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.
Your use of connectivism in your mash up brings to light the fact that learning occurs within networks and these networks come in many forms. According to Davis, Edmunds & Kelly-Bateman (2008) learning occurs in connectivism when, “distributed within a network, social, technologically enhance, recognizing and interpreting patterns1.” This supports your move from ideas (knowledge) to constructionism (learner is an information constructor2) with the final outcome being learning.
ReplyDelete1APA Citation: Davis, C, Edmunds, E, & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2008). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved March 4, 2012, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
2Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2012, February). Cognitivism at Learning-Theories.com. Retrieved February 20th, 2012 from http://www.learning-theories.com/constructivism.html
(posted by Pixie Cat)
Your learning-theory mash up describes an approach I've read recently about in relation to math. Students need to make a personal connection to math ideas. There needs to be a hook that allows students to connect the math ideas to their own experiences. Then from there they can build/construct new ideas and take a more active role in their learning. Based on this idea, it seems like prior knowledge and experience would come intermingled with the connections.
ReplyDeleteIn relation to John Bransford's "How People Learn," your mash-up is learner-centered in that learning develops as the learner makes more connections and combines them with prior knowledge and experiences to construct new ideas. The approach is also community-centered because you describe the connections as being facilitated by the community. Connections are not limited to book learning. Students learn from others and their experiences and build upon them in the classroom.
I really appreciated the feedback I received in the form of the comments here, and also via Dr. Gibson, who facilitated a whole-group discussion about my learning theory, "Connected Constructionism," in Second Life during one of our class meetings. As a result of the feedback from Pixie Cat, AshleyShea, Dr. Gibson, and others, I made a few subtle but meaningful changes to my graphic.
ReplyDeleteBecause a number of folks mentioned that Connectivism utilizes prior knowledge to form the very "idea paths" that comprise it, I included "Prior Knowledge" next to "Networks" in the parentheses to the right of Connectivism. With this foundation consisting of what we already know and leading us to new ideas, we're then ready to construct new knowledge and gain new meanings and insights.
In addition to the shift mentioned above, I cleaned up the image by switching the arrow pointing to Constructionism to a plus sign, which allowed me to better express the idea that when you're able to establish networks that utilize prior knowledge (Connectivism), the foundation is set for new learning to occur that builds on what's already been established (Constructionism), ultimately leading to new knowledge.
These changes gave my graphic greater clarity and specificity. It was wonderful to be able to receive multimodal feedback on it both here and in SL.
This is a great example of synthesizing ideas and expressing a learning theory. Not explicitly stated is the role of perception in creating prior knowledge, forming networks, and shaping the construction process. You might think of it as part of the mechanism of learning (without it we'd have no awareness and thus no ideas to connect into a network). What I find interesting is that there is no easy starting or ending point for a theory; it's a matter of having SOME starting point and then being able to integrate ideas and possibilities. Nice job on this.
ReplyDelete