[elearning] Connectivism: Learning for Today's learner

[Roland Gesthuizen]

Here is an interesting online course for teaching staff. It starts today 
and is free to anybody who has an interest in learning more about 
Connectivism. Just the thing to brush up on your cognitive neuroscience, 
conceptual learning, and social networking. I was interested to spot 
that amongst other Web2.0 tools, it makes good use the Moodle content 
management system.

Enjoy

Regards Roland

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *George Siemens* <gsiemens at elearnspace.org 
<mailto:gsiemens at elearnspace.org>>
Date: 2008/9/6
Subject: Connectivism:
*
Connectivism

*

*
Learning for today's learner

*

September 5, 2008

As mentioned in June, we are offering an open online course on 
Connectivism <http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/>. The course begins 
on Monday and is freely available to anyone with an interest in learning 
more about the topic. You can sign up for free here 
<http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/?page_id=3>. The course outline is 
also available <http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/wiki/Connectivism>. And, for a 
bit more information, I've put together a short introductory 
presentation <http://elearnspace.org/media/GettingStarted/player.html> 
on how the course operates.
For learners wishing formal credit through University of Manitoba, a 
paid enrollment option <http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/?p=67> is 
also available.

As posted on my elearnspace site, I have an article available on New 
spaces and structures of learning: the systemic impact of connective 
knowledge, connectivism, and networked learning 
<http://elearnspace.org/Articles/systemic_impact.htm> (MS Word file 
<http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/systemic_impact.doc>). The concepts 
explored in the article are reflective of a previous discussion on this 
site about "a world without courses". How long, after all, can we flirt 
at the edges of change before we seek a full embrace?

I had a nice chat with Richard Schwier on connectivism. He has posted 
the video on his site: Interview on Connectivism 
<http://omegageek.net/rickscafe/?p=1193>. As I mentioned during the 
discussion, at a recent conference, Stephen Downes and I were chatting 
about research basis for learning theories. The notion of connectivism - 
pick another term like networked learning if that works better for you - 
is better supported through research than existing theories of learning. 
The concepts from AI, connectionism, cognitive neuroscience, conceptual 
learning, and social network analysis - all of which form key 
foundations of connectivism - all contribute to validating learning in 
networks.

...and, I was recently also interview by Robin Good. We chatted about 
learning, connectivism, and social media <http://blip.tv/file/1196315>.

Matthias Melcher (I think that's his name - had to dig around his x28 
blog <http://x28newblog.blog.uni-heidelberg.de/> for a bit) provides an 
interesting commentary on why he feels connectivism should not be seen 
as a learning theory. I'll quote it at length:

    IMO, a definition or description would be more appropriate for
    simpler things that do not suffer when they are isolated and
    formalized. I think, a complex, emerging concept like connectivism
    is better understood by its relationships. So, rather than "What
    is…", I would prefer something like "How is it related", or
    connected, to other ideas, or even, to the world.
    Connectivism would, IMO, suffer from restricting definitions such as
    being a learning theory, which has to obey traditional criteria of
    an empirically provable but very narrow scope of application. Even
    though the theory is addressing extensive changes and emancipation,
    this will not increase the perceived scope of what the theory
    explains but, instead, the prevailing resistance against such
    changes will further diminish and restrict the conceded scope.
    The whole new view, however, that is enabled by connectivism,
    extends to much more than learning and schools. Downes' and Siemens'
    discussions shed new light on fundamental concepts, such as rules
    versus patterns, complicated vs. complex, equivalence vs.
    similarity, and coping with ambiguity and uncertainty. And these
    consideration render many entrenched practices of the entire
    knowledge industry questionable.

Late last week, I threw out a question 
<http://twitter.com/gsiemens/statuses/875982639> to Gary Stager 
<http://www.stager.org/> on Twitter: "when a constructivist constructs 
knowledge, where does it reside physically/biologically?". Gary replied 
with something along the lines of "we don't know and I don't care. I can 
teach well without knowing the details of how the mind works". Fair 
enough. Different educators adopt different approaches in order to 
makesense of the teaching and learning process. I'm trying to define it 
from the perspective of how our mind works. Gary is - in true 
constructionist form (and I don't mean that negatively!) - is focused 
more on the practical results and activities.
Gary then asked a critical question: what is the unique idea in 
connectivism? The response takes a bit longer than the 140 characters 
allowed by Twitter, so I'll tackle it here. Read More 
<http://connectivism.ca/blog/2008/08/what_is_the_unique_idea_in_con.html>

Parmenides <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parmenides> held to a view that 
nothing changes. Everything is permanent and unchangeable. While we have 
only fragments of his writing, his ideas are prominent in Plato, which 
in turn gives Parmenides a weight in philosophy that is often not 
explicitly acknowledged. Heraclitus 
<http://www.iep.utm.edu/h/heraclit.htm>, on the other hand, felt 
everything was in a state of flux and change. He is credited with some 
variation of the common statement: you can't step into the same river 
twice (or, more precisely, you can't step into the same water twice, 
even if the river itself remains largely unchanged). While Parmenides 
thoughts found some resonance with ancient atomists 
<http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atomism-ancient/>, and occur in the 
ongoing quest of physics to find the one base element of all things 
(currently this has been reduced to such a level that it has become 
nonsensical to most human beings - note string theory), most people 
today would likely find Heraclitus' view of change to be more reflective 
of reality. *Read more* 
<http://connectivism.ca/blog/2008/07/a_humble_call_for_a_new_discip.html>

------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
Roland Gesthuizen - ICT Coordinator - Westall Secondary College
http://www.westallsc.vic.edu.au

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can 
change the world; indeed it is the only thing that ever has." --Margaret 
Mead

-- 

Regards Roland

--
Roland Gesthuizen - ICT Manager - Westall Secondary College
http://www.westallsc.vic.edu.au

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/elearning/attachments/20080908/23d28026/attachment-0001.html