I believe in connecting and building your Personal Learning Network (PLN). I never really thought about collaboration and Constructivism being in a closed environment. Steven Downes provided a keynote today on Connectivism and Personal Learning.
I see the move to Open Education Resources (OER) where all the content is there, available, free, at your fingertips. Connectivism is a learning theory that
“emphasizes the learner’s ability to navigate information: the pipe is more important than the content within the pipe.” (Siemens, 2005)
Why this is important now is that with social media, OER, and the Internet, knowledge is distributed available anytime anywhere. Constructivism (Papert, Piaget, Vygotsky) interpretted the higher-thinking skills of Bloom’s to encourage making and producing. In Constructivism, the classroom is still teacher-centric with the teacher managing and coordinating projects. I know we call it student-centered, but the teacher is still designing who does what. It’s a beginning. It’s learning to let go.
Personalized Learning starts with the learner and where they are. If we are moving to Connectivism, then the learner is the center of a network of resources, people, ideas, etc. The learner decides what they need with the help of all the other people in their network. The teacher could be one of the nodes that links the connections. I see this happening by the learner – some are ready now – some may never be ready. There are a lot of questions on how to transition to this type of environment. Traditional school is so embedded in teacher-directed instruction. Maybe we’ll use this piece of teaching and that from learning something new.
Maybe the teacher is the coach on the sidelines guiding the learner on their learning path. Instead of standardized tests, the learner is monitoring their progress, collecting evidence of learning, asking for feedback from their PLN.
- How do you measure achievement?
- What are you measuring now?
- How do you design assessment around each learner?
- When do you start building a learner’s network?
- What components are in their network?
- Is there a physical place or places for learning and connecting?
- Do age and grade levels matter in this environment?
We are moving in this direction. The world is changing, getting smaller and flatter. I have changed since my PLN has grown and become a richer part of my life. I am learning something new almost every day. So if we move to a more Connectivist model, how do we transition and make it work within our current system or do we just start completely over?
I would have to disagree with your statement that Constructivist theory promotes a teacher-centric context. It is not a theory of teaching at all but a theory of learning. If you take the time to review Piaget’s interactions with children, you will see that very little teaching takes place as he placed himself into the context as learner-constructor-of his own understanding.
The experiments that he created were clearly staged and Piaget himself was quite taken with the incorrect answers that students would provide and he was not interested in correcting them but in asking more questions to understand their line of reasoning.
From the standpoint of socio cultural theorist Vygotsky is similarly a theory of learning moreso than one of teaching. It was Jerome Bruner who later coined terms like “scaffolding” when discussing practical application of these theories in more formal settings.
Dr. Timony – I am so glad you caught this. From his observation of children, Piaget understood that children create ideas. They were not limited to receiving knowledge from parents or teachers; they actively constructed their own knowledge. Piaget’s work provides the foundation on which constructionist theories are based.
Constructionists believe that knowledge is constructed and learning occurs when children create products or artifacts. They assert that learners are more likely to be engaged in learning when these artifacts are personally relevant and meaningful. The teacher’s role is to facilitate learning by providing a variety of experiences. “Discovery learning” provides opportunities for learners to explore and experiment, thereby encouraging new understandings. My concern is that most of the time the products or artifacts are not relevant or meaningful to students. The teacher designs the projects, the tasks, the assessments.
Thanks for the reply. This is where I think there is a misunderstanding. Constructivism is not relegated to the classroom. Within the classroom, it is a reasonable supposition that the teacher/facilitator sets the stage for experiences with some end in mind–how specific those outcomes are depends on the particular practitioner’s interpretation of constructivism. This entire approach is arguable, however, because it is not a teaching theory but a learning theory.
Constructivism seeks to explain learning whether there is a classroom experience or not. It does not assume the classroom and does not relegate learning to curated scenarios.
Similarly socio cultural theorists do not describe learning as an activity restricted to the classroom. Vygotsky, in particular, describes learning that is culturally specific and that the content learned within the culture has to do with needs and values of that community. The interactions that take place to facilitate learning within the zone of proximal development is then viewed as a dynamic construct that is not solely determined by teacher and classmates but by interaction with everyone in the culture.
There are few actual, established, learning theories that also address teaching theory. Most of them have little to do with learning as something that specifically or solely exists within a classroom with teachers.
Dr. Timony – Thank you again. I agree with you. Your last paragraph refers to what I was trying to explain. “There are few actual, established, learning theories that also address teaching theory. Most of them have little to do with learning as something that specifically or solely exists within a classroom with teachers.”
I am working with Kathleen McClaskey researching personalizing learning. This means that the learner drives their learning based on how they learn best. We are reviewing Universal Design for Learning (UDL) – http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatisudl (The “what” “why” and “how” of learning), the Reggio Emilia Approach based around certain fundamental values about how children learn, Piaget and how learners construct understanding and “discovery of learning”, Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development and the importance of play, and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s theory of flow. If learners understand how they learn best and have a voice in what and how they learn, then teaching looks different — the teacher is more of a “guide on the side.”
I think that sounds very interesting. Unfortunately, the least insightful about how learning best occurs are learners. If you are interested in developing “interest driven activity,” I think that approach is fine but suspect you will find yourself at the drawing board in pretty short order.
My concerns regarding interest based educational decisionmaking is that the perception of a child’s interest by adults tends to narrow experiences rather than facilitate appropriate learning opportunities.
Best of luck.
Dr Bray,
If connectivism talks about how learners learn best, so is it a learning theory or teaching theory?
Thanks
Hoda – I believe Connectivism is actually a learning theory. I wrote this 5 years ago so may update this post with new thoughts. Thanks!
Dr Timony,
I have a couple of questions regarding connectivism and constructivism. Im reading now about the thoery of 21 century but there are many for and against arguments about connectivism. You mentioned that constructivism is more a learning theory not teaching. What about connectivism? How do you see that? Do have any published articles or know an article discussing this? I have read all articles from Dr Siemens and Dr Dowens. They both believe that connectivism is the teaching theory of the digital age. I have not yet found my way and Im still not clear to pick which perspective.
Thank you for your more clarification.