Against+Connectivism


 * Principles of Connectivism:**
 * Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions.
 * Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources.
 * Learning may reside in non-human appliances.
 * Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known
 * Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning.
 * Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill.
 * Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities.
 * Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what to learn and the meaning of incoming information is seen through the lens of a shifting reality. While there is a right answer now, it may be wrong tomorrow due to alterations in the information climate affecting the decision.


 * Examples of Established Learning Theories:**
 * **Behavorism** (Pavlov, Skinner) - learning is the acquisition of new behavior through conditioning ([|Wikipedia])
 * **Cognitivism** (Piaget) - learning is an active, creative process where new information is made meaningful allowing us to retrieve it and use it
 * **Constructivisim** (Piaget, Vygotsky) - learning is an active, contextualized process of constructing knowledge rather than acquiring it ([|Learning-Theories])
 * **Humanism** (Maslow, Rogers) - learning is viewed as a personal act to fulfil one’s potential ([|Learning-Theories])
 * **Multimedia Learning** (Mayers) - in simple terms, "People learn more deeply from words and pictures than from words alone" (Mayer, //Multimedia Learning//, 2002)
 * **Sudbury Model** - students individually decide what to do with their time, and learn as a by-product of ordinary experience ([|Wikipedia])
 * **Problem-Based Learning** - hands-on, active learning centered on the investigation and resolution of real-world problems ([|Learning-Theories])

There is little or no research that establishes or substantiates connectivism as a learning theory. In his response to George Siemens' "[|Connectivism A Learning Theory for the Digital Age]", Plon Verhagen states that this is not a learning theory but, instead, an academic, philosophical interpretation of the effect of the current digital age on education. Verhagen believes that Siemens' questions about theory are better placed at the curricular level, and we agree. Connectivism is more about what is learned and why. Knowledge is not only the connections created during the learning process, but also what the student brings to the learning process in terms of background knowledge and prior educational experience. Technology is merely the conduit through which these connections mesh and meld to form a new knowledge.
 * Is Connectivism a Learning Theory? No!**

Additionally, Siemens suggests that the biological learning structures in humans (such as brain synapses) that create knowledge are identical to the connections forged between humans connecting to other humans, and between humans and information sources, including nonhuman "appliances" such as computers or calculators. He believes that learning is not always entirely under human control, yet it is the humans who are the learners when we discuss education. Stephen Downes, another proponent of the idea of connectivism as learning theory, defines knowledge as "the set of connections, formed by actions, and experience." He also adds that, "in connectivism, there is no real concept of transferring knowledge, making knowledge, or building knowledge." Making and building knowledge are at the core of education; technology provides another way to find information and create learning.

Bill Kerr is another opponent of this idea of connectivism as learning theory (which, by the way, seems to be primarily centered in Canada, although Kerr is from Australia, and to be primarily an online discussion). He thinks that the current learning theories sufficiently explain how humans acquire new knowledge. In his [|Challenge to Connectivism] he states that a substantive learning theory should:

//"Contribute to a theory/practice spiral of curriculum / learning reform. Provide a significant new perspective about how we see learning happening. Represent historical alternatives accurately."//

He argues that connectivism's language, while possibly correct, is too general to assist in "new practice at the level of how learning actually happens." And, although he acknowledges that connectivism does indeed "contribute to a general world outlook," it does not add anything new to our understanding of human learning. He also disagrees with Siemens' descriptions of existing learning theories, and feels those are quite sufficient for describing how people learn. Connectivism doesn't really provide us with either. If anything, connectivism is a combination of different learning theories. It does not reform behaviorism, cognitivism, humanism, and so forth. Neither does it provide us with a form of learning that already exists. Rather than it being an entirely new theory, maybe it is just a summary of being influenced, or connected, by the learning theories that already exist. For example, just because I watch the Philadelphia Eagles, I wear their jerseys, I have their autographs, I go to their games, and I paint my hair green doesn't make me a player. I'm connected with the Eagles in every way possible, but no matter how hard I try, I'm not a player! Just because connectivism includes most (if not all) the learning theories that already exist, it doesn't make it a theory! Like me, it's just a "wanna be!"

In [|Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past?] Rita Kopp and Adrian Hill suggest that connectivism will increase the gap between those who have access to technology and those who had to use "books and pen and paper as resources for learning." They also suggest that schools have not trained educators in how to use this technology or have a model in place to deliver the curricula. Finally, they point out that our education system is "grounded in traditions of the past, steeped in values that have developed over centuries" and that to integrate would require a change paradigm shift in educational thinking.


 * References**

Downes, S. (2005, December 22). "An Introduction to Connective Knowledge." Retrieved October 22, 2009 from []

Downes, S. (2007, February 3). "What Connectivism Is." Message posted to []

Kerr, B. (2006, December 26.) "a challenge to connectivism." Message posted to [|http://billkerr2.blogspot.com]

Kop, R. and Hill, A. (October 2008). "Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past?" //The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, vol. 9.// Retrieved from []

Siemens, G. (2004, December 12). "Connectivism: a Learning Theory for the Digital Age". Retrieved October 21, 2009, from [|**http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm**]

Siemens, G. (2005, September 15). "What's wrong with established theories of learning?" Message posted to []

Siemens, G. (2006, November 12). "Connectivism: Learning Theory or Pastime for the Self-Amused?" Retrieved October 22, 2009, from [|**http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism_self-amused.htm**]

Smith, B. (2009, April 15). "A Better Class of Learning: the Sudbury Model." Message posted to []

Tempelman-Kluit, N. (July 2006). "Multimedia Learning Theories and Online Instruction." //College and Research Libraries.// Retrieved from []

Verhagen, Plon W. (2006, November 11). "Connectivism: a new learning theory?" Retrieved October 22, 2009 from []

Wikipedia. (2009). //Connectivism (learning theory).// Retrieved October 22, 2009, from [])