My response to George Siemens' videos on Connectivism

Video on learning theories vs. human nature – As humans we have a basic need to externalize our thoughts. This is in conflict with Constructivism, which states that the act of assigning meaning happens in our minds, whereas he is saying that useful knowledge is only created as a function of a network of people interacting on a common idea. As educators, rather than helping our students “acquire” knowledge, we need to help them become good networkers, i.e. function well in group working/training environments. So the ability of the young people in our care to function well in groups is as or more important than how many books they read or how many Math formulas they can manipulate. Our curriculum objectives (IRP’s) are aimed more at the latter than the former. To be sure, there are learning outcomes that aim at developing team-building and collaboration skills, but they are secondary to the knowledge-based outcomes. I think it’s a big jump to go from an information (private knowledge)-based education system to one that values knowledge formed by groups above all. We know that our (any) formal education system doesn’t progress in big jumps!
Changing nature of knowledge - I agree with Siemens that learners of all ages need to have the ability to keep learning throughout their life, to stay current with new and emerging information, be it technical or philosophical. He says that we usually keep up with new information in a social milieu. If I think of the numerous education workshops I have attended to pick up a new teaching strategy or refresh my earlier learning, they were all with groups of people, and we usually had the opportunity to discuss the topic of the workshop. We don’t go to too many workshops where we are the only participant.

The network is the learning - I have some difficulty with the notion that the network is the knowledge, or the learning. It seems to me that every learning network must have an idea, a concept, a theory or a skill as its focus. If the ‘network’ itself is the learning, then we could participate in a network telling bad jokes or finding new ways of folding paper, and that would be as valuable as the learning networks formed around education concepts.

I have a concrete example of a knowledge and skill-based network that I belong to. It is focused on the motor scooter I ride, called a Yamaha Majesty. It is a web-based digital network with members all over the world. On several occasions, I have written about mechanical problems or questions I have with my bike, including a pretty major problem that I am currently trying to solve ($800 and counting). I have usually been helped by one or more members of the network who have more technical experience than I, and it has often saved me expensive trips to the dealer. I just wish I had consulted the network before trying to diagnose this problem myself! My point is that this network is based on the give-and-take of information; it wouldn’t be very useful otherwise. I can’t see the knowledge that I am participating with hundreds of other scooter-riders tapping away on our keyboards and turning our wrenches as useful learning.

My Learning Network (PLN)