Group items tagged

The paper outlines 4 key principles for connected learning - autonomy, connectedness, diversity, and openness. The authors' point of view is that all four principles can be "expanded to recognize individual and psychological diversity within connective environments." They conclude by saying that it is in the "context and recognition of the engagement" that makes connectivism a "viable framework for learning, offering great potential..."

In 2011, George Siemens and Stephen Downes launched a massive open online course called "Connectivism and Connected Knowledge" (CCK11.) The article defines Connectivism as "network-based pedagogy" and discusses why these authors value "the process" over "the product." Specifically, why the process of taking the course would be in itself much more important than what learners may have learned. Additionally, they offer 4 major components: aggregation, remixing, repurposing, and feeding forward. In the nutshell, the article argues that, as far as connectivism in concerned, knowledge is not something that can be "neatly packaged and passed along as a finished product"; rather, it is "complicated, distributed, mixed with other concepts, looks differently to different people.."

Interesting to see the authors explaining connectivism in light of personality theory and self-determination theory rather than trying to argue it as a learning theory akin to behaviorism, cognitivism, or constructivism. I appreciated their inclusion of Downes' four key components of connectivism: autonomy, connectedness, diversity, and openness. As I read their discussion of autonomy, my mind was drawn to Daniel Pink's explanation of intrinsic motivation, which is comprised of three key aspects: Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose. [See Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.] This piece was a helpful read with a very different perspective than I had previously encountered for connectivism.

Bell, F. (2010). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 98-118. Unlike the other articles I've discussed regarding Connectivism Frances starts by detailing the world Internet market. Which is an interesting starting point because in order for Connectivism to be a qualifying learning theory for everyone, the actual "connection" part must be prevalent. This is the first article that draws attention to the potential digital divide that could keep some countries and regions from the potential benefits of Connectivism. From his subtle inclusion of what can be read as the digital divide, he details the history of sharing on the Internet, and the general practice of sharing the Internet in itself has created. I also like that Frances describes Connectivism as a learning theory not looking to take over past practices but collaborate with them. This was an important note compared to the other articles I read that were determined to sell Connectivism as the all or nothing approach towards the future of web 2.0 in learning either for or against. Finally Frances discusses Connectivism role in research and those looking for a more fundamental understanding of research done on Connectivism and regarding Connectivism. The author tackles both topics with great research backing up all scenarios and discussions.

Is connectivism a real learning theory? This article explores the theory through different aspects of the digital era and how other learning theories (i.e. behaviorism, constructivism) are observed through various scenarios involving technology.

This is a very interesting article. I like reading more about connectivism because for some reason I find it difficult to understand. It questions whether connectivism should be considered a learning theory.

This article provides some great background on the theory of connectivism: its beginnings, major influencers, and basic principles. The article goes on to question whether connectivism alone is enough to answer all of the questions regarding how best to reach students in the technology-abled classroom. The article provides 5 scenarios to tackle the question, and offers some thought-provoking findings.

Like many other educational articles, this writer questions whether connectivism deserves a place as a learning theory in its own right. Bell discusses the growing use of the internet as a classroom and how connectivism applies. He also discusses connectivism as a phenomenon versus a learning theory.

Connectivism: Frances Bell explores theories in technology-enabled learning. Bell states, in 5 different scenarios, that it is proven that with our global society we should keep researching how to improve connections and learn from the past. Not all countries or people are equal when it comes to technology.

This 2011 journal article discusses how researchers can bring more rigor to research into Connectivism to counter the claims of some analysts that insist the concept lacks true academic support. Their final results indicate that Connectivism alone can not be a theory for education, but instead needs to work in congruence with other theories. A wide variety of reasons from personal preference to funding will influence which theories we use. As technology expands, so does research.

This article examines connectivism and its role as a learning theory in the digital age. It explains the principles of connectivism and provides scenarios that connectivism could help in an educational setting.

There is significant debate as to whether or not connectivism is a stand alone learning theory. While the data does not fully support connectivism as separate and distinct learning theory, there is considerable support for it a a learning phenomenon. The author of the article emphasizes the connected world in which we live has evolved, and therefore, has influenced the manner in which people learn.

From the development of the internet to present day, using technology for informational purposes and learning development continues to grow and become more common. Connectivism supports the theories that learning occurs as a more intrapersonal experience and occurs while the learning creates information and deeper understandings. This resources presents the development of technology as a cause for a new view of learning and education.

Communities of practice are groups of people who share the same job or a common interest in a subject. They come together to form a link to help each other perform in the world around them. This article talks about the value of communities of practice and how and why they work.

Eckert, P. (2006). Communities of practice. ELL, 2, 683-685. In this article, Mrs. Eckert does a great job in simplifying what a community of practice entails and means. She allows you to visualize the communities you belong to as well as other communities of practice you interact with or observe on a daily basis. One important distinction is that the author of this work is written from the sense of sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology and not from an educator's mind set. Irrespective of this standpoint, you can see direct correlations to where students understand themselves and what communities of practice your own student population may fall under. In order to understand the social development of communities of practice Mrs. Eckert does a good job in breaking down common cores that can emerge from memberships. The linguistic side she writes, "A white working class Italian-American woman does not develop her ways of speaking directly from the larger categorical working class, Italian American, and female, but from her day to day experience as a person who combines those three memberships. Her experience will be articulated by her participation in activities and communities of practice that are particular to her place in the social order."(Eckert, 2006) Building upon that theory, she discusses the importance of social space "Emma Moore's study of teenage girls in Northern England (Moore 2003) traced the gradual split of a group of somewhat rebellious "populars" as some of them emerged as the tougher "townies" in their ninth year. In the process, the vernacular speech patterns of the "townies" intensified in opposition to those of their more Conservative friends". (Eckert, 2006) While the article sheds more light on the development of speech patterns and dialects through the medium of communities, we can also see the definition in practice in which a collection of people gather together over a common interest and then orients to their new surrounding

This is just a basic definition of communities of practice. It is a very easy way to understand it.

Communities of practice (CoP) are created through a community of people who have common interests. In communities of practice, Eckert (2006) explains "a community of practice develops ways of doing things, views, values, power relations, and ways of talking" (p.1). CoP's have a way of providing a personal identity and a way of speaking within a CoP.