosity produces 'the miracles of the multitude' (Virno, 1996, p. 208): it is minoritarian (collective, but non-Statist) and possibilist (evental and multiple). As Hardt and Negri ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref90">35</reflink>], p. 177) put it, such practices 'set the common in motion.' They propose practices that are all forms of 'co-research' (I would call it 'study,' after Agamben, [[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref91">2</reflink>]]) such as research by academics with workers outside the academy, in the service of social causes or via social media.</p> <p>If I have a criticism of the practices proposed by Hardt and Negri and those of 'knowledge socialism' described in this article (afro-communitarianism; transnational knowledge production; digitally accessible education; non-directive pedagogy), it is that none of them is radical enough. Knowledge <emph>communism</emph> would look not only beyond intellectual property and institutional hierarchies, but also humanism, nations and formal education, taking as its starting-point the equiprimordiality of Guattari's ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref92">32</reflink>]) 'three ecological registers' (p. 28) of the environment, social relations and subjectivity (or outside, in-between and inside) and the fact that all three are the product of 'living autopoietic machines' (p. 61), a commonwealth of knowledge both human and more-than-human ...</p> <hd id="AN0156784810-16">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <ref id="AN0156784810-17"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref26" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Adams, J. (1765). V. "A dissertation on the canon and the feudal law," No. 3. Massachusetts Historical Society; Adams Papers Digital Edition. <ulink href="http://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-06-01-02-0052-0006">http://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-06-01-02-0052-0006</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref91" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Agamben, G. (1995). The idea of study. In M. Sullivan &amp; S. Whitsitt, Trans., Idea of prose (pp. 63 – 65). SUNY Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref61" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Akram, W., Adeel, S., Tabassum, M., Jiang, Y., Chandio, A., &amp; Yasmin, I. (2020). Scenario analysis and proposed plan for Pakistan Universities – COVID – 19: Application of design thinking model. Cambridge Open Engage (Working Paper). https://doi.org/10.33774/coe-2020-ql1w6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref73" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Al-Azawi, R., Al-Faliti, F., &amp; Al-Blushi, M. (2016). Educational gamification vs. game-based learning: Comparative study. International Journal of Innovation, Management, and Technology, 7 (4), 131 – 136. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijimt.2016.7.4.659</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref59" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Alhazzani, N. (2020). MOOC's impact on higher education. Social Sciences &amp; Humanities Open, 2 (1), 100030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100030</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref46" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Almutairi, F., &amp; White, S. (2018). How to measure student engagement in the context of blended-MOOC. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 15 (3), 262 – 278. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-07-2018-0046</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref74" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Anderson, J. (2010). Games and the development of students' civic engagement and ecological stewardship. In J. Bishop (Ed.), Gamification for Human Factors Integration: Social, Education, and Psychological Issues (pp. 199 – 215). Information Science Reference.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref49" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Annabi, C. A., &amp; Wilkins, S. (2016). The use of MOOCs in transnational higher education for accreditation of prior learning, programme delivery, and professional development. International Journal of Educational Management, 30 (6), 959 – 975. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2015-0057</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref24" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Assié-Lumumba, N. D. T. (2017). The Ubuntu paradigm and comparative and international education: epistemological challenges and opportunities in our field. Comparative Education Review, 61 (1), 1 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1086/689922</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bauwens, M., Niaros, V. (2017). The emergence of peer production: Challenges and opportunities for labour and unions [Policy Brief]. European Trade Union Institute. https://<ulink href="http://www.etui.org/publications/policy-briefs/european-economic-employment-and-social-policy/the-emergence-of-peer-production-challenges-and-opportunities-for-labour-and-unions">www.etui.org/publications/policy-briefs/european-economic-employment-and-social-policy/the-emergence-of-peer-production-challenges-and-opportunities-for-labour-and-unions</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Benkler, Y. (2005). Common wisdom: Peer production of educational materials, Harvard Center for open and sustainable learning. HLS Scholarly Articles. https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/37077901</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Benkler, Y. (2016). Peer production and cooperation. In J. M. Bauer &amp; M. Latzer (Eds.), Handbook on the economics of the internet. Edward Elgar. https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/14700_5.html</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Benkler, Y., Faris, R., &amp; Roberts, H. (2018). Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radicalization in American politics. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blum-Smith, S., Yurkofsky, M., &amp; Brennan, K. (2021). Stepping back and stepping in: Facilitating learner-centered experiences in MOOCs. Computers &amp; Education, 160, 104042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104042</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bordoloi, R. (2018). Transforming and empowering higher education through Open and Distance Learning in India. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 13 (1), 24 – 36. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-11-2017-0037</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Buddharaksa, W. (2016). Book Review: Holloway, J. 2016. In, Against, and Beyond Capitalism: The San Francisco Lectures. Oakland, CA: PM Press. MANUSYA, 19 (2), 112 – 114. https://doi.org/10.1163/26659077-01902007</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cammaerts, B., &amp; Mansell, R. (2020). Digital platform policy and regulation: Toward a radical democratic turn. International Journal of Communication, 14, 135 – 154. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/11182/2901</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chairman's Statement of the 23rd ASEAN-China Summit, Viet Nam, 12 November 2020. https://asean.org/storage/47-Final-Chairmans-Statement-of-the-23rd-ASEAN-China-Summit.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chee, Y. S., Mehrotra, S., &amp; Liu, Q. (2013). Effective game based citizenship education in the age of new media. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 11 (1), 16 – 28. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1012864.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, T., Peng, L., Jing, B., Wu, C., Yang, J., &amp; Cong, G. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on user experience with online education platforms in China. Sustainability, 12 (18), 7329. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187329</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cheng, Y. (2014). Qianxi "Feizhi daoxing jiaoxue [On "Non-directive Teaching"]. Kecheng Jiaoxue [Curriculum Teaching], 11 (64), 153 – 154.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cherkaoui, M. (2020, March 22). The Shifting Geopolitics of Coronavirus and the Demise of Neoliberalism – (Part 2). Al Jazeera Center for Studies. <ulink href="http://studies.aljazeera.net/en/reports/shifting-geopolitics-coronavirus-and-demise-neoliberalism-%E2%80%93-part-2">http://studies.aljazeera.net/en/reports/shifting-geopolitics-coronavirus-and-demise-neoliberalism-%E2%80%93-part-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> De Santos, B. (2016). Epistemologies of the South and the future. Postcolonial Italia, 1. <ulink href="http://europeansouth.postcolonialitalia.it/journal/2016-1/3.2016-1.Santos.pdf">http://europeansouth.postcolonialitalia.it/journal/2016-1/3.2016-1.Santos.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., &amp; Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification". In Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, Tampere, Finland. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dewey, J. (1983). Education as Politics. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The middle works of John Dewey (Vol. 13, pp. 1921 – 1922). Southern Illinois University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Elliott, K. C., &amp; Resnik, D. B. (2019). Making open science work for science and society. Environmental Health Perspectives, 127 (7), 075002. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP4808</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fan, L. (2020). Hezuo tanjiu shi xuexi zai gaozhong yingyu yuedu jiaoxue zhong de yingyong yanjiu [The Application of Cooperative Inquiry Learning in Senior High School English Reading Teaching]. Jiben Jiaoyu Yanjiu [Research on Basic Education], 544 (52), 76 – 77.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Freitas, S. I. d., Morgan, J., &amp; Gibson, D. (2015). Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46 (3), 455 – 471. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12268</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Galvão, J. (2020). COVID-19: The deadly threat of misinformation. The Lancet Infectious Diseases), 21 (5), e114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30721-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Giang, V. (2013, September 19). "Gamification" techniques increase your employees' ability to learn by 40%. Business Insider. https://<ulink href="http://www.businessinsider.com/gamification-techniques-increase-your-employees-ability-to-learn-by-40-2013-9">www.businessinsider.com/gamification-techniques-increase-your-employees-ability-to-learn-by-40-2013-9</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Graber, D. A., &amp; Dunaway, J. (2018). Mass media and American politics. CQ Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guattari, F. (2000). The three ecologies (I. Pindar &amp; P. Sutton, Trans.). Athlone Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hajdukiewicz, A., &amp; Pera, B. (2020). Education for sustainable development—The case of massive open online courses. Sustainability, 12 (20), 8542. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208542</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hannah, M. (2021). QAnon and the information dark age. First Monday, 26 (2), https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v26i2.10868</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hardt, M., &amp; Negri, A. (2009). Commonwealth. Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Higgs, P. (2010). Towards an indigenous African epistemology of community in education research. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2 (2), 2414 – 2421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.347</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hitkul, J., Prabhu, A., Guhathakurta, D., Jain, J., Subramanian, M., Reddy, M., Sehgal, S., Karandikar, T., Gulati, A., Arora, U., Shah, R. R., Kumaraguru, P. (2021). Capitol (Pat)riots: A comparative study of Twitter and Parler. ArXiv:2101.06914 [Cs]. 111 (17), 1 – 12. <ulink href="http://arxiv.org/abs/2101.06914">http://arxiv.org/abs/2101.06914</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hodgkinson-Williams, C., &amp; Gray, E. (2009). Degrees of openness: The emergence of open educational resources at the University of Cape Town. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 5 (5), 101 – 116. <ulink href="http://learntechlib.org/p/42198/">http://learntechlib.org/p/42198/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huang, W. H., &amp; Soman, W. (2013, December 10). A practitioner's guide to gamification of education. University of Toronto. https://inside.rotman.utoronto.ca/behaviouraleconomicsinaction/files/2013/09/GuideGamificationEducationDec2013.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Islam, M. F., Akter, T., &amp; Knezevic, R. (2019). The role of MOOCs in achieving the sustainable development goal four. In Proceedings of the Western Balkans information and media literacy conference, Bosnia and Herzegovina, June 2019 (pp. 20–21). https://<ulink href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/334112867%5fTHE%5fROLE%5fOF%5fMOOCs%5fIN%5fACHIEVING%5f">www.researchgate.net/publication/334112867%5fTHE%5fROLE%5fOF%5fMOOCs%5fIN%5fACHIEVING%5f</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jackson, L., &amp; Peters, M. (Eds.). (2021). Marxism, Neoliberalism, and Intelligent Capitalism: An Educational Philosophy and Theory Economic and Neoliberal Studies Reader (Vol. XI). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jacobs, G. M., &amp; Renandya, W. A. (2019). Student centered cooperative learning: Linking concepts in education to promote student learning. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7213-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jefferson, T. (1789). Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Richard Price. Library of Congress. https://<ulink href="http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/60.html">www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/60.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley &amp; Sons.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lan, T. (2018). Leng Ran de "Qing-Zhi jiaoxue" yu Luo Jiesi de "Fei zhidao xing jiaoxue" de bijiao yanjiu. [A Comparative Study of Leng Ran's "emotion-knowledge teaching" and Rodgers] "Non-directive teaching. Dalian Jiaoyu Xueyuan Xuebao [Journal of Dalian Education University], 34 (2), 28 – 32.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lazzarato, M. (1996). Immaterial labour. In P. Virno &amp; M. Hardt (Eds.), Radical thought in Italy: A potential politics (pp. 133 – 147). University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, C., Yang, T., Inchoco, G., Jones, G. M., &amp; Satyanarayan, A. (2021). Viral visualizations: How coronavirus skeptics use orthodox data practices to promote unorthodox science online [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 1 – 18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445211</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, J. J., &amp; Haupt, J. P. (2021). Scientific collaboration on COVID-19 amidst geopolitical tensions between the US and China. The Journal of Higher Education, 92 (2), 303 – 329. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2020.1827924</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lenin, V. (1916). Lenin: Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism. https://Marxists.org. https://<ulink href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/">www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Letseka, M. (2013). Anchoring ubuntu morality. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4 (3), 351. <ulink href="http://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/mjss/article/view/483">http://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/mjss/article/view/483</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lévy, P. (2020). Toward an epistemological mutation in the humanities and social sciences. In M. A. Peters, T. Besley, P. Jandrić, &amp; X. Zhu (Eds.), Knowledge socialism: The rise of peer production: Collegiality, collaboration, and collective intelligence (pp. 33 – 59). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8126-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luke, T. (2020). Perversities or problems in the rise of peer production with Knowledge Socialism: Collegiality, collaboration, collective intelligence. In M. A. Peters, T. Besley, P. Jandrić, &amp; X. Zhu (Eds.), Knowledge socialism: The rise of peer production: Collegiality, collaboration, and collective intelligence (pp. 61 – 80). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8126-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lunacharsky, A. (1918). Self-Education of the workers by A. Lunacharsky 1918. https://Marxists.org. https://<ulink href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/lunachar/1918/self-education.htm">www.marxists.org/archive/lunachar/1918/self-education.htm</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ma, S., Wang, Y., &amp; Zhang, M. (2020). Hunhe shi jiaoxue moshi xia ketang jiaoxue gaige chutan– yi xiandai hanyu yuyin ke weili." [A preliminary study on the reform of class teaching under blended teaching: Taking the modern Chinese phonetic class as an example]. Hainan Guangbo Dianshi Daxue Xuebao. Journal of Hunan Radio &amp; Television University, 81 (4), 138 – 143.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marino, M. T., &amp; Hayes, M. T. (2012). Promoting inclusive education, civic scientific literacy, and global citizenship with videogames. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7 (4), 945 – 954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-012-9429-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mbiti, J. (1969). African Religions and Philosophy. Heinemann.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken. Why games make us better and how they can change the world. Penguin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Menkiti, I. A. (2004). On the normative conception of a person. In K. Wiredu (Ed.), A Companion to Africa Philosophy (pp. 324 – 330). Blackwell Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Milligan, C., &amp; Littlejohn, A. (2014). Supporting professional learning in a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15 (5), 197 – 213. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1855</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministy of Foreign Affairs (MFA). (2020). MFA's news and China. <ulink href="http://www.mfa.go.th/main/th/news3/6886">http://www.mfa.go.th/main/th/news3/6886</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mohamed, M. H., &amp; Hammond, M. (2018). MOOCs: A differentiation by pedagogy, content and assessment. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35 (1), 2 – 11. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-07-2017-0062</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MOOC.org. (2020). About MOOCs. https://MOOC.org. https://<ulink href="http://www.mooc.org/">www.mooc.org/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morford, Z. H., Witts, B. N., Killingsworth, K. J., &amp; Alavosius, M. P. (2014). Gamification: The intersection between behavior analysis and game design technologies. The Behavior Analyst, 37 (1), 25 – 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-014-0006-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J. (2020). Geopolitics of power and knowledge in the COVID-19 pandemic: Decolonial reflections on a global crisis. Journal of Developing Societies, 36 (4), 366 – 389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0169796X20963252</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neilson, D. (2020). The democratic socialisation of knowledge: Integral to an alternative to the neoliberal model of development. In M. A. Peters, T. Besley, P. Jandrić, &amp; X. Zhu (Eds.), Knowledge Socialism: The Rise of Peer Production: Collegiality, Collaboration, and Collective Intelligence. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8126-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Odgers, C. L., &amp; Jensen, M. R. (2020). Annual Research Review: Adolescent mental health in the digital age: Facts, fears, and future directions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 61 (3), 336 – 348. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13190</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ong, D., &amp; Jambulingam, M. (2016). Reducing employee learning and development costs: the use of massive open online courses (MOOC). Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 30 (5), 18 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-08-2015-0066</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. (2018). Building knowledge cultures in the age of the digital reason. Research Features. https://researchfeatures.com/building-knowledge-cultures-in-the-age-of-the-digital-reason/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. A. (2020). An educational theory of innovation: What constitutes the educational good? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52 (10), 1016 – 1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2019.1699992</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. A. (2020). Digital socialism or knowledge capitalism? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52 (1), 1 – 10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2019.1593033</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. A. (2021). Knowledge socialism: The rise of peer production - collegiality, collaboration, and collective intelligence. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53 (1), 1 – 9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2019.1654375</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. A., &amp; Besley, T. (2006). Building knowledge cultures: Education and development in the age of knowledge capitalism. Rowman &amp; Littlefield.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. A., Besley, T., &amp; Arndt, S. (2019). Experimenting with academic subjectivity: Collective writing, peer production and collective intelligence. Open Review of Educational Research, 6 (1), 26 – 40. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1557072</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. A., Besley, T., Jandrić, P., &amp; Xudong, Z. (2020). Introduction. In M. A. Peters, T. Besley, P. Jandrić, &amp; X. Zhu (Eds.), Knowledge socialism (pp. 1 – 11). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8126-3_1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. A., Rider, S., Hyvönen, M., &amp; Besley, T. (Eds.). (2018). Post-truth, fake news: Viral modernity &amp; higher education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8013-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M.A, &amp; Jackson, L. (Eds.). (2021). From radical Marxism to knowledge socialism: An educational philosophy and theory economic and neoliberal studies reader (Vol. XI). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Petersen, A. H. (2019). How Millennials became the burnous Ggneration. AMASS: Society for Popular Democracy, 23 (4), 16 – 21. link.gale.com/apps/doc/A592557454/AONE?u=anon∼51b323cf&amp;sid=googleScholar&amp;xid=307829a1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Purkayastha, N., &amp; Sinha, M. K. (2021). Unstoppable study with MOOCs during COVID-19 pandemic: A study. Library Philosophy and Practice, 4791. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/4791</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ramose, M. B. (2002). The philosophy of ubuntu as a philosophy. In P. H. Coetzee &amp; A. P. J. Roux (Eds.), Philosophy from Africa: A text with readings. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ranjan, P. (2021). The case for waiving intellectual property protection for COVID-19 vaccines. Observer Research Foundation. https://<ulink href="http://www.orfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/ORF%5fIssueBrief%5f456%5fTripsWaiver.pdf">www.orfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/ORF%5fIssueBrief%5f456%5fTripsWaiver.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ren, Y. (2020). Fanzhuan ketang beijing xia shuxue xiaozu hezuo xuexi celue tanjiu. [Research on Cooperative Learning Strategy of Mathematics Group under the Background of Flipped Classroom] Chengzhang Zhilu [Growth Road], 31 (659), 82 – 83.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richter, G., Raban, D. R., &amp; Rafaeli, S. (2015). Studying gamification: The effect of rewards and incentives on motivation. In T. Reiners, &amp; L. C. Wood (Eds.), Gamification in education and business (pp. 21 – 46). Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rigby, C. S. (2014). Gamification and motivation. In S. P. Walz, &amp; S. Detering (Eds.), The gameful world. Approaches, issues, applications (pp. 113 – 137). The MIT Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80's. Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sanchez-Gordon, S., &amp; Luján-Mora, S. (2014). MOOCs gone wild. In Proceedings of the 8th International Technology. Education and Development Conference, Valencia, Spain (pp. 1449 – 1458). <ulink href="http://hdl.handle.net/10045/41441">http://hdl.handle.net/10045/41441</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shah, D. (2020). By the Numbers: MOOCs in 2020. Available at https://<ulink href="http://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2020/">www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2020/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Snyder, T. (2021, January 9). The American abyss. The New York Times. https://<ulink href="http://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/magazine/trump-coup.html">www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/magazine/trump-coup.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Srdjan, T., Radica, P., &amp; Olivera, P. (2016). Massive open online courses (MOOC) and its possibilities as instrument of formal, nonformal, informal and lifelong learning. In D. Cvetkovic (Ed.), Virtual learning. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/65930</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tambini, D. (2017). Fake news: Public policy responses (Media Policy Brief 20; p. 28). The London School of Economics and Political Science Department of Media and Communications. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/80787497.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tanabe, J. (2020). Exploring a Post-COVID-19 sustainable peace model. Social Ethics Society Journal of Applied Philosophy, Special Issue, 31. <ulink href="http://ses-journal.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Article-4%5fTanabe%5fSESJuly2020.pdf">http://ses-journal.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Article-4%5fTanabe%5fSESJuly2020.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Topol, E. [@EricTopol]. (2020, April 9). The #COVID19 pandemic could be a turning point, restoring faith in science and bringing people together [Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/1248236673982271493?lang=en</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Unger, R. M. (2020). The knowledge economy: A critique of the dominant view. American Affairs, 5 (3), 29. https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2020/08/the-knowledge-economy-a-critique-of-the-dominant-view/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vanolo, A. (2018). Cities and the politics of gamification. Cities, 74, 320 – 326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.12.021</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Virno, P. (1996). Virtuosity and revolution: The political theory of exodus. In P. Virno &amp; M. Hardt (Eds.), Radical thought in Italy: A potential politics (pp. 189 – 212). University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Virno, P. (2004). A grammar of the multitude: For an analysis of contemporary forms of life (I. Bertoletti, J. Cascaito, &amp; A. Casson, Trans.). Semiotext(e).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Xu, B., Kraemer, M. U. G., Xu, B., Gutierrez, B., Mekaru, S., Sewalk, K., Loskill, A., Wang, L., Cohn, E., Hill, S., Zarebski, A., Li, S., Wu, C.-H., Hulland, E., Morgan, J., Scarpino, S., Brownstein, J., Pybus, O., Pigott, D., &amp; Kraemer, M. (2020). Open access epidemiological data from the COVID-19 outbreak. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 20 (5), 534. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30119-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yuan, L., Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education. A White Paper. JISC CETIS. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.oerknowledgecloud.org/archive/MOOCs-and-Open-Education.pdf">www.oerknowledgecloud.org/archive/MOOCs-and-Open-Education.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhu, Y. (2020). Anli jiaoxue fa yu hezuo xuexi zai jingji jiaoxue zhong de jiehe yingyong [The Combination of Case Teaching Method and Cooperative Learning in Economics Teaching]. Jiaoyu Xiandai Hua [Education Modernization,], 29 (4), 193 – 196.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Public Affairs.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Daniel E. Crain; Stephanie Hollings; Hazzan Moses Kayode; Moses Oladele Ogunniran; Yodpet Worapot; Paola Guañuna; Tahira Yasmeen; Anum Riaz; Artem Samilo; Yuhan Jiang; Ogunyemi Folasade Bolanle; Liz Jackson and Sean Sturm</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Daniel E. Crain is a graduate student at Peking University's School of International Studies, a Zhi-Xing US-China Student Leadership Fellow, and a part-time researcher at the Beijing Academy of Social Sciences. His research interests mainly revolve around contemporary Sino-US relations, constructivist international relations theory, and the vast sociopolitical implications of society's (post)digital transformation. His current work focuses on the political and relational complexities emerging from changes in digital information ecosystems in China and the US. Before pursuing an advanced degree, he worked for 3 years at an international school teaching social science in Southern China.</p> <p>Stephanie Hollings Stephanie is a recent PhD graduate of the Faculty of Education at Beijing Normal University. Her research interests are mainly focused on international education, global citizenship, and global competences. Recently, her work has explored an array of topics including international schools in China, gamification, indigenous knowledge, and aspects of knowledge socialism.</p> <p>Hazzan Moses Kayode is a seasoned scholar in educational management and history from the University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. His areas of research interest are eclectic and cut across personnel administration in education, global and African educational assessments, secondary and higher education, human resources development, intellectual history, African history and epistemology, African historiography, and studies on intergroup relations. His current research interests focus on teacher personnel and student academic achievement in Southwestern Nigeria.</p> <p>Moses Oladele Ogunniran is a postdoctoral Fellow for the International Science and Evidence-based Education (ISEE) Assessment project. The ISEEA is meant to re-envision the future of education and feed into UNESCO's Futures of Education report at the UNESCO, Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development (MGIEP). With expertise in the economics of education and educational policy and management, his current research focuses on comparative and international education, educational leadership and policy, and the labor market. Using education and economic development theory, human capital, and human flourishing theory, his latest work is concerned with the mismatch between skills acquired and skills expected among tertiary institution graduates in Nigeria and China.</p> <p>Yodpet Worapot is a PhD candidate at Beijing Normal University's Institute of International and Comparative Education, a Chinese government scholarship recipient, and a part-time research associate. His areas of interest include international cooperation in education, China-ASEAN educational policy, and education for sustainable development. He has worked via the UNESCO Youth Leadership Workshop on Global Citizenship Education and the Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative (YSEALI) academic fellowship. Recently, his research has focused on higher education cooperation mechanisms in Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) between China and Thailand and improving the effectiveness of international cooperation.</p> <p>Paola Guañuna is a PhD candidate at Beijing Normal University's Educational Administration and Innovation Department and a member of several Latin American associations in China (ASEEC and ALOCH) to promote cultural and academic exchange between China and Latin America. Her research interests focus on Sino-Latin American cultural and educational cooperation, internationalization of higher education, and online education. Her current work focuses on the cooperation agreements between Chinese and Latin American HEIs and online education.</p> <p>Tahira Yasmeen is a PhD student at Beijing Normal University's School of International Educational Leadership and Policy (Comparative Education). Her research interests focus primarily on the comparison of higher education institutions (HEIs) at the national and international level, as well as the implications of the digitalization of traditional education. Recent work by Tahira focuses on the transformation of traditional education into a digital education system due to COVID-19. She is also the Vice President in the International Student Union Faculty of Education (ISUFoE) and a monthly contributor to the Monthly Timeline newspaper in BNU's School of Education.</p> <p>Anum Riaz is a PhD student at Beijing Normal University, a MPhil graduate in Leadership and Management, and a member of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). She was recently nominated for the Outstanding Leadership Award for ISA, Dubai. Currently, she works as a lecturer with a particular focus on educational leadership roles in educational institutes.</p> <p>Artem Samilo is a PhD student of Comparative Education at Beijing Normal University's Faculty of Education. He has a master's degree in international economics and now primarily focuses his research on comparative education, economics, policy, and the practice of gifted education in Ukraine. Artem's current research explores knowledge socialism and the knowledge economy within the field of education.</p> <p>Ogunyemi Folasade Bolanle is a graduate of the MA in Comparative Education program at Beijing Normal University. Her research interests focus on educational leadership and management. She has worked in several schools in Nigeria before beginning her degree.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib89" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib100" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib97" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib91" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib87" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib93" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib90" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib98" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib94" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib99" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib92" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib95" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl77" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl78" bibid="bib96" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl79" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl80" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref92"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1348856 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Knowledge Socialism in the COVID-19 Era: A Collective Exploration of Needs, Forms, and Possibilities – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Crain%2C+Daniel+E%2E%22">Crain, Daniel E.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4195-7848">0000-0003-4195-7848</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hollings%2C+Stephanie%22">Hollings, Stephanie</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8813-1173">0000-0002-8813-1173</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kayode%2C+Hazzan+Moses%22">Kayode, Hazzan Moses</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2933-5798">0000-0003-2933-5798</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ogunniran%2C+Moses+Oladele%22">Ogunniran, Moses Oladele</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9615-2775">0000-0002-9615-2775</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Worapot%2C+Yodpet%22">Worapot, Yodpet</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3888-748X">0000-0003-3888-748X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Guañuna%2C+Paola%22">Guañuna, Paola</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5092-9019">0000-0001-5092-9019</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Yasmeen%2C+Tahira%22">Yasmeen, Tahira</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6479-1567">0000-0001-6479-1567</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Riaz%2C+Anum%22">Riaz, Anum</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3481-4486">0000-0003-3481-4486</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Samilo%2C+Artem%22">Samilo, Artem</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6787-7910">0000-0002-6787-7910</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jiang%2C+Yuhan%22">Jiang, Yuhan</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8738-5297">0000-0001-8738-5297</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bolanle%2C+Ogunyemi+Folasade%22">Bolanle, Ogunyemi Folasade</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0305-0332">0000-0002-0305-0332</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jackson%2C+Liz%22">Jackson, Liz</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5626-596X">0000-0002-5626-596X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sturm%2C+Sean%22">Sturm, Sean</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4011-7898">0000-0003-4011-7898</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Educational+Philosophy+and+Theory%22"><i>Educational Philosophy and Theory</i></searchLink>. 2022 54(6):761-782. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 22 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2022 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pandemics%22">Pandemics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22COVID-19%22">COVID-19</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Utilization%22">Information Utilization</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Global+Approach%22">Global Approach</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Indigenous+Knowledge%22">Indigenous Knowledge</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Democratic+Values%22">Democratic Values</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22International+Cooperation%22">International Cooperation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22MOOCs%22">MOOCs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Electronic+Learning%22">Electronic Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Games%22">Computer Games</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instruction%22">Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Knowledge+Economy%22">Knowledge Economy</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22China%22">China</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Thailand%22">Thailand</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pakistan%22">Pakistan</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/00131857.2021.1952864 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0013-1857<br />1469-5812 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: The inspiration for this collective writing project began with a digital conference entitled 'Knowledge Socialism, COVID-19 and the New Reality of Education' held at Beijing Normal University. In this conference and through this article, multiple researchers spread across six continents have engaged in the collaborative task of outlining emerging innovations and alternative contingencies towards education, international collaboration, and digital reform in this time of global crisis. Trends associated with digital education, knowledge openness, peer production, and collective intelligence as articulated by Michael A. Peters' conception of Knowledge Socialism are given careful analysis and exploration. Some of the members of this collective endeavor to identify problems, others, begin to draw boxes around potential solutions. Overall, this article engages with real world challenges and innovations that look beyond dominant neoliberal trends in the knowledge economy to build bridges toward novel possibilities in this era of rapid digital change. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2022 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1348856 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1348856 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/00131857.2021.1952864 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 22 StartPage: 761 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries Type: general – SubjectFull: Pandemics Type: general – SubjectFull: COVID-19 Type: general – SubjectFull: Information Utilization Type: general – SubjectFull: Global Approach Type: general – SubjectFull: Indigenous Knowledge Type: general – SubjectFull: Democratic Values Type: general – SubjectFull: International Cooperation Type: general – SubjectFull: MOOCs Type: general – SubjectFull: Electronic Learning Type: general – SubjectFull: Computer Games Type: general – SubjectFull: Instruction Type: general – SubjectFull: Knowledge Economy Type: general – SubjectFull: China Type: general – SubjectFull: Thailand Type: general – SubjectFull: Pakistan Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Knowledge Socialism in the COVID-19 Era: A Collective Exploration of Needs, Forms, and Possibilities Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Crain, Daniel E. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Hollings, Stephanie – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Kayode, Hazzan Moses – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Ogunniran, Moses Oladele – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Worapot, Yodpet – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Guañuna, Paola – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Yasmeen, Tahira – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Riaz, Anum – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Samilo, Artem – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Jiang, Yuhan – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Bolanle, Ogunyemi Folasade – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Jackson, Liz – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Sturm, Sean IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2022 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0013-1857 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1469-5812 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 54 – Type: issue Value: 6 Titles: – TitleFull: Educational Philosophy and Theory Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
