Connectivism – Theory of Learning? Knowledge? – What Next? September 16, 2008
Posted by delliotthk in CCK08, Education.Tags: Add new tag, CCK08, Education
trackback
Last week we discussed Connectivism as a Theory of Learning comparing it to Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism. In that context I wondered whether Connectivism was an extension of the other theories or more foundational and actually a replacement of them. I couldn’t seem to get any discussion on that. Perhaps the question is unclear. This week Stephen helped us enter the world of Theories of Knowledge. Thanks to Mike for his concept map of these new ideas.
My question is similar. It seems that former theories of knowledge were based on pre-20th century science. If all knowledge is found in the network then empricism, rationalism, logical positivism etc. could then be seen as subsets of Connectivist learning at a time when they were using the best wisdom available. Qualitative and quantitative knowledge could be seen as reflections of underlying connectivist knowledge.
Continuing this line of thought, it seems to be not so big a step to view Connectivist theory from an ontological perspective. The further we go with brain research and the advances in physical science we get easily overwhelmed with the wondrous mystery of where any idea is located both personally and socially, it seems we could start using terms like reality, or a description of life, or the foundations and ground of all being to refer to it all.
Is this all unhelpful speculation? For now I will simply work on Connectivism as, at once, a Theory of Learning and a Theory of Knowledge while looking for a deeper understanding.
I’m having a tremendous amount of trouble getting my head around this week’s readings actually, and the aspects of brain research you mentioned are the primary stumbling points. I’ve read through a couple of the readings 2 times and still can’t comprehend what I’m looking at :S
I keep looking for some entry point – a new concept I can connect with an existing level of understanding – but I’m coming up empty so far. Are you having any more luck?
Fortunately for me, I’m stubborn and don’t like admitting defeat so I’ll keep up the readings and start reading people’s blogs to see if anyone is having better luck with this
Cheers,
Mike
Thank you for writing. I wrote a reply to Steven’s question about Sense Making Framework. Your thoughts have been most helpful.
Your concept maps indicate to me that you understand the content, at least at one level, better than most. Very impressive and helpful.
My post shows I’m struggling with a different level of understanding, the perspective of the conversation.
Before the course I thought of Connectivism as a very pragmatic concept that validated and explained the huge social wave of networking that technology had unleashed on society and education. Picture hundreds of students in a lecture hall with laptops working on Facebook and doing whatever else while the professor droned on. “What is up with that?” Connectivism helps. Having Connectivism understood as a learning theory and then theory of knowledge pushes way beyond the pragmatic and I lose the perspective relative to other learning theories and theories of knowledge.
Don’t know if this helps but seems to describe where I am at the moment.