Where Old Meets Now

    If Connectivism is a learning
theory, then by no means is it a
traditional one,
such as Behaviorism, Cognitivism, or even Constructivism. 
It has been proposed
that Connectivism is “a
learning theory for the digital age.”  An age that is seeing the
half-life of knowledge continually decrease to the point that a single
expert is unable to be fully cognizant of all
the innovations occurring within their niche of study.  In order to
deal with this sudden deluge of data in both
our online and offline
environments, one will need to start
relying on solutions outside of the
traditional
avenues of exploration.  New techniques and
strategies will have to be utilized to find answers to our present and
future learning
needs.  I believe that Connectivism is one
of
these solutions.

    Throughout history many of our major cultural facets (religion,
movies,
music)
have splintered to meet our ever changing societies diverging needs and
wants.  Even though these offshoots have close ties with their
originators they skillfully connect new trains of thought with creative
flair to produce amazing
results.  Why then should learning and subsequently education be
any different from our
other cultural artifacts?  Therefore the question on the originality
of Connectivism has already been answered, George Siemens himself
feels
that “learning
theories are somewhat interdependent, much like a quilt.”  If
Connectivism is not an entirely new theory of learning, then is it
asking us
to look at the acquisition
and formation of knowledge in new ways?  Yes.  Connectivism states that
knowledge is “formed
from our actions and experiences” “distributed
across our networks” by “linking
people, places and information” while filtering these through our
own context to form patterns.  This means that
“knowledge is now stored
in our friends“, both online and offline, including nonliving
devices; as seen in our unique
shopping experiences.   This new aspect of knowledge will not
eliminate its current definition,
but increase its meaning to include the ever expanding nature of our
experiences in a growing online environment.

    Even with this new opportunity to fully engage in learning,
Connectivism, like
its predecessors, has weaknesses; not in concept but in application. 
To
some, a learning network can be overly distracting. 
These distractions can occur externally with “participants
who are not in attendance to learn, but rather to influence“, or
internally when “learners
lose focus because of the chatter“.  These issues are unfortunate
and seem
to take away from the learning experience, until one realizes that this
is learning according to Connectivism.  When one learns to navigate “the
confusion and chaos” and concentrate on the task
at hand, the strength of Connectivism
becomes apparent, especially when “our
little boxes transform into highly permeable, linked, multiple networks”
capable of “dealing
with the fluidity of knowledge.”  This
has become increasingly important in the field of education where the
task of the teacher has shifted from knowledge expert to knowledge
facilitator.  Personally, Connectivism is used on a regular basis in my
offline (within my
school) and online (Twitter,
Facebook) Personal
Learning Networks, but how can I use this learning theory in my
classroom?  How do we guide students “to
construct and traverse networks” and “form
connections” for learning.  The current system is horribly
outdated, students
are being prepared for their future using antiquated methods, and a
complete overhaul of the system would be disastrous.  For educational
success new techniques will have to be added piece by piece to slowly
change the methods of instruction
and assessment. 
At K-12, more guidance would be required, introductory
online collaborative projects between classmates, classrooms, and
schools could be initiated to provide students the building blocks of
proper network development.  As the students continue with their
education, and receive more challenging subject material, more network
based learning could be introduced to prepare them for the future that
lies ahead.

    Even though the box has been opened, there still
remains many unanswered questions regarding the overall
theory of Connectivism and its potential applications within society. 
The foundation
of Connectivism relies on the social network between human beings,
people that are “known
to have mob/group mentality“, personal bias’ (which will filter and
modify the data in unexpected ways), as well as constantly adjusting
emotions.  With this understanding of human nature, one must ask, “How
much influence do these basic human traits have on a learning
network?”, as well as “How
can we judge our knowledge gained through these networks as valid?“,
as recently as October
3rd these very concerns were exploited and discussed. 
This then leads to other fundamental questions regarding networks,
such as “How does one know
their networks are effective?“, “Is there a critical mass
needed
to make a network valid and/or effective?”, and “How does one ensure
the diversity of their network, hoping to avoid the silo affect?.” 
Answers to
these questions are not apparent at this time, however as the course
proceeds and networks continually expand, knowledge may be uprooted
within the various nodes
to deal with these concerns.

Posted by email from ubiquitous’s posterous

Filed under: Uncategorized and