Connectivism

In Connectivism, Davis, Edmunds & Kelly-Bateman (2008) quote Siemens's (2005)definition on connectivism as follows:

...connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired and the ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. Also critical is the ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday.

At times, we may not even realize that it only takes a moment to attain knowledge or learn something new or build on something you already know from someone else. Based upon this small snap shot of my network, or “mind map”, it confirms that I, like many, have access to various methods and means of knowledge attainment and/or learning. From previous learning experiences, I have found that the best way for me to learn is kinesthetically or visually. Some virtual tools to facilitate my learning are those that allow self-pacing (e.g. online courses, untimed eLearning courses) and are interactive. However, at times, asking questions is the most upfront method, yet it may not always be to most effective or efficient.

With this respect, I find that building from the feedback or information provided or attained from others enables me to branch off on my own to investigate or research further. From this method I tend to attain additional knowledge then what was initially intended. For instance, I may refer to a fellow colleague or a peer regarding a specific topic of interest (e.g. social intelligence). In approaching my colleague it is made apparent to me that the questions I am posing are being met with lack of enthusiasm in the responses unmasked by simple phrases such as “I’m not certain”. If minimal information is being provided, I tend to utilize the minimal information as a stepping stone and move forward onto researching the topic of interest through other facets or branches of my network, or mind map. In this particular scenario, I may pull from my higher education and web-based community branches generating interest around how to obtain the information (whether by hardcopy or online references).

If not for these very connections created within my network, I may not be at the level of knowledge attainment I am at today. The following are highlights of each aspect of my mind map and how it relates to the greater connection of networking, learning and knowledge attainment:

Social Impacts: Co-Educational Organization

This aspect allowed for diversity in relationships in turn building diversity in thought and expression. As I continue to build diverse relationships the expansion of my knowledge grows. Such relationships aid in my growth professionally, socially, and most importantly personally which opens the door to more networking.

Institutionalized Learning: Higher Education

For some, higher education provides a gateway to knowledge that was untapped or unforeseen. Yet, for me, the realm of higher education paved the way to additional avenues that were not planned through a curriculum. A majority of my knowledge base was derived primarily through the face-to-face relationships created within various social settings or surroundings. The high educational institution was the key to unlock such a door of opportunity to a “group think” community.

Higher education also provides an arena to allow focus on a particular interest of study (e.g. major or minor). As an undergraduate, Sociology was my selected choice of study. Since Sociology focused on the study of people and the various social microcosms, it sharpened my observational and analytical skills making it an easier transition in understanding or applying psychological concepts to the sociological world, and now the Instructional Design realm.

Connection to web-based communities

The introduction to web-based communities has been extremely revolutionary. Such tools as Facebook, YouTube, Wikipedia and other social networking online environments provide additional avenues to knowledge-based information or circuits. For instance, Google.com provides the opportunity for an online user to express their thoughts and intermingle with others on the same or similar platform through RSS (Real Simple Syndication) feeds. Through such a venture personal connections may be created to enhance the learning experience or enable additional methods or modes of knowledge attainment. This, also, aids in additional networking and ongoing connectivism.

Professional World: Corporate Training Professional

With the previously noted in mind, I am able to face and tackle various instructional design challenges in regards to training and development in the work place. At times, I pull from each aspect of my mind map to gain a better perspective on how to best meet a goal or handle a situation. When focusing on training and development, the utilization of my knowledge in the web-based communities and higher education areas compliments my creativity and innovation to ensure I am presenting the best solution for the adult learner.

Overall, I have come to a greater understanding of and respect for the varying learning theories and concepts and how they may apply to my role as an Instructional Designer and a continuous learner. I am allowing myself to learn more and more each day as I continue my journey with Walden University; a journey that I am happy to be able to add to my mind map of connectivism.

What are your thoughts? What does your mind map reveal about you and your learning style, approach or knowledge attainment? Do you think through this brief overview we would be linked by one another's networks? Much like 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon, I would think we would be and if not it would only be a short period of time before we crossed one another's paths.

Constructivism: The Blue or the Red Pill of Learning

As defined in Learning Theories and Instruction by Ormrod, Schunk and Gredler (2009) “constructivism does not propound that learning principles exist and are to be discovered and tested, but rather that learners create their own learning” (pp. 184). Based on this theory of constructivism, I find it plausible to create a “social” environment in an online classroom. Each of us over time has created the reality that we are competent and able enough to achieve the goals set for online classroom learning. We have allowed ourselves to be introduced to the world of technology as well as integrated such technology within our lives enough to have a conscious understanding that we are capable of partaking in online classes and studies. Due to such a reality we motivate ourselves and one another to construct meaning of our online moments and attempt to equate them to moments that are similar to face-to-face interactions. In order to do so, initially we adapt to the guidelines set forth (e.g. course policies) and intertwine this information into our reality, yet not allowing ourselves to loss our autonomy. In doing so, online (class room) discussions are entered openly by creating an atmosphere and dialect in which we are familiar. As we build on this reality we are also building our knowledge, in turn, building on the constructivist theory or concept of learning.

To aid in our quests, we are , at times, assisted with a concept coined as “…instructional scaffolding, which refers to the process of controlling task elements that are beyond the learners’ capabilities so that they can focus on and master those features of the task that they can grasp quickly…” (Ormrod, Schunk & Gredler, 2009). For instance, based upon Bruning et al, Puntambekar and Hubscher, theory of scaffolding, upon the opening of a course our Instructor provides us with resources (support) to assist in our efforts to complete the overall task(s) or achieve a greater gnosis of the various aspects of Instructional Design. If raise concern about the course, our Instructor provides feedback or additional guidance on how to potentially reach the answer (functioning tool) through 1:1 or class discussions or communications. Upon submitting an assignment, or posting a response to each week’s chosen topic, we are posed with cognitive scenarios or questions (extending the range of the learner) which engage us in a deeper form of “social” connection as well as attaining knowledge (Ormrod, Schunk & Gredler, 2009). I find this method beneficial as it allows for those at varying levels of knowledge attainment to pace ourselves to ensure adequate retention within the intended schedule of course topics.

Based upon Kim’s (2001) view of social constructivism, it can further be argued that online studies expands an individual’s culture as well as their societal boundaries. Online studies not only allow us to interact with others from a similar stream of thought or reality, but to also expand such cognition throughout differing cultures within the world. Since our reality and knowledge are created by the very interactions we have and/or maintain, it may be safe to say that we may also create the beneficial outcomes from such ongoing interactions.

From this understanding I continue to ponder the following: If we create our realities and knowledge, then which came first and how did it come about? Or is it all simply that which does exist because it can?

For Ism's Sake

Bill Kerr, blog writer of “Isms as Filter Not Blinker” (2007) brings forth the argument that we cannot rule out any particular, or specific, theory of learning since each are relevant to our growth and development; and I am in agreement. From an elementary perspective, let’s look the behaviorist learning theory and the potential outcome of those impacted solely by such a theory or learning strategy. For instance, what results would be achieved amongst a group of subjects that have been taught the behavior that accelerating through an amber traffic light is the “norm”? Although, this behavior may be the norm to some of us, by most laws, it is not considered common practice of the status quo. Yet, what if a small town of motorists were provided with this direction? From a strictly behaviorist perspective, this action would be that of non-consequence since it is a taught and learned desired behavior and result. Within that small town, which I will call Town A, it is acceptable to accelerate upon coming to an amber traffic light with no consequence. Yet, what if a motorist from a surrounding town, Town B, has decided to move to the Town A where the traffic laws vary from his/her town? Will the newcomer adapt to the surrounding environment, or conversely will an accident occur? Regardless of the outcome, a behavioral change or shift will take place on someone’s or some group’s behalf. So to this I pose, “at what juncture do we determine when one –ism shifts to another”?

In Learning Theories and Instruction (2009), Ormond, Schunk and Gredler argue that “…behaviorist approaches are probably more appropriate for certain groups…than others” (pp. 179). This, as well as Kerr’s views, supports the notion that more than one learning theory must be applied for growth and development. It can be argued that the varying strategies and concepts of learning are intertwined throughout or daily lives. As we are constantly evolving physically, we are also evolving in thought. To evolve in thought, it is understand, that one must undergo varying experiences. In relation to this subject matter, such experiences may be equated to the various –isms in which Kerr (2007), Ormond, Schunk and Gredler (2009) bring to light. If we take this argument and apply it to a classroom setting, we can possibly solve repeated issues that undermine a student’s growth. For instance, a student that demonstrates constant tardiness may benefit from a behavioral pattern or possibly the introduction of a cognitive approach to rectify the ongoing occurrence. Standridge (2001) may argue that “behavioral contracts, consequences, reinforcement, and cues” may assist in meeting the desired goal pertaining to the student’s attendance. Yet, from a cognitive approach, the instructor may consider different problem solving approaches to determine the best method in reaching the desired goal (Ormond, Schunk & Gredler, 2009). However, from a connectionism approach, the implementation of rewards or recognition over a period of time from demonstrating the desired result may also result in habit (http://tip.psychology.org/thorn.html).

We must take in take all these variations into consideration as Instructional Designers. If we focus primarily on one learning concept or theory we may limit our own abilities to provide outreach to those that need our assistance the most or may deter those that surpass the average capabilities of attaining certain knowledge sets. We must be amply prepared and flexible for what may or is to come.