Actionlearning. Learning Networks Knowledge Exchange = Learning 2.0. It is now ten years or so into the era of online learning. Schools, colleges and universities have now developed the internet infrastructure of their choice. Almost all have web pages, most have online courses, and many have synchronous online learning.
The learning management system (LMS) has become a commodity business, educational software of all sorts abounds, and the phenomenon has spread around the globe. Photo credit: Joachim Angeltun Even so, it may be observed that most people online of school or college age are elsewhere. They may not be writing class essays, but they are writing blogs, perhaps one of the 50 million or more tracked by Technorati. They are at MySpace, which now counts some 86 million accounts. On the web, what has happened has been described as the migration to something called Web 2.0 (pronounced "web two point oh").
As an example, he cites the difference between Netscape and Google. Google, by contrast, never viewed the web as a place to ship product. Connectivism. Can training departments learn from zoos? - Social Media In Learning. About 6 weeks ago I wrote a posting on this blog, entitled What is the future of the LMS? Within a few hours, my colleague in the Internet Time Alliance (ITA), Harold Jarche had followed it up with one of his own, LMS is no longer the centre of the universe , and so began, what we at the ITA are now calling, The Great LMS Debate (you can see the chronological list of postings here .) At the Learning & Skills Group Conference earlier this month, Jay Cross mentioned this debate in his keynote and a number of other session speakers picked up on it too, and this sparked off further discussion in blogs and tweets.
On Saturday Charles Jennings added a further posting to this thread, called Real learning, let's not confuse it with completing templated exercises . Charles's rational, reasoned and elegantly written post is a must-read, and it got me thinking even further. Firstly Charles reminds readers: He then goes on to define "real learning"
LMS is no longer the centre of the universe. OK, so here’s the deal – if learning is work and work is learning, why is organizational learning controlled by a learning management systems (LMS) that isn’t connected to the work being done in the enterprise? Learning is no longer what you do before you go to work, never having to learn anything else in order to do your job. In the 21st century networked economy, learning and working are becoming one. As Robert Kelley showed over a 20 year study of knowledge workers, we need to keep learning in order to get our jobs done – “What percentage of the knowledge you need to do your job is stored in your own mind?” In a networked economy, social learning is how we get things done. The LMS framework is being challenged for its supremacy over organizational learning much as heliocentricity showed European civilization that we were not the centre of the galaxy.
Your guide to social e-learning. What we know about learning - Emerging Technologies for Learning. Connectivism and the modern learner « Learning in the Corporate Sector. Recently, I read a blog article about connectivism by Debora Gallo. Soon after, I attended a presentation about m-learning by Jan Herrington, in which she too mentioned connectivism. This got me thinking… I don’t know anything about connectivism! So after several hours of unenlightened googling, I decided to bite the bullet, go back to first principles and read George Siemens’ seminal paper, Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Theoretical foundations Siemens describes connectivism as “the integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organisation theories”. According to Chaos Theory, everything is connected, as illustrated so eloquently by the Butterfly Effect.
While chaos may appear a random mess at first glance, the theory holds that order does in fact exist. So if we view chaos through the lens of Network Theory, we see the universe as a massive, complex network. The point for the learner is whether you can recognise the underlying pattern. Complementary nature of Instructivism, Constructivism and Connectivism. A Constructivist Approach to Online Teaching and Learning. A Constructivist Approach to Online Teaching and Learning By Julie Carwile from Inquiry, Volume 12, Number 1, Spring 2007, 68-73 © Copyright 2007 Virginia Community College System AbstractThe author contends that using a learning-centered, or constructivist, approach in online courses is critical to student success.
Most professors will agree that teaching online remains a relatively new frontier. Even after many years, online instructors struggle with keeping students motivated and thoroughly engaged in the course material. Gone are the days of posting a syllabus on a college website and waiting in one’s faculty office for the assignments to be submitted. Two Learning Models A learning model describes how learning occurs, and two major classifications of models are objectivism and constructivism. Within the constructivist model, educators recognize several approaches or models of learning, including the cooperative/collaborative approach and the socio-cultural model. . · Learning is adaptive. Constructivism - Adult Education. Connectivism: A Theory of Personal Learning. Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age.
Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age December 12, 2004 George Siemens Update (April 5, 2005): I've added a website to explore this concept at www.connectivism.ca Introduction Behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism are the three broad learning theories most often utilized in the creation of instructional environments. Learners as little as forty years ago would complete the required schooling and enter a career that would often last a lifetime. “One of the most persuasive factors is the shrinking half-life of knowledge. Some significant trends in learning: Many learners will move into a variety of different, possibly unrelated fields over the course of their lifetime. Background Driscoll (2000) defines learning as “a persisting change in human performance or performance potential…[which] must come about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with the world” (p.11).
Driscoll (2000, p14-17) explores some of the complexities of defining learning. Conclusion: