Social constructivism Social constructivism is a sociological theory of knowledge that applies the general philosophical constructivism into social settings, wherein groups construct knowledge for one another, collaboratively creating a small culture of shared artifacts with shared meanings. When one is immersed within a culture of this sort, one is learning all the time about how to be a part of that culture on many levels. It is emphasised that culture plays a large role in the cognitive development of a person. Social constructivism and social constructionism[edit] Social constructivism is closely related to social constructionism in the sense that people are working together to construct artifacts. A very simple example is an object like a cup. For a philosophical account of one possible social constructionist ontology, see the 'Criticism' section of Representative realism.[1] Social constructivism and philosophy[edit] Social constructivism, psychology, and religion[edit] See also[edit] References[edit]
Talk:Connectivism wikipedia as a battlefield of views and beliefs?[edit] Of course everyone is entittled to a view on any subject. But describing a subject as an item in an encyclopedia is something different from discussing the content of an item and the validity of a --ism. Not agreeing on connectivism is not a reason for deleting an item on connectivism. 16:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaapB (talk • contribs) Jaap, I am not so sure. Theory is a system of ideas intended to explain something, such as a single or collection of fact(s), event(s), or phenomen(a)(on). Turgid prose[edit] I came here hoping to learn what Connectivism was, after getting bogged down in some turgid prose at a site devoted to connectivism. What on earth is this??? I was going to point to the Constructivism article as an example of a clear explanation, but I see that it too, has been overwhelmed by turgid prose. I was taking a more polite approach, but yes, Connectivism is a Hoax.
A Model of Autonomy In his presentation during week 10 of PLENK2010, Seb Fiedler challenged us to develop a concept of autonomy more precise than vague ascriptions of capacities of learners to choose their own course materials and subjects. It was a good criticism and led to worthwhile reflection around the topic. Fiedler provided us with a model meta-structure, as follows: This was helpful, but made it difficult to grasp where the autonomy came into the picture. It also seemed to centre autonomny on the person, or the individual, which Fiedler and others suggested is a limitation of the conception of autonomy we are employing. Quite so. That said, a proper model of autonomy will reflect a proper theory of decision-making or theory of action in general. is more helpful than an unprincipled classification of autonomy into different categories such as found here. Here is the outline of a much more comprehensive and useful model of autonomy: For example, this is a pretty good model:
Cybergogue: A Critique of Connectivism as a Learning Theory Background Having explored a “learning theory” that George Siemens (2005; 2006a) and Stephen Downes (2005; 2007) developed for a networked and digital world called connectivism. Fascinating and extensive conversations in the blogosphere and in educational journals debate whether connectivism is a new learning theory or whether it is merely a digital extension of constructivism. Siemens and Downes initially received increasing attention in the blogosphere in 2005 when they discussed their ideas concerning distributed knowledge. An extended discourse ensued in and around the status of connectivism as a learning theory for the digital age. This led to a number of questions in relation to existing learning theories. Introduction A lamentable disadvantage of theories is also a satisfactory advantage of theories—that is, they are wont to change over time. What is Connectivism? At the dawn of the 21st Century, a new educational framework was developed called connectivism. 1. 1. Table References
Constructivism Jean Piaget: founder of Constructivism In past centuries, constructivist ideas were not widely valued due to the perception that children's play was seen as aimless and of little importance. Jean Piaget did not agree with these traditional views, however. For more detailed information on the philosophy of the construction of human knowledge, see constructivist epistemology. Formalization of the theory of constructivism is generally attributed to Jean Piaget, who articulated mechanisms by which knowledge is internalized by learners. When individuals assimilate, they incorporate the new experience into an already existing framework without changing that framework. According to the theory, accommodation is the process of reframing one's mental representation of the external world to fit new experiences. It is important to note that constructivism is not a particular pedagogy. The learning environment should also be designed to support and challenge the learner's thinking (Di Vesta, 1987).
Technologically Externalized Knowledge and Learning « Connectivism | Connectivism | Scoop.it Let’s take a step back and consider how well we are using learning technology in contrast with what is possible given advances over the last decade. Ideologies influence design, then design constrains future options. We don’t have to look very far to see examples of this simple rule: classrooms, design of organizational work activities, politics, and the operation of financial markets. What we create to survive during one era serves as neurosis for another. In education – particularly in technology enhanced education – a similar trailing of ideologies from another era is observed. For example, education consultants and speakers commonly declare “if a student from 100 years ago came to our classrooms, she would feel right at home”. What are the ideologies reflected in this approach to learning? 1. Other ideologies exist, but these are particularly influential in education, impacting design to accreditation. What is wrong with these views? The externalized generation… 1. What is TEKL?
Connectivism-Intro On Jan. 17 George Siemens and I will launch the third offering of our online course called 'Connectivism and Connective Knowledge' -- or CCK11. We use the term 'connectivism' to describe a network-based pedagogy. The course itself uses connectivist principles and is therefore an instantiation of the philosophy of teaching and learning we both espouse. If you're interested, you can register here: The course is a MOOC -- a massive open online course. What this means is, first, that it may be massive. It also means, second, that the course is free and open. The way CCK11 is set up is that we've defined a twelve-week course of readings. What is important about a connectivist course, after all, is not the course content. Let me explain why we take this approach and what connectivism is. What we learn, what we know -- these are literally the connections we form between neurons as a result of experience. Of course, all this is the subject of the course. 1. 2. 3. 4.
Massive open online course Education service on the web Poster, entitled "MOOC, every letter is negotiable", exploring the meaning of the words "massive open online course" A massive open online course (MOOC ) or an open online course is an online course aimed at unlimited participation and open access via the Web.[1] In addition to traditional course materials, such as filmed lectures, readings, and problem sets, many MOOCs provide interactive courses with user forums or social media discussions to support community interactions among students, professors, and teaching assistants (TAs), as well as immediate feedback to quick quizzes and assignments. Early MOOCs (cMOOCs: Connectivist MOOCs) often emphasized open-access features, such as open licensing of content, structure and learning goals, to promote the reuse and remixing of resources. History[edit] What is a MOOC? Precursors[edit] Early approaches[edit] cMOOCs and xMOOCs[edit] MOOCs and open-education timeline (updated 2015 version)[13][30] Notable providers[edit]
Constructionism Seymour Papert Seymour Papert defined constructionism in a proposal to the National Science Foundation entitled Constructionism: A New Opportunity for Elementary Science Education as follows: "The word constructionism is a mnemonic for two aspects of the theory of science education underlying this project. From constructivist theories of psychology we take a view of learning as a reconstruction rather than as a transmission of knowledge. Then we extend the idea of manipulative materials to the idea that learning is most effective when part of an activity the learner experiences as constructing is a meaningful product.".[2] As Papert and Idit Harel say at the start of Situating Constructionism, "It is easy enough to formulate simple catchy versions of the idea of constructionism; for example, thinking of it as 'learning-by-making'. Here is one type of theory that constructivist learning theory can be applied in a classroom setting. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Jump up ^ Cakir, M. (2008).
Connectivism and its Critics: What Connectivism Is Not Posted to the CCK08 Blog, September 10, 2008. There are some arguments that argue, essentially, that the model we are demonstrating here would not work in a traditional academic environment. - Lemire - Fitzpatrick - Kashdan These arguments, it seems to me, are circular. Yes, we know that in schools and universities students are led through a formalized and designed instructional process. But none of this proves that the current practice is *better* that what is being described and demonstrated here. Right now we are engaged in the process of defining what connectivism is. George Siemens offers a useful chart comparing Connectivism with some other theories. From this, we can see that, according to connectivism: - transfer occurs through a process of connecting
Connectivism-Long Description 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:
The MOOCs fad and bubble: please tell us another story! | GlobalHigherEd In the context of two recent GlobalHigherEd entries about the global geopolitics and geoeconomics of MOOCs (see ‘Are MOOCs becoming mechanisms for international competition in global higher ed?’ and ‘On the territorial dimensions of MOOCs’) we are pleased to post this guest entry by Dominique Boullier, Professor in Sociology, Sciences Po Paris. Professor Boullier has served as scientific coordinator of the médialab (with Bruno Latour) since 2009, and serves as executive director of the educational innovation program FORCCAST. The MOOCs fad and bubble: please tell us another story! by Dominique Boullier How can we escape this new buzz about MOOCs, since the launch of Coursera? 1/ Brands. 2/ Scale and standards. 3/ Free. 4/ Platforms. 5/ Cheap resources. When described in these terms, any other sector of our financialized capitalism would almost fit the model. 1/ These announcements are not unusual in various sector of digital innovation. Where is the Dewey of the MOOCs systems?