Group items tagged

This is a great resource with videos about communities in practice. I really enjoyed the table about communities of practice vs teams.

This resource had both videos and a visual table to explain communities of practice. I liked how they described it using the terms: "Communities of Interest and Communities of Action". I think that is important because people can access their own specific interest catered directly to them.

I think this is a great resource to have for Communities of Practice. It provides a clear definition of Communities of Practice and also provides videos and visuals to provide further clarification.

CoP's a great place to share ideas, resources, post questions/concerns with other professionals within your contetn area. Great video and explanation of CoP!

This is a great place to get started because there are videos as well as text. The diagram toward the bottom of the page by Heather Smith and James McKeen from the School of Business at Queen's University is particularly useful. Often knowing what something is is easier when you know what it is not! Good stuff, thanks.

This article discusses that the idea of communities of practice (CoP) is that learning occurs in social contexts that emerge and evolve when people who have common goals interact as they strive towards those goals. It mentions the negotiation of meaning which involves two components: reification and participation. The article also compares communities of practice with teams and community of practice as knowledge management.

This article describes in detail the development of CoP and the work of Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger. There is a short video embedded that gives an example of CoP in the workplace at Caterpillar University. At the bottom of the article it shows a table that contrasts teams and CoPs. This gives a good visual on what the differences are in each category.

I especially like the way that this resource outlines the difference between teams and CoPs. It makes complete sense and is very intuitive but it is extremely useful to have it outlined in the chart format.

Lave & Wegner are the originators of the idea of 'Situated Learning' which is described as being fully engaged and "learning to talk instead of learning from talk." Within CoPs, participants engage in frameworks with structure. Alcoholics Anonymous was a good example from this article.

Sometimes when I spend time researching and learning about new concepts, I get lost in the details of definitions and citations. What I liked about this article was the table comparing CoPs to Teams. It breaks it down and compares the two in a way that makes sense.

As many have already commented on, this article gives a nice foundation for what CoPs are and their framework and purpose in society. I especially like the analogy chart made between CoPs and teams, showing what makes up each, how they may be similar, but how they are different.

This article summarizes the work of Lave and Wenger on the theory of communities of practice. It discusses how participation in communities of practice leads to learning and contributing to community goals. The article also includes a helpful chart that outlines the differences between communities of practice and other types of teams or focus groups.

This article explains the idea of communities of practice (CoP) and has some great videos to further explain giving examples. There is also a nice chart that shows the difference between a team and a CoP, which can be a common misconception that they are not the same thing.

This article gives insight to Wenger's components of learning, and then discusses the differences between teams and CoPs. I found this very helpful, as it can be easy to confuse the two at first. Through this chart, one can better understand the objective, membership, organization, termination, value proposition, and management of CoPs and compare this information to that of teams.

The communities of practice concept is explained in detail with many references to the work of Lave and Wenger. The article speaks to communities of practice as social learning in the workforce for organizational development, change management, and knowledge management.

This article offers an introduction to communities of practice. It also examines impacts on learning, makes distinctions between teams and offers direction for benefits for knowledge management.

Communities of practice, credited to Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger, is a concept that claims that learning occurs through social interactions when people have a common goal and they interact while moving towards obtaining the goal. These communities are best ran with reification and participation. The alignment of these two concepts are what directs the communities of practice to their common goal. A community of practice is different than a team. A team has a goal, but their goal is to finish a specific task or project while a community of practice's goal is to share knowledge and learning on a particular subject. Teams also have a leader and disperse once the goal is completed while communities of practice are self organized and only disband when there is no interest left in learning that topic.Communities of practice facilitate the exchange process of knowledge.

A CoP evolves when people (educators) have common goals and collaborate to meet those goals. The chart comparing CoPs and teams was really helpful. The objectives, membership, and values are all distinctive differences when comparing CoPs and teams. Thanks for a great link!

This short article outlines what communities of practices are and provides a useful table showing the differences between them and teams. This chart is from Heather Smith and James McKeen from the School of Business at Queen's University (2003). They discuss the objective, membership, organization, termination, value proposition and management through the lenses of communities of practice and teams.

This article is a good, brief description of a CoP. I found analyzing the chart helpful for a a better understanding of a CoP. I previously considered a CoP to be a formal learning group. Now, based on the article you've provided, I can see how a CoP can be informal and include marginal group members.

Re"construction of his/her identity through these communities" Finding your voice and place in a CoP is important, as you need to be an active member to achieve the greatest return.

Fabio. Neat little video. Here is the part I find really interesting. In the comment area below the video, Alec Couros writes "Those that are connected...can pragmatically extend their neural networks beyond the confines of their own cognitive space." In essence they share brain-power with their network. It becomes so much more than "help me solve this" (which is how I use my small PLN). Taken in the context of this Stephen Johnson video shared here in Diigo as well ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NugRZGDbPFU ), it seems that the many pieces of a great unseen puzzle can come together through such connections. Would the PLN all be striving for the same end goal or simply working on similar goals and have the group epiphany? Funny how a short "cute" video and a comment from 4 years ago can get a guy thinking about such interesting, if not esoteric, ideas.

This is a really cool video. Fabio, you are correct, watching this video helps make this topic much more clear. The comment shared here by Jon is quite profound. It make the saying that "two heads are better than one" seem very true, except now you can have thousands of heads working together. Very neat.

Article does a great job of explaining where connectivism came from and how it will continue to advance forward just as society if doing currently. We will continue to learn and mold our understandings based off of the connections we are making through a collaborative network.

This article provides a balanced view of the arguments concerning the role of connectivism in the field of education. The authors have done a nice job of differentiating the types of theories and their roles in practice. Perhaps the strongest features of the entire article is the discussion on connectivism as it applies to the use of technology. I appreciated their description of the theory as a connecting piece between some of the more established learning theories and the new technological landscape that characterizes our learning environment. Excellent article - thanks for sharing!

This article by Duke, Harper and Johnston is a detailed analysis of connectivism as a learning theory. Not only is technology discussed as how it's applied to this theory, but there is also discussion of learning theories and instructional theories in general. It is also a valuable read because it explains how this theory can or should not be applied to all students or content.

This source gives a good description as connectivity and connectivity as a learning theory, and it also discusses the argument that connectivity is not a learning theory. It ends by talking about connectivity and its integration with technology and online learning.

This article from Kaplan University explains the importance of connectivism in a digital age. They reference George Siemens and Stephen Downes and their research behind connectivism as a learning theory. They examine connectivism as a learning theory, and explain how the learner is at the center and designs their own path, essentially making their own learning.

This article discusses Connectivism and the debate over whether it should be considered as a learning or instructional theory or as a pedagogical view. The role of Connectivism in the use of technology in education is also discussed.

I really liked this article mainly because they clearly explained the difference between learning theories vs. instructional theories. I think that was useful in their conclusion that connectivism really is more of a tool to be used in the learning process rather than a complete learning theory.

This article discusses the validity of Connectivism as a learning theory. It gives the very straight-forward definition as "social learning that is networked." The discussion of the importance of the Connectivism theory in today's ever increasing technical classroom is quite engaging. It has also forced educators to look at what is being done in digital education and rethink, debate, and philosophize over how each part fits.

In this article, Duke, Harper, and Johnston discuss whether connectivism is a learning theory or an instructional theory. They begin by discussing the differences between learning theories and instructional theories. A learning theory should explain how learning occurs, while an instructional theory should explain how best to achieve the learning goals. The authors summarize connectivism as "social learning that is networked" (2013, p. 6). What a person knows is not as important as the connections the person makes that will allow further know,edge and growth. Everyone feeds into the systems of knowledge and receives greater knowledge as a result. This knowledge can be held by people, societies, or machines. Basically, everyone learns through personal learning networks. These learning networks allow people to learn through collaboration rather than by having to experience everything for themselves. Being able to tap into a large amount of knowledge allows people to understand patterns they might now otherwise see. While there are several arguments against connectivism as a learning theory, the authors argue that connectivism can be useful as an "instructional guide or theory" (2013, p. 9) to develop behaviorism, cognitivism, or constructivism for "application to a globalized and networked world." The authors conclude that connectivism is useful in the learning process or curriculum planning, but that it is not a "standalone learning theory" (2013, p. 10).

This talks about how connectivism takes elements from behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. It discusses connectivism as a learning theory and how the use of technology ties into it.

This article puts a focus on the debate if connectivism is "a learning theory or instructional theory or merely a pedagogical view." Instructional theory has major elements that are discussed in this article and connectivism is analyzed to see if it in fact, is a learning theory. The author recognizes that the debate will last a long time but the fact that connectivism is valuable in the educational setting will prevail. Technology is a major factor of its success. This article convinced me of the importance of allowing my students more access to technology for educational success.

The author of this article defines learning theories vs instructional theories, connectivism, connectivism as a learning theory, and connectivism and the use of technology. Connectivism was created as a learning theory for the digital age. Siemens and Downes came up with this theory because social learning can happen through networks. In today's world technology and advancements are changing rapidly, which in turn is providing new information quickly. Educators have had to embrace this new option of networks for knowledge use in the classroom. Connectivism can be used as a tool in the learning process for instruction or curriculum.

We are at a crucial point in history. By being educators, we must constantly be discussing and managing our definition of an educator's job. We must constantly be working through our philosophy base as new tools and ideas come to life.

This paper outlines connectivism and analyzes whether it should be considered a learning theory, instructional theory, or pedagogical view. I found this article interesting as it has a good discussion the differences between learning theories and instructional theories. The paper is critical of Connectivism as a learning theory, which I think is important as you consider how to use its principles in the classroom.

This article discusses a theory developed for the digital age by Siemens and Downes called connectivism. The theory has issued a debate over whether it is a learning theory, instructional theory, or a pedagogical view. In this article, the authors discuss learning in the digital age and how the theory of connectivism fits within the world today. There is a focus on connectivism being social learning that is networked.

This article discusses whether Connectivism is a learning theory or an instructional theory or a pedagogical view. A learning theory is not whether something is true or not but if it is useful for explaining behavior. An instructional theory must list procedures to enable learning by focusing on the overall structure of the learning material and how to achieve the most successful learning experience. Connectivism is social learning that is networked. It could be a learning theory as it states how a student learns through a network. Connectivism can be categorized as a tool to be used in the learning process and not a standalone learning theory.

I like the explanation of the difference between a full-blown theory and a developmental theory and whether connectivism is a theory or not at this point. I also appreciated the connection to earlier learning theories that this article termed pre-connectivist. With all of the different theories most educators have studied and incorporate into their teaching practices, it is helpful to see how some of them relate to one another.

Connectivism may not be an actual learning theory, according to the authors of this article. It may, they conceed, be a developmental theory that might one day become an actual theory. However, its full list of contexts has not yet been identified so its title as a learning theory could be premature.

This article argues that connectivism is not a theory because it does not introduce any new ideas. It is a great resource for reviewing other learning theories. In the article is states that Verhangen sees connectivism as a level of pedology and curriculum rather than theory. I like this quote from Downs 2007 "Knowledge is the set of connections formed by action and experience."

The author discusses about connectivism as a theory and how it affects learning in a digital era. Connectivism is a new theory that may not have a ton of research compared to other learning theories, but as the technology world continues to evolve, the theory of connectivism evolves too.

Kop and Hill give an overview of connectivism and discuss it as a learning theory. They also discuss the implications in education the increasing influence of the internet has. Kop and Hill look at the connection between connectivism and formal education. They come to the conclusion that, while they foresee radical shifts in education, they do not view connectivism as warranting its own place in learning theory structure.

In this journal article, Connectivism is referred to as helping develop new pedagogies and not a learning theory on it's own. The role of a tutor is diminishing as learners move from a learning environment controlled by an institution, to an environment where they direct their own learning.

I like this article for the overview of connectivism. The overview gives a good idea about what connectivism is. The article goes on to analyze older learning theories and how they need to be addressed in regards to the digital age. It explains how connectivism can build on older theories to better address current digital learning.

Connectivism: is a framework for understanding learning. Siemens (2004) states, "A community is the clustering of similar areas of interest that allows for interaction, sharing, dialoguing, and thinking together." Knowledge is always distributed and shared across learning networks. Information is gathered from everyone and then relating information back to everybody as well as receiving feedback from others.

This source really compares different theories about connectivism. It is discussed whether or not it is a learning theory or not, and what different people think in terms of connectivity. It also discusses some basics about connectivity, and how it means that information is just stored in different places and learners can move between networks to access different information.

This article discusses what learning theories meet the needs of today's learners and how connectivism is built on older theories to connect newer theories. (I didn't check the resources page until after I posted this - I'm hoping I can still use it because I spent a good 20-30 minutes on it!)

This article is a good critical evaluation of connectivisms usefulness in the modern classroom. Ultimately, the authors state that while new theories are emerging in response to technology, connectivism still plays an important role. This is due to the connective nature of technology and the internet.

This article sets out to distinguish Connectivism as either learning theory or developmental (learning) theory. The similarities and differences between the two are briefly discussed before relating how connectivism fits within the frameworks. One interesting aspect of this article is the importance placed on higher-order thinking skills and applications, which seems to be a growing demand in our current education and business markets.

It gives great insights on how connectivism is a learning theory. Also, I find the explanation for how connectivism fulfills the three main tasks for developmental theories.

Thanks for sharing this Alanna! This was a thorough article explaining the past and future of Connectivism. I liked how it puts it all into perspective and we can envision what is in store in the future regarding Connectivism.

Connectivism is a learning theory for the digital age. What does that mean for existing learning theories. This articles questions if previous learning theories still meet the needs of today's learners, and the needs of learners of the future. This articles analyzes connectivism to determine if it has anything new to offer as a learning theory.

I truly appreciated this quote..."New learning environments are informing present and future trends from which both educators and students stand to benefit. Moreover, the way in which global networks and communities of interest are currently being formed through emerging technologies is encouraging young people, in particular, to develop new, creative, and different forms of communication and knowledge creation outside formal education." I also appreciated how this article examined, and almost made the reader feel, the discourse that often arises when new theories emerge. As an educator, I have learned that balance is key! It truly isnt one method or theory over another! Rather an intersection of theories is where powerful learning can take place. Connectivism is certainly a 21st century theory which I believe is built to capitalize how how connected today's learner are through the Internet and social media! Connectivism, to me, feels that a theoretical vehicle to deliver many different theories and strategies.

Thanks for sharing, David. I like that Mackley and Vincent show the various branches of their PLNs because it gives me a frame of reference and helps me see where I need to focus my own efforts. I find the concept of the PLE to be fuzzy, and feel that I need to learn more about it and its relationship to the PLN.

I liked this source because of the clear descriptions that it provides. I also loved the visuals at the end with the different networks that they are tied to.

This article does a nice job of explaining PLNs and the theory surrounding them. The article includes definitions of personal learning environments, personal learning networks, and connectivism. I also like that it includes diagrams to compare their PLNs, as well as an introductory video.

I picked this one, because it has a video that I found helpful. I learn better with sound and pictures. It stresses that PLNs are not things, but rather ideas. The other reason that I include this in my list is that the article actually provides diagrams of what different people's PLNs look like. Given that we're learning about this sort of thing in this unit, I thought I'd also mention this. Finally, I liked that this article acknowledges that according to the Theory of Connectivism, you don't even have to know the person who you're learning from.

This was one of the most helpful articles to read because it not only showed connectivism as theory but also its limitations. It explores connectivism as theory and as a phenomenon because detractors feel like it does not fit the qualifications for a theory. However Mr. Bell does show how if not a theory connectivism certainly does have merit. He also compares other theories to connectivism to show that merit in today's digital learning.

This article looks at Connectivism and explores if is a learning theory. The article also addresses how technology has created the need for researchers to move beyond more traditional learning theories and develop theories that relate to the use of technology in learning.

This is a great introduction to constructivism. Please take the time to watch the video in the introduction. The article explains the link between today's knowledge and yesterdays information while stressing the fact that knowledge and information is ever changing. Constructivism allows the investigator to to take control of learning and bypass the slow or reluctant process of updating information as it changes. I really liked this article, it sparked some ideas for my personal finance class I am rewriting curriculum for. (my book for this class is a 1998 edition with no funds for updated material)

This article provides a very detailed introduction and definition of Connectivism as well as its components: Chaos Theory, Importance of Networks, Complexity and Self-Organization.

This wiki created by the Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology at the University of Georgia describes the theory of connectivism in great detail and relates it to recent technological advances. Connectivism is defined and the related components of chaos theory, importance of networks and interplay of complexity and self-organization are described. The wiki includes a great cartoon slide show called "Connectivism through '67" that helps build understanding of this concept. It also includes a chart comparing various other learning theories to connectivism.

"Clarissa Davis, Earl Edmunds, Vivian Kelly-Bateman Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology, University of Georgia" The article set the stage for the need for new learning theory now that 21st century technologies are in full force. The authors briefly discuss the "half-life of knowledge," again, setting up the need for new theory. After defining connectivism, the article provides a handy comparison between it and behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism.

"Clarissa Davis, Earl Edmunds, Vivian Kelly-Bateman Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology, University of Georgia" The article set the stage for the need for new learning theory now that 21st century technologies are in full force. The authors briefly discuss the "half-life of knowledge," again, setting up the need for new theory. After defining connectivism, the article provides a handy comparison between it and behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism.

This article provides a general overview of the theory of connectivism. It cites the work of George Siemens in describing the three components of connectivism: chaos theory, importance of networks, and the interplay of complexity and self-organization. As with other resources, there is criticism of the ability of connectivism to stand alone as a learning theory. However, a useful resource provided by this article is a table that compares the differences of behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism.

This blog is by the University of Georgia, College of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology on Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology. This blog post gives a great foundation of the components and principles of connectivism.

A website from the University of Georgia Dept of Ed Psych and Instructional Technology. Discusses the components of Connectivism, Chaos, Importance of Networks and Complexity and Self Organization. The quote from Siemens about,  "decision making being based on rapidly altering foundations," is well used and helped me to visualize a little more. There is a well worked description with Connectivism related to car restoration which I liked and an accessible table to compare and contrast Connectivism to the other major learning theories.

This source starts by discussing some of the components of constructivism and some of the different theories that go along with it. This is a good source because even though it contains some of the same information as other sources, it gives real examples to explain the theory of connectivism. It also gives a few different arguments against connectivism as a learning theory.

This resource discusses connectivism as a learning theory. It explains connectivisms' origins and how it is essential in staying current in our digital age. This resource includes an example of the benefits of connectivism. In addition, it provides a chart that compares connectivism as a learning theory to behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism.

This source discusses connectivism as a learning theory. It talks about how the theory came to be and compares it to other learning theories. It also mentions that some view it as a pedagogical view instead of a learning theory.

This source summarizes the main ideas in connectivism succinctly and clearly. The authors connect the discussion of connectivism to other learning theories. The chart showing How each theory functions is useful.

While this isn't an article, and appears to look more like a wiki entry, it does offer some good information on connectivism. One thing I liked in particular is the visual breakdown of the three current learning theories alongside connectivism. Anyone unfamiliar with behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism can get a quick snapshot of the key components in an east to understand chart. A column for connectivism has also been added to show how it compares to the others as a learning theory. Constructivism emphasizes the social nature of learning, but connectivism takes it to the next level by stressing the need for broad networks for a learner to connect to in order to build deeper understandings and more resources.

This article discusses various learning theories and what happens when you throw technology into the mix. They do not feel that previous learning theories should be dismissed but need to be viewed in a different light to meet the demands of the 21st Century. There is a thorough definition of connectivism and all of it's components. I appreciated the visual chart comparing the different learning theories to connectivism and how critics of connectivism viewpoints are explained.

An outline of the theory of connectivism that provides a comparison to other learning theories. The outline gives us a definition of the theory, major principles, and criticisms of the theory.

UGA's DEPT of Edu psychology and Instructional tech provides a comprehensive report on connectivism. The report includes definitions, comparisons to other theories and criticism to connectivism.

This is a wiki created by the Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology at theUniversity of Georgia. It explains everything from the origins of connectivism to practical application of the theory. A chart on the page compares connectivism to the other major theories of learning.

I like this description of connectivism.

A website created by students in the EdPsych department at University of Georgia that explains the components of connectivism as an educational theory.

I really like the way this article breaks down connectivism into its parts as well as providing the table that breaks down the primary learning theories so you can compare information side by side.