Connectivism—Really an Option?
After reading George Siemens’ work on connectivism as well as Pløn Verhagen’s response to that work, I am left with some clear opinions, and a number of questions.
First, as my title implies, I want to pose this idea, is this really a direction we should be going in pedagogically? What Siemens implies in his work is that fostering the ability to make connections, to be able to find knowledge, is the main thing that we, as educators, should be doing. He does not seem to answer the question why, more than to state that this is a trend he has observed already occurring. Nazism was a trend occurring in 1920s Germany, should that be supported by educators? Okay, that is too harsh, and I am not a big fan of going to the Nazi well myself, but it does make the point. Just because there is a trend, does not mean we have to support it unreservedly. Perhaps more apropos would be the connection to the experimentation that occurred on college campuses in the 1960s with various hallucinogenic drugs. It was a trend, supported by a professor, Timothy Leary. Again, should that be something that we all sign off on? In both of these cases, history has obviously come down on the negative side. By the same token, this only became clear as the negative aspects in both cases became apparent and the consequences clearly outweighed any gains that were possible. How does all of this play into the concept of connectivism?
To me, this is a call for balance. Certainly, technology has changed, and will continue to change the manner in which we teach. It has also changed content. Some entirely new fields, such as CAD, computer programming, graphics, web design and so forth have all come as a result of changes in computer technology. Perhaps this suggests that we take a more long-term approach to the role of technology in education. What might that look like?
Do these changes in technology necessitate a change in the content of what we teach? Instead of pushing my students to understand the Constitution, do I train them to search out the document and the opinions on it? What about, as Verhagen mentions, analysis?
Learning is definitely about making connections, both within disciplines and across them, and with various means of acquiring knowledge. How can we, as educators, shape these networks? What do we want them to look like? Should we take an active role in shaping these networks? In my reading at least, Siemens is not very clear on these points, and perhaps this is an attribute. I think there are fundamental differences in the manner we develop say math skills form the way in which we learn history and develop a sense of historical context. The learning networks we develop in these areas should reflect that difference, in my opinion.
It is probably clear by now, that I am not ready to sign on with Siemens unreservedly. More, I believe there should be some middle ground that we strive to where we incorporate research tools and technology in to our curriculum. The big question is: What do you think that would look like?
Jim Mc Intyre
I agree that we must not jump on any trend and base our teaching on it whole-heartedly. Every teacher has to find his/her own middle ground, blending the technology with which they are comfortable, with other practices they consider valuable.
ReplyDeleteIn reading your post, the issue of the digital native also comes to my mind. If today's learners are truly wired differently, if their brain was formed differently because of the technological environment in which they grew up (and there is some evidence to that, but how conclusive is it?) society is facing more than a trend.
Jim,
ReplyDeleteYou make some excellent points. I agree with what most of what you said. I at times struggle with how much technology is enough. I was listening to a radio program and the guest made a great point. He said supposedly were are the most connected that we have ever been to information and that we can just click and find information. He then made the point that even though this is that case we don’t seem to be getting smarter.
Now with that being said I am not sure that if we had the internet and online resources we would never get the real answer about a great number of things. There is so much control of information by the mainstream media. Internet news sources radio programs can provide us with some real truthful information. Take the oil gusher for example. If there is no internet and technology out there is no way that the country gets that real story.
You made a great statement..balance. I guess that old statement of "everything in moderation" works here.
Chad
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf I hear you right, you feel that connectivism prioritizes how content is received over content itself. It seems like connectivism gets too focused on the means of learning instead of the end of the learning, the acquisition and eventual application of agreed-upon, valid content. It can't be just as good as the next most popular web 2.0 opinion.
ReplyDeleteConnectivism is something that should be focused upon and taught. Technology, socialization and information overload is not going away anytime soon. As we begin working with the 21st Century Student, the ability for them to create connections and process information faster will be key to success.
ReplyDeleteThinking as a teacher, connectivism is a method we utilize already constantly. As you need new lesson plan ideas for a topic, don't we go online search for materials, connect with others who have taught the same thing and create a new version of our own formation of the ideas gathered?
This is the type of question that I continue to challenge our high school administration and staff with. I'm considered part of this generation, but at the beginnings of it, not the end. I didn't receive the Internet and technology, other than a phone and computer, until I was a senior in high school. Up until that point, I research, I listened, I communicated and discussion for teachers and fellow peers, and I feel that my competency for knowledge and content is still way above the typical student of today's age.
ReplyDeleteI really think this technological swing could be a useful instrument in moderation and slowly incorporated in specific lessons, activities, learning points, research, etc., but it cannot be everything!
Our students have become incredibly numb to technology and I've had so many students appreciate working separate of a computer because that's all they spend their time working, talking, playing, buying, etc. on.
Yes, we get that technology is the new trend and revolution, if you will, but like any new introduction, whether it is a law, a tradition that socially accepted, or a mentality, we must be very careful. I don't find your examples of Nazism or the Flower generation to be too far-fetched. We saw, in history's tracks, how detrimental these types of thought processes and 'trends' were. The conditions that set up these trends may not necessarily compare to today's technological revolution, but we see some detriments that are a result of them: cyberbullying, plagiarism, identity thefts, sexual predators, the degradation of communication and the regression of human intellect. If we continue on this strong path of technology, technology, technology, without understanding anything else aside of this revolution, I think our students are doomed for one-dimensional, limited, and isolated lives.
This must be conducted in moderation, while developing other phenomenal aspects of the human mind, interpersonal relationships, and the ability to communicate and compromise with one another. If we continue to just sit in front of the computer, plug in the iPods, and stay glued to the newest video games, society, as we knew it, would've reached its ultimate peak and will find itself petering in a downward spiral.