![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
torquetumAlDahdouh, A., Osorio, A., & Caires, S. (2015). Understanding knowledge network, learning and connectivism. International journal of instructional technology and distance learning, 12(10).
This paper provides an overview of the basic tenets of Connectivism as a theory of learning. According to connectivism “knowledge is a network and learning is a process of exploring this network.” (p. 3). Connectivism argues that the information age includes emerging phenomena in how people learn and a new theory is necessary to explain it.
A network consist of nodes connected by relationships. Nodes can be (literally) neural, conceptual or external. I am interested in conceptual nodes but I am more interested in external nodes, that is “people, books, websites, programs and databases connected by internet, intranet or direct contact” (p. 4). The paper points out how using tech in the classroom is often ineffective because the amount of time it takes to incorporate a certain tech innovation into the classroom results in it already being out of date. We as educators, trying to appropriate tech, cannot keep up. I am interested in how my teaching and learning environment can assist students in connecting with existing sources of knowledge without me having to know it all or be skilled in it all. I am interested in seeing whether viewing knowledge and learning through the lens of connectivism can help me create such an environment.
A relationship is a link between two nodes. There are special characteristics that relationships could have: they can be graded, directional or self-joining, or make patterns. Nodes themselves can be networks. They use an example of a school to show how complex networks and sub-networks can be. There are teachers, students, administrators. There are subnetworks such as a class and the connections within it. There are friend groups which may connect to families as well as the classroom, and so forth.
Connectivism builds, in part, on actor network theory where nodes are actors, things with agency for example humans, animals or certain machines. Connectivism puts more emphasis on technology than ANT and includes technology as both actor and connector. “So, according to Connectivism, technology has actors such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) agents, smart phone devices, electronic books and websites; and connectors such as social network, internet and intranet” (p. 8). Technology makes both the connections and the flow of information more feasible” (p. 9); “The information needs a connection to reach the target and the connection needs the flow of information to stay alive. Therefore, no flow of information exists without connection and no connection remains without flow of information.” (p. 9)
Connectivism is more concerned with known knowledge and less with knowledge creation. Connectivism sees knowledge as abundant and easy to access. What is important is aggregating, discovering and exploring knowledge. Nodes can be unstable. For instance knowledge may go out of date. The currency of a node is very important in connectivism. If knowledge is out of date, people move on and that node is no longer connected to, which in turn weakens all nodes that are connected solely (or mostly) to that dying node.
The knowledge network is dynamic exhibiting patterns that change. Learning is a continuous process of exploring the network and finding patterns. As a conceptual framework connectivism has a “unique vision regarding the interaction between learners and content” (p. 16). Both the content and the learners are nodes in the network. Connectivism sees learning not as internalizing the knowledge but as using and processing content and forming patterns.
It is not generally accepted that connectivism is a learning theory that is distinct from others and not just a version of, say social connectivism. This paper does include several references to other papers both supportive of an critical of connectivism. I found this paper a good introduction to connectivism.
Do not treat this blog entry as a replacement for reading the paper. This blog post represents the understanding and opinions of Torquetum only and could contain errors, misunderstandings or subjective views.
This paper provides an overview of the basic tenets of Connectivism as a theory of learning. According to connectivism “knowledge is a network and learning is a process of exploring this network.” (p. 3). Connectivism argues that the information age includes emerging phenomena in how people learn and a new theory is necessary to explain it.
A network consist of nodes connected by relationships. Nodes can be (literally) neural, conceptual or external. I am interested in conceptual nodes but I am more interested in external nodes, that is “people, books, websites, programs and databases connected by internet, intranet or direct contact” (p. 4). The paper points out how using tech in the classroom is often ineffective because the amount of time it takes to incorporate a certain tech innovation into the classroom results in it already being out of date. We as educators, trying to appropriate tech, cannot keep up. I am interested in how my teaching and learning environment can assist students in connecting with existing sources of knowledge without me having to know it all or be skilled in it all. I am interested in seeing whether viewing knowledge and learning through the lens of connectivism can help me create such an environment.
A relationship is a link between two nodes. There are special characteristics that relationships could have: they can be graded, directional or self-joining, or make patterns. Nodes themselves can be networks. They use an example of a school to show how complex networks and sub-networks can be. There are teachers, students, administrators. There are subnetworks such as a class and the connections within it. There are friend groups which may connect to families as well as the classroom, and so forth.
Connectivism builds, in part, on actor network theory where nodes are actors, things with agency for example humans, animals or certain machines. Connectivism puts more emphasis on technology than ANT and includes technology as both actor and connector. “So, according to Connectivism, technology has actors such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) agents, smart phone devices, electronic books and websites; and connectors such as social network, internet and intranet” (p. 8). Technology makes both the connections and the flow of information more feasible” (p. 9); “The information needs a connection to reach the target and the connection needs the flow of information to stay alive. Therefore, no flow of information exists without connection and no connection remains without flow of information.” (p. 9)
Connectivism is more concerned with known knowledge and less with knowledge creation. Connectivism sees knowledge as abundant and easy to access. What is important is aggregating, discovering and exploring knowledge. Nodes can be unstable. For instance knowledge may go out of date. The currency of a node is very important in connectivism. If knowledge is out of date, people move on and that node is no longer connected to, which in turn weakens all nodes that are connected solely (or mostly) to that dying node.
The knowledge network is dynamic exhibiting patterns that change. Learning is a continuous process of exploring the network and finding patterns. As a conceptual framework connectivism has a “unique vision regarding the interaction between learners and content” (p. 16). Both the content and the learners are nodes in the network. Connectivism sees learning not as internalizing the knowledge but as using and processing content and forming patterns.
It is not generally accepted that connectivism is a learning theory that is distinct from others and not just a version of, say social connectivism. This paper does include several references to other papers both supportive of an critical of connectivism. I found this paper a good introduction to connectivism.
Do not treat this blog entry as a replacement for reading the paper. This blog post represents the understanding and opinions of Torquetum only and could contain errors, misunderstandings or subjective views.
