Connect – Arif

I have to be honest, I was a bit confused as to why so many so called experts in the field seem to have a problem with accepting connectivism as a theory of learning?  After deciphering through the papers and some of the additional resources.  It makes sense that learning is done in a network style.   Even traditional learning in a classroom setting is done this way.  The instructor may be considered an expert or highly knowledgeable resource, but is not the only resource that students have to rely on.  Many students themselves may have experience in a subject and can contribute, plus the infinite resources available to us via the internet, and yes there are still a number of reliable ones out there.

I find our class to be a prime example of connectivism; in that we connect to a network (rampages/adlt640summer18) we are then connected to various resources; where we then learn on our own, develop our thoughts that either confirm or inspire new beliefs which we then share with others.  Thus keeping our learning cyclical and evolving, and initiating conversations and sometimes debate.

The fact that learning is a collaborative effort rather than individual I think is not only refreshing but also more realistic, especially when you look at how people interact in the working world once the formal education is complete, and now you need to apply what you learned in school to a job.  Take a job like Information Technology (IT); students can learn about IT, and train in various concentrations, but it doesn’t mean you become a sole expert on all things IT when you go out into the work force.  If anything you might have an IT person who specializes in network security and another who specializes in data management.  It is very likely that these two would have to work together, bounce ideas of each other, or utilize each other’s knowledge and skill to complete a project or improve on how a major business’s network functions.

I would certainly encourage connectivism in my course; especially as my topic is study skills in STEM, and there will be people of different backgrounds who can all contribute to what works best or what doesn’t.  And some may agree while others disagree, or cause other to rethink how they have been studying all this time.

3 thoughts on “Connect – Arif

  1. Connectivism from a modern standpoint seems pretty much a no brainier, but historically speaking learning and gaining knowledge was an individual experience. The big change in thinking occurred because of the internet and the ease at which information can be found.

  2. I agree that I found the reading on the debate on whether it was a theory or not interesting. It is an interesting thing to view though because as you mentioned it is another component of learning to think about. No matter if it is online or in another place learning does occur in a network. IT as you mentioned is a great example especially because the field evolves soooo quickly. What is also interesting with IT is not with eLearning you also have educators coming into certain components to assist with certain aspects. I technically am considered to have an IT component to my job but I would not really consider myself IT. My background is in Education. However, I gained a lot of knowledge through others. Through connectivism. Through networks, through other people, and it turned into this weird hybrid that I do today. My academic and educational assisted but the majority of my learning occurred through others and then doing self-reflection and expanding on what I have learned. You made great points.

  3. Arif,

    I agree that connectivisim can also be seen in classroom style learning as well. In my experience, the dialogue between students/instructors based on past experiences enhance my learning of the material. When I read that articles, I didn’t consider that but after reading your post I have thought about it and think that is a great point.

    Kim

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *