- Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources. A learner can exponentially improve their own learning by plugging into an existing network.
- Learning may reside in non-human appliances. Learning (in the sense that something is known, but not necessarily actuated) can rest in a community, a network, or a database.
- Knowing where to find information is more important than knowing information.
- Learning happens in many different ways. Courses, email, communities, conversations, web search, email lists, reading blogs, etc. Courses are not the primary conduit for learning.
The list on the blog is of course a lot longer - but the elements above illustrate (IMHO) best what the technology element has to offer... although, I am not convinced that the arguments in themselves need to be ICT-based (people can network without a computer, or a book is also a non-human appliance...), but I do agree with the fact that an additional/expanded view on the theories on learning are a welcome addition to the theoretic framework
Wikipedia (in all its fallibility) actually sees similarities with the Activity theory of Vygotsky as it regards knowledge to exist within systems which are accessed through people participating in activities. It also bears some similarity with the Social Learning Theory of Bandura that proposes that people learn through contact.
Wikipedia also traces the term 'connectivism' to a 2008 online course by Siemens and Downes delivered "Connectivism and Connective Knowledge". Downes, on his blog, defines the concept as:
"At its heart, connectivism is the thesis that knowledge is distributed across a network of connections, and therefore that learning consists of the ability to construct and traverse those networks."
Where, according Downes, connectivism differs from existing theories theories, is that connectivism is 'connectionist', literally the set of connections formed by actions and experience. The following video tries to explain the concept...
There still is a great deal of criticism of connectivism as a theory. The most often cited is prof Plon Verhagen from the University of Twente - as retrieved from on the web - who criticises connectivism as a new theory, primarily because he can distil no new principles from connectivism that are not already present in other existing learning theories.
The jury, it seems, is still out. And I would like to see your views in this blog...
I find it - with my limited knowledge of theories difficult to evaluate whether connectivism is a new theory - or even a theory at all - but I can see why people are exited about it. But the argument on whether it is is an academic one ... the application of it, and the consequences thereof are (to me) at least as important.
ReplyDeleteAs a self-declared geek, I am of course interested in a networked and inter-connected world, but I am not entirely sure that "knowing something" can be replaced by "knowing WHERE TO FIND something" as is often proposed when talking about the new interconnected world and the implications of the internet.
I still believe that having more than just the basic life skills stored inside my head - rather than on a vast distributed network - will allow me to see connections between pieces of information, to derive new knowledge from old one.
The whole debate about the role of computers in our live - and they have been around and present in our lives since more than 40 years now - is still ongoing. Some seem to truly believe that computers can replace aspects of our life. And they can - in some ways. They can store some information, can perform calculations and replace some of the repetitive work. But still, they can not think. They can not draw conclusions and they have no intuition...