Connectivism as a learning theory?

Do we need another learning theory? 

After my last encounter with learning theories of Constructivism and Constructionism, should I be agreeing that there is one theory too many?

At the back of my mind I was thinking about some class discussions around negotiated meanings in knowledge creation/construction. There are no absolutes, a few of my colleagues declared. The meaning of knowledge is shared and agreed upon and can change in a different setting and context. Initially I resisted this notion as I felt that there has to be some defined parameters and absolutes; otherwise won’t chaos rule? Towards the end of last semester, I came away with some grudging acceptance that perhaps there are no absolutes and meanings may change.

At best different learning theories try to explain how humans learn and aid us in our quest and understanding. When the learning theories are put under the microscope, sometimes they may not all stand up to the being the perfect theory! If you start looking for flaws, you’ll find them.

My interest in connectivism was sparked when I listened to a podcast given by George Siemens whilst I was trying to untangle the difference between constructivism and constructionism. I listened to the podcast without any preconceived notions and thought that some aspects of the lecture made sense. 

That’s why when I came across the CCK08 course, I thought it would be a good opportunity to find out more about connectivism.

September 8, 2008 at 12:53 pm Leave a comment

Newer Posts


Subscribe to podcast

Subscribe to this podcast feed

Feeds

Flickr Photos