Group+D+Against-+Auste,+Kathleen,+Caroline

=Group D Against = by Auste, Kathleen, and Caroline

//Is connectivism a learning theory?//
Not really. But how did we come to that conclusion?

__**First defined learning theory:**__ [] Learning Theory: Any of the proposals put forth to explain changes in behaviour produced by practice, as opposed to other factors, e.g., physiological development. This definition refers to learning theory in the psychological realm. We’ve adapted this definition for the educational realm: Learning Theory: Any of the proposals put forth to explain how learning is accomplished.

__**Then we asked, //How do traditional learning theories align with this definition?//**__ [] Behaviorism: a school of psychology that takes the objective evidence of behavior (as measured responses to stimuli) as the only concern of its research and the only basis of its theory without reference to conscious experience. Paraphrase to align with definition of “learning theory”: Learning is accomplished by the practice of stimuli-response. [|http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~emurphy/stemnet/cle2b.html] “Von Glasersfeld (1995) argues that: ‘From the constructivist perspective, learning is not a stimulus-response phenomenon. It requires self-regulation and the building of conceptual structures through reflection and abstraction’ (p.14).” Paraphrase to align with definition of “learning theory”: Learning is accomplished by the practice of self-regulation and the building of conceptual structures through reflection and abstraction.
 * Behaviorism**
 * Constructivism**

[|Critics' Placement]

-Read down to Critics' Placement and you will find: "...Verhagen, places connectivism at the level of the curriculum; connectivism speaks of **what** people should learn and the skills they should develop. If connectivism were truly at the theoretical level, it would explore the processes of **how** people learn.

__**Finally, we asked, //Does connectivism align with this definition?//**__ Not completely. [] Connectivism: “Learning is a network phenomenon, influenced (aided) by socialization and technology.” It’s difficult to paraphrase this definition to align with definition of “learning theory” because the concept of connectivism is more about //what// learning is, not //how// it is accomplished.

[|The speed of connectivism]** What is interesting about this blog is that the author states that one of the reasons that old learning theories are not working anymore is because those theories cannot keep up with how much students are required to know and how quickly they need to learn it. Is the solution to this problem really to change the way in which we teach so that we can teach more in a shorter period of time? Is it possible to change the way students are learning and then they are able to learn more, or are they just doing more without digesting the information?
 * //__Does connectivism support your students?__//

//__**Is connectivism relevant to your teaching practice? If so, how?**__// [|What do we need to teach using the "theory" of connectivism?] This video simplifies the idea of connectivism. However, when you watch it, remember that in order for this theory to work, the student needs to have access to all of the tools necessary, including daily computer use, and the time must still be spent to show how to use the programs and make all of the contacts. It's not as easy as it seems because not all students have the access needed and not all teachers have the sources to teach using this "theory".

Therefore, for those who have access to technology 24/7, sure connectivism can be relevant. **__//But what about the rest of us?????//__**

//__**Are parts of the theory more compelling or relevant to you than others?**__// [] The idea of Networked Students is probably relevant to to many teachers especially to those of us taking this course. The fact that our students can have access to experts so easily and quickly is an incredible benefit that our students have today. Wendy Drexler created a short video that clearly explains networked students.

//__**Are there parts of the theory which you find confusing?**__// [] George Siemens Learning Theory can be very confusing and it is not at all an easy read. He does discuss that learning occurs internally, but then he goes on to claim that it occurs externally as well. He contends that external environments such as computers can store knowledge. I found that I was asking myself what the definition of words that had always thought I understood, such as knowledge, were as I read his theory. I always thought knowledge was internal and when we externalize our knowledge by communicating it in some way it it becomes known as information. Bill Kerr disagrees with Connectivism as a learning theory. He claims, "networks are important but haven't changed learning so much that we need to throw away all of the established learning theories and replace them with a brand new one." It seems there are other scholars who are confused why Connectivism would be considered a learning Theory.