If there is a learning theory that applies to the internet, it may well be connectivism. George Siemens explains:
Connectivism is a learning theory for the digital age. Learning has changed over the last several decades. The theories of behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism provide an effect view of learning in many environments. They fall short, however, when learning moves into informal, networked, technology-enabled arena.
This is a big subject but a quick look at some of the principles of connectivism may give us the flavor of what it’s about:
- Learning has an end goal - namely the increased ability to “do something”.
- 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.
- Knowing where to find information is more important than knowing information.
The ability to do something sounds not unlike the Praxis mission. But even more fundamental to connectivism is the centrality of the network in learning. Siemens sees the network (rather than the content/course/syllabus) as the starting point for learning. The mere act of connecting people with a common objective is half the battle. Most of the knowledge we’ll ever need resides there (though not in a linear, textbook format) so learners and practitioners should focus on making sense of the stuff they need.
Another interesting angle. With the exponential growth in the quantity and complexity of information, as well as the random/chaotic nature of the network, pattern recognition becomes more important than information processing for the learner. When knowledge was relatively static processing it was the key. For example, the curriculum for high school French grammar was probably the same for decades in the UK, so teachers focused on ways to cram or facilitate the process of remembering it. Teaching methods will need to change to accommodate the needs of the post-network society.
You can read George Siemens’ blog here.
Ken Carroll
中文 Chinese
Charles Says:
March 5th, 2007 at 12:38 am
I think the teaching methods used to provide us with the skills and knowledge needed by/useful to us needs to become ahead of the game rather than the slow trudging reactionary position it takes currently. Few things are exhibiting an ability to withstand the massive shifts occurring within our society while maintaining their current thinking. Unfortunately I think at the moment that it is moving in the wrong direction seeking more and more to quantify students abilities without a general regard to the future requirements of society.
Innovate or Die is the modus operandi for many companies at the moment (for better or worse). Current education systems are not unique in their struggle to resist this change but they’re even more reluctant than RIAA to face this challenge.
The post-network society is still along way off I think. The semantic web will be one of the biggest things changes in the not to distant future to allow us to become a truly networked society. I also think that increased interoperability within the social networks is coming (openId is a step in the right direction). At the moment the big social networks are like islands some of them have telescopes so you can see what’s happening on another island but very few are building the brides (and super highways) that will be needed for a networked society. Broadband penetration will need to increase dramatically across the board with America surprisingly being a country that is lagging behind in this regard.
Well I hope this post has managed to get rid of the writers block I’ve got on my blog post about the focus on technology as a solution not a tool in education is causing us to overlook the ability to change and improve our current methods… looks like I’m not going to get that finished for another 24 hours. *sigh*
Learning and networks « The ChinesePod Blog with Ken Carroll Says:
March 6th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
[...] are going to dominate how we learn in the future, or so the prononents connectivism believe. They could be [...]
Michael Butler Says:
March 23rd, 2007 at 11:59 am
Ken,
You wrote:
If there is a learning theory that applies to the Internet, it may well be connectivism.
I think in your enthusiasm to (re)consider the place of technology in education that you are in danger of losing (ever so briefly) the true subject of our concern- human beings.
A learning theory should never apply to the Internet- it should apply only and CENTRALLY to people. Besides, logically, as Siemens claims, how can learning change over a short span of several decades? Our brain and our base learning capabilities change at an evolutionary speed unless somehow Connectivism trumps Darwinism? Perhaps the Internet changes the speed and the ease at which we learn but it does not affect the nature of how we learn. Or does it? The advantage of the other theories is that they have been tested in the lab. Can we say the same for this theory?
My biggest question in this whole regard is: has the way we learn ever changed or is it just the metaphors we use to describe learning (I’m feeding off something Stephen Downes talks about).
Also, long before connectivism appeared education was understood by some as a means of learning to do something. This conception however was not central to public education in English speaking countries (we train citizens) and so it was not a mainstream idea. But the idea is not new.
My criticism with your understanding of connectivism is that information and the increased number of nodes of information we are now connected to seems to equate to a model of how we learn. I understood you much better when you “were” a cognitivist.
I’m afraid that I won’t be able to follow your thinking (and I really want to) if you confuse our tools with the way we learn.
By the way, I also understand that you are thinking out loud here.
ChinesePod is a community of practice at The ChinesePod Blog with Ken Carroll Says:
March 23rd, 2007 at 12:28 pm
[...] basis of a latter day CoP. Networks are definitely good for learning. (Some people say the network is the learning.) Consider that the the most effective learning tool we know of is a network - the [...]
admin Says:
March 23rd, 2007 at 3:05 pm
Michael,
I’ve always taken an eclectic approach to this, so I’m still a cognitivist. The Siemens’ view neither excludes nor contradicts any of the earlier ‘isms’, including my old nemesis, behaviorism.
To be honest I’m more interested in what works in real life rather than in pristine theory. If that involves a mixture of 4 or 5 different philosophies, then so be it.
Siemens himself is highly theoretical and he works in an academic context. If his ideas make sense to me I’ll try to use them. Ultimately, the marketplace will decide whether or not these judgments are the right ones. In the meantime, I still like the theoretical discussion (when I can find the time for it.) I am indeed thinking out loud.
As the name Praxis suggests, the idea of learning and doing has been around since Greek times. I agree that that’s not a new idea.
Ken