Below I summarise the main points of the
paper 'Connectivism - A Learning Theory for the Digital Age' (Siemens, 2004).
My broad conclusion is that I found the
idea that Connectivism is a new theory of learning was a bit forced – the
elements of connectivism that Siemens talks about seemed more to be an
explanation of how there may be some new forms of knowledge creation and some
new tools.
That said, I think Siemens is right to
sense that there is something quite different going on with Web 2.0 and how we
interface with it. The fact that we have access to such a variety of inputs, so
fast, and that by scanning we can easily approach issues from a variety of
directions, and can agglomerate categorisations that become more meaningful the
more people contribute – all suggest to me that people may be learning things
in new ways.
Introduction
Behaviourism, cognitivism and
constructivism are the classic learning theories utilized in the construction
of learning environments.
But now that learning is so impacted by
technology, something new is needed.
One of the issues prompting this is the
rapidly diminishing life of knowledge. Gonzalez (2004) writes: “…The half-life
of knowledge is the time span from when knowledge is gained to when it becomes
obsolete…..To combat the shrinking half-life of knowledge, organizations have
been forced to develop new methods of deploying instruction.”
Trends in learning:
“Formal education no longer comprises the
majority of our learning. Learning now occurs in a variety of ways – through
communities of practice, personal networks, and through completion of
work-related tasks.”(p.1)
“Technology is altering (rewiring) our
brains. The tools we use define and shape our thinking.” (p.1)
“Increased attention to knowledge
management [in organsiations] highlights the need for a theory that attempts to
explain the link between individual and organizational learning.”
“Many of the processes previously handled
by learning theories (especially in cognitive information processing) can now
be off-loaded to, or supported by, technology.”
“Know-how and know-what is being
supplemented with know-where (the understanding of where to find knowledge
needed).”
Background
Driscoll (2000) defines learning as “a
persisting change in human performance or performance potential… [which] must
come about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with the
world” (p.11). [cited by Siemens on p.2).
-
learning as a lasting, changed
state (emotional, meantal, physiological (i.e. skills) brought about as a
result of experiences and interactions with content or other people.
The classic learning theories all “hold the
notion that knowledge is an objective (or a state) that is attainable (if not
already innate) through either reasoning or experiences.”
Behaviourism – observable behaviour is more
important than understanding internal activities. Focus on specific stimuli and
responses. Learning is about behaviour change.
Cognitivism – computer information
processing model. “In cognitive theories, knowledge is viewed as symbolic
mental constructs in the learner’s mind, and the learning process is the means
by which these symbolic representations are committed to memory.” (Cindy Buell,
cited by Siemens on p.2).
Constructivism – learners create knowledge
as they attempt to understand their experiences. Learners are actively
attempting to create meaning.
Limitations of Behaviourism, Cognitivism
and Constructivism
“The central tenet of most learning
theories is that learning occurs inside a person.” “These theories do not
address learning that occurs outside of people (i.e. learning that is stored
and manipulated by technology). They also fail to describe how learning happens
within organizations.”
[My view on this is that currently learning
often doesn’t happen within organizations – it is always limited to the
combined learning of individuals].
“In a networked world, the very manner of
information that we acquire is worth exploring. The need to evaluate the
worthiness of learning something is a meta-skill that is applied before
learning itself begins.” (p.2.)
“When knowledge is subject to paucity, the
process of assessing worthiness is assumed to be intrinsic to learning. When
knowledge is abundant, the rapid evaluation of knowledge is important. “
“Additional concerns arise from the rapid
increase in information. In today’s environment, action is often needed without
personal learning – that is, we need to act by drawing information outside of
our primary knowledge. The ability to synthesize and recognize connections and
patterns is a valuable skill.”
[Siemens asks how learning theories are
impacted when knowledge is no longer acquired in a linear manner – but this is
nothing new, no new theory is required for non-linear learning].
He also asks what adjustments need to be
made to learning theories when technology performs many cognitive operations
now – e.g. information storage and retrieval. Again, I’m not sure this part is
new – books were stores of information storage and retrieval?
What is the impact of networks and
complexity theories on learning – [I think this is worth exploring].
What is the impact of chaos as a complex
pattern recognition process on learning?
An Alternative Theory
“We derive our learning competence from
forming connections.”
Karen Stephenson: “I store my knowledge in
my friends” (cited p.3]
Chaos theory – recognizes the connection of
everything to everything. “Chaos is the breakdown of predictability, evidenced
in complicated arrangements that initially defy order.” (p.3) Chaos says that
the meaning exists – “the learner’s challenge is to recognize the patterns
which appear to be hidden.”
[Siemens seems to be trying to say that
this is different from constructivism – where learners make meaning from doing
activities. Instead, meaning is not being made, it is being comprehended by way
of forming connections between specialized communities. I’m not sure I buy
this. Patterns may not exist until events have happened – so ‘meaning’ in this
respect can only ever be retrospective and may only describe one-off events –
so it does not qualify as ‘learning’ as it will not affect how people act or
their potential to act].
[Isn’t he just describing constructivism –
but saying that technology has made the world more connected in more complex
ways, so we need to be cognizant of the connections when we construct?]
Networks, Small Worlds, Weak Ties
Albert-Laszlo Barabasi states that “nodes
always compete for connections because links represent survival in an
interconnected world.” (2002, p.106). Nodes that successfully acquire greater
profile will be more successful at acquiring additional connections.
Connections between disparate fields can
ideas can create new innovations.
Connectivism
= the integration of principles explored by
chaos, network and complexity and self-organisation theories.
“Learning is a process that occurs within
nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the
control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can
reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused
on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us
to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing.”
“Connectivism is driven by the
understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New
information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions
between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to
recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made
yesterday is also critical.” (p.4).
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 (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.
[I’m struggling here – knowledge can reside
in networks etc and technology can certainly produce knowledge in new ways. But
is that ‘learning’? Maybe the definition of learning as ‘actionable knowledge’
is too broad. The point of a learning theory is to see what we may change in
order to improve learning in the individual. I don’t yet get how Connectivism
says anything new in this respect, except that the individual may need some new
skills to use some new tools].
“Knowledge that resides in a database needs
to be connected with the right people in the right context in order to be
classified as learning.”
[I guess that is true in a way – I think we
do need theories to explain how organizations ‘learn’ – but this is a theory of
organizational process, not a theory of ‘learning’ at the individual level.]
John Seely Brown presents an interesting notion
that the internet leverages the small efforts of many with the large efforts of
few. E.g. Maricopa County Community College system links senior citizens with
elementary school students in a mentor program. The small efforts of the many –
the seniors – complement the large efforts of the few – the teachers. (2002).
[Siemens says this amplification of
learning through the extension of a personal learning network is the epitome of
connectivism – but I don’t get it]
Implications
Nothing to note.
Conclusion
“Connectivism provides insight into
learning skills and tasks needed for learners to flourish in a digital era.”
(p.5)
Brown, J.S., (2002). Growing Up Digital:
How the Web Changes Work, Education, and the Ways People Learn. United States
Distance Learning Association.
Buell, C. (undated). Cognitivism. Retrieved
December 10, 2004 from http://web.cocc.edu/cbuell/theories/cognitivism.htm.
Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of Learning
for Instruction. Needham Heights, MA, Allyn & Bacon.
Gonzalez, C., (2004). The Role of Blended
Learning in the World of Technology. Retrieved 10 December 2004 from
http://www.unt.edu/benchmarks/archives/2004/september04/eis.htm.
