This assignment asked us to create our own "mash-up" learning theory based on two or more existing theories. We were to draw a diagram that represented how the pieces fit together. Above is my illustration of "connected constructionism."
The theory starts with connectivism, which places greater value on the capacity to know rather than what is known. Networks are fundamental to connectivism. One might say networks are connectivism. In today's digital word, it is simply unacceptable for the teacher to be the sole proprietor of knowledge and ideas. Teachers must facilitate connections between students, between other teachers, professionals, scholars, documents, resources, etc. Students must see these connections as valuable, they need to be taught how to navigate them, and it needs to be accepted as OK that there are multiple ways to access these networks, and that different discoveries are possible depending on the networks one accesses.
Once students are exposed to a variety of ideas (new knowledge), they need to be able to place them into a schema that makes sense. This is where constructionism and prior knowledge comes in. Learners need to be able to make meaning of new information in order for learning to occur. This is why learning is so very personal. Today's educators need to develop a mindfulness for the learner, attune themselves to how students learn, and place equal (if not more) credence on the process of learning as with the content of learning.
Visual explanation
The lines above Connectivism all link to various ideas. Regardless of the path one chooses to explore an idea, eventually the learner will be able to travel all paths and encounter all ideas if he or she chooses. I tried to illustrate the importance of the network, and the interconnectedness of both ideas and those who seek them out.
Once a learner is exposed to a new concept, it needs to become meaningful. Prior knowledge and experience allows for this. When you add that to new knowledge, learning occurs. Because I see these ideas building on one another and allowing for knowledge to grow, the graphic reads upwards from left to right.
Questions for the reader
I wonder if by only using connectivism and constructionism in my mash-up, I am forgetting or neglecting some important aspect of cognitive development that renders my mash-up invalid. Should I throw in another theory, or is this sufficient to stand on its own?
I had some trouble reconciling in my brain the relationship between the paths learners can take to access the network, and the ideas they can find there. Are all ideas really linked? Is it possible to access the same ideas from two different paths or perspectives? I definitely made some assumptions here. I hope they weren't false.
Overall, this was an enjoyable assignment which gave me an opportunity to articulate the relationship between two learning theories that are really central to my instruction as a high school English and journalism teacher.