Group+D+6-A-1

​

__Connectivism: Siemens' Theory and the Power of Student Learning in Our Digital Age__

Please view these short videos to give you some insight into this new learning theory:

media type="youtube" key="BjOv_ssTQDY" height="405" width="660"

media type="custom" key="6523267"

**__Response:__** There is no doubt that the current generation of students has been affected by technology. It must be noted that this generation of students have always known life with the internet, video games, and the computer. This has changed how this generation views and process information. But does that necessarily mean that there is new theory of learning? It seems as if technology is still evolving and that to say there is new ways of learning is difficult. This is a relevant topic because of this fact about how much our kids are online and work with technology. Although this generation's students may find comfort and ease with using technology as a source of education, it cannot be the only source. As well noted before, it is quite understood that the chaotic variety of information presented through the Internet and television can be simple ways of just retrieving information without any challenge, question, or discussion. Frequently exposed to computers, video games, and television provide numerous hours of entertainment, which trains the student of today to constantly need and demand such stimuli. Students are missing out and lagging in their abilities in cognitive analysis and processing, which are instrumental in developing a well-rounded human being, in preparation to be equipped for any type of scenario post-high school, despite the constant,and perhaps tedious, process of researching, learning, discussing, supporting, validating any particular argument or debate; this emphasis on pure technological resources doesn't create a well-informed student, but rather a one-dimensional human being who will forever be dependent on the very work someone else has conducted for their research and learning ease.

[] [] [][] **__Connectivism: An Interesting Methodology, but no Theory of Learning__** Disciplines are often highly resistant to change, and the reception that George Siemens learning theory, which he refers to as connectivism is a clear proof of this. Siemens asserts in his work, //Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age// (2004) that technology has profoundly altered the classroom due to the amount of information it has made readily available to our students. Further, he contends that real goal of teachers should be to educate students on how to work with information and draw connections across the wide landscape of knowledge available to them, and develop networks that allow them to more effectively access information. This paper will argue that while Siemens does make some important points concerning how the education environment has transformed in recent decades, his response is not a full fledge theory of learning. Furthermore, while it does offer some important insights, these should be utilized in a guarded fashion. Since his initial publication in 2005, Siemens’ ideas have generated a great deal of debate in education circles. This debate has spawned some very fruitful interchanges and at least one conference entirely dedicated solely to the topic. (See []  last accessed July 9, 2010) Among his more virulent critics is Pløn Verhagen, who pointed out in his piece, //Connectivism, A New Learning Theory?//, that “A theory should explain phenomena and those explanations should be verifiable.” He goes on to deny that Siemens’ work lacks sufficient specificity in its explanatory characteristics to warrant the designation theory. It rarely validates and proves that such an educational transition is absolutely necessary in this particular realm of our exploding technological revolution. Furthermore, Bill Kerr notes that many of the actions that Siemens is describing as forming a new approach to learning are not new at all. In his paper, Kerr makes the assertion that “the sort of ideas being put forward in connectivism theory have already been developed by Clark. Language is so ubiquitous that it is not always noticed. Network based learning theories might be more visible because the network is more visible.” (Bill Kerr //A Challenge to Connectivism// at []  last accessed, July 9, 2010, 7:28 PM. Thus, Siemens’ claim to theoretical status for connectivism and his originality have both been called into question. The second criticism is more damaging than it may appear at first reading. If Siemens are not new, then they form part of learning practices that have been occurring for some time previously. To some extent, Siemens skirts this criticism by calling for a new definition of what constitutes a theory. Essentially, Siemens asserts that a more fluid approach to what constitutes a theory of knowledge is necessary. Thus, he is arguing in favor of the idea that his theory of learning requires a new definition of learning in order to be considered a theory. (Rita Kop and Adrian Hill, //Connectivism: Learning Theory of the Future or Vestige of the Past// at h [|ttp://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/523/1103][|last accessed July 9] , 2010. What is most impressive regarding this critique is that these authors use Siemens’ own words to criticize his conception of learning. Therefore, if Siemens’ ideas are not original, may not constitute a theory, and rely on some semantic twists to achieve the status he hopes for them, do they posses any actual value? The short answer is “yes”. It should be understood from the outset that this is a provisional affirmation. Siemens does rightly draw our attention to the fact that technology has changed the manner in which we educate. A very clear example of this is the fact that in every classroom on the campus on which I teach there is a PC, with internet connection and an LCD projector. In addition, there are numerous Wi-Fi hotspots on campus, and public access computer stations. In this environment, students use the web more often than they have in the past. Many have facebook pages. Does this replace traditional learning? No, but it can augment it. For example, a colleague of mine does an assignment where he has students develop facebook pages for Benjamin Franklin, Andrew Jackson, and so forth, complete with friends. It is a means to doing research that fits in with the students’ milieu. Siemens seems more applicable here, as a methodology or approach that could be derived into a practical guide on how to apply technology.
 * __Check out these links below to further your opinion of Connectivism:__**

However, with this being said, the full implementation of this educational theory must have its reigns pulled back and controlled. Taking a theory that has very little verification and altered definitions of education that contrast generations of learning must take heed and warning. Although school districts and students are adapting to such technological revolutions and display such comfort in utilizing multiple types of revolutionized resources, this does verify that it is completely sound with promise of creating a well-rounded individual who will be equipped for future scenarios, interactions, skills, propositions, and just basic survival life skills. What a full technology-utilized curriculum may do is make the student acquainted with accessing information that has already been done for them, conveying positions, sources, authors, and a full-length paper that just fulfills the very research topic they were to conduct. Take away technology and what skills will our future student be left with? This may be all too scary to imagine, but there must be more facilitating and interactions for the social and cognitive development of the human being. What Verhagen emphasizes in his //Connectivism: a new learning theory?// supports just this! The full dependence and implementation of connectivism learning styles across the boards doesn't necessarily prepare an individual, nor strengthen their ability and capacity to learn, but rather this practice "take[s] over some cognitive tasks from people when generating knowledge. In principle this is hardly more remarkable than using a pocket calculator to avoid the tiresome task of doing sums by hand". The validity of challenge to Siemens' theory is justified in the cliche of 'don't fix something if it's not broken.' It is understood that there is necessity to alter and adjust learning/teaching strategies, but if we discard all previous forms learning/teaching styles and move fully into technological introduction and utilization, what are we saying about our academic and leading predecessors? Is Siemens stating that everything they've ever learned and come to know is extremely limiting and incompetent compared to today's world? Why would they still be considered one of the most adaptable and accomodating generations then? How are they able to utilize well-rounded abilities in various scenarios and display levels of hard work and success if they didn't have access to the type of technology and virtual connections and associations that are so heavily stressed today? In [] <span style="color: #800000; display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; text-align: left; vertical-align: sub;">, Gonzalez responds to Siemens' theory and justifies that "half of what is known today was not known 10 years ago. The amount of knowledge in the world has doubled in the past 10 years and is doubling every 18 months according to the American Society of Training and Documentation (ASTD). To combat the shrinking half-life of knowledge, organizations have been forced to develop new methods of deploying instruction." Well, personally, I would hope this is true; otherwise, we may be witness to a stagnant society who has no capability of development, progress, and advancement for the full measure of sustainability and success on a personal and national level. Despite Gonzalez's addition to Siemens' theory, although true, but not a new concept, it may not fully require a 360 revolution within the classrooms. We must absolutely seek further knowledge, understanding, associations and connections made at various levels, but we can't forget about facilitating and reinforcing a multi-dimensional human being, fully equipped to meet the demands, stresses, challenges, successes, and multi-faceted advances of our future societies, national and international of the real world that awaits them beyond the confines of the high school walls.
 * __Connectivism: It Can't be a Sole Solution:__**

Jim Mc Intyre Chad Pohlmann Holly Liebl

<span style="color: #800000; display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; text-align: center; vertical-align: sub;">Photo sourcing: <span style="color: #800000; display: block; font-family: Impact,Charcoal,sans-serif; text-align: center; vertical-align: sub;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">[]

link to mary-ellen's page