Theory of Connectivity as an Emergent Solution to Innovative Learning Strategies

Ingrid del Valle García Carreño^1,

¹Faculty of Education and Teacher Training, Autonomous University of Madrid (AUM), Madrid, Spain

Cite this paper:
Ingrid del Valle García Carreño. Theory of Connectivity as an Emergent Solution to Innovative Learning Strategies. American Journal of Educational Research. 2014; 2(2):107-116. doi: 10.12691/education-2-2-7

Abstract

Faced with globalization and the inclusion of the Internet in the educational process, new dilemmas have emerged. In response, innovative theories of learning must be born and the teacher should create different strategies and prepare new skills. So far, all learning theories have focused on classroom attendance and so teaching and evaluation strategies, but in the XXI century there arises the need to develop other skills and styles such as e-learning, e-portfolio, e-blog among others. While there is talk of student-based learning and collaboration, it should be kept in mind that at the time those theories were formed present technologies did not exist. Technology has created and defined a new culture, reshaping the way we communicate study and learn. With this phenomenon, the need arises to create a new theory which can adapt to these changing circumstances. This emerging theory is the theory of connectivity. The purpose of this paper was to prepare and explain following topics: first of all the paradigms of education as presage, product, process-product, mediational and contextual or ecological paradigm. Secondly, the theories of education before connectivity: behaviorism, cognitive, historical- social and constructivism. As third point, we development the principles elements of connectivity, as an emergent solution to innovative e-learning. Such as last point we present reflections and conclusions

Keywords:
complex thought ConnectivityParadigms education theories networks nodes

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Figures

References:

[1]	Borrás, I (1997) Internet for Teachers: Case study evaluation of a graduate level course. Educational Technology Research & Development.
[2]	Hernandez, G. (2002): Paradigms in educational psychology. Mexico: Polity Press.
[3]	Kuhn, T. (2011). La Estructura de las Revoluciones Científicas. Fondo de Cultura Económica. México.
[4]	Popper, K. (1994). The Myth of the Framework: In defence of science and rationality, London: Routledge.
[5]	Lakatos, I. (1980). The methodology of scientific research programmes: Volume 1: Philosophical papers (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
[6]	Guba, E & Lincoln, Y. (1981) Effective Evaluation. San Francisco.
[7]	Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research, 2, 163-194.
[8]	Cantrell, D. C. (1993). Alternative paradigms in environmental education research: The interpretive perspective. Alternative paradigms in environmental education research, 8, 81-104.
[9]	Chambers, N. (1999). Close encounters: the use of critical reflective analysis as an evaluation tool in teaching and learning. Journal of advanced nursing, 29(4), 950-957.
[10]	The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 5-8.
[11]	Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi- experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand-McNally.
[12]	Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1984). Teacher Behavior and Student Achievement. Occasional Paper No. 73.
[13]	Brophy, J. (1999). Toward a model of the value aspects of motivation in education: Developing appreciation for.. Educational psychologist, 34(2), 75-85.
[14]	Montero (1990) Teacher behaviors and learning outcomes: analysis of some relationships. In Carretero, M., Palacios, G. and Machesi, A. (Eds).
[15]	Herrero, C (2006) Teacher education in a global society. Retrieved March 18, 2008 educational http://seer.ucg.br/index.php/ / article / view / 157/121.
[16]	Domjan, M. (2014). The principles of learning and behavior. Cengage Learning.
[17]	van Merriënboer, J. J., & de Bruin, A. B. (2014). Research paradigms and perspectives on learning. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 21-29). Springer New York.
[18]	Vygotsky, L. (1979) The development of higher psychological processes. Barcelona: Grijalbo.
[19]	Zhang, C., Li, D., Yang, J., & Yong, A. (2014). Human cognitive paradigm and its application in semi-supervised learning. Optik-International Journal for Light and Electron Optics, 125(3), 1178-1184.
[20]	Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: developing tools for any effective classroom. Education, 130(2).
[21]	Morin, E (2008) Complex Thinking Retrieved March 1, 2008 http://www.pensamientocomplejo. com.ar / Peter, S and Pellegrini, A (2000) Higher Education Psychologyof Themes.
[22]	Driscoll, M (2002). How People Learn (and What Technology Might Have To Do with It). ERIC Digest.
[23]	Driscoll, M. P., & Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction.
[24]	Stephenson, K., (Internal Communication, no. 36) What Knowledge Tears Apart, Networks Make Whole. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://www.netform.com/html/icf.pdf.
[25]	Siemens, George. “Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age (2004).” elearnspace. Disponível em:< http://www. ingedewaard. net/papers/connectivism/2005_siemens _ALearningTheoryF orTheDigitalAge. pdf>. Acesso em 5 (2012).
[26]	Kellert, S. H. (1994). In the wake of chaos: Unpredictable order in dynamical systems. University of Chicago press.
[27]	McBride, N. (2005). Chaos theory as a model for interpreting information systems in organizations. Information Systems Journal, 15(3), 233-254.
[28]	Walsham, G. (2005). Learning about being critical. Information Systems Journal, 15(2), 111-117.
[29]	Downes, S. (2005). Feature: E-learning 2.0. Elearn magazine, 2005(10), 1.
[30]	Downes, Stephen (2012). “Connectivism and Connective Knowledge: essays on meaning and learning networks.” National Research Council Canada, http://www. downes. ca/files/books/Connective_Knowledge-19May2012. pdf
[31]	Barabási, A. L., (2002) Linked: The New Science of Networks, Cambridge, MA, Perseus Publishing.
[32]	Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological review, 104(2), 211.
[33]	Kee, K. F., Sparks, L., Struppa, D. C., & Mannucci, M. (2013). Social groups, social media, and higher dimensional social structures: A simplicial model of social aggregation for computational communication research. Communication Quarterly, 61(1), 35-58.
[34]	Spitzer, M. (1999). The mind within the net: Models of learning, thinking, and acting. Cambridge, MA.MIT Press.
[35]	Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technologyenabled learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 98-118.
[36]	Slavich, G. M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2012). Transformational teaching: Theoretical underpinnings, basic principles, and core methods. Educational Psychology Review, 24(4), 569-608.
[37]	Ireland, T. (2007). Situating connectivism [Design Wiki]. ETEC 510: Design of technology-supported learning environments. University of British Columbia. Retrieved from: http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Situating_Connectivism.
[38]	Lave. J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York and Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[39]	Dunaway, M. K. (2011). Connectivism: learning theory, and pedagogical practice for networked information landscapes. Reference Services Review, 39(4), 675-685.
[40]	Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic education: Community as curriculum. Innovate, 4(5). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=550.
[41]	Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology enabled learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 98-118.
[42]	Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 80-97.
[43]	Wade, M. C. (2012). A critique of connectivism as a learning theory [Web log post]. Retrieved from Cybergogue: Doing is Learning http://cybergogue.blogspot.nl/2012/05/critique-of-connectivism-aslearning.html.
[44]	Verhagen, P. (2006, November). Connectivism: a new learning theory?. elearning, Retrieved November 4, 2008, from http://www.surfspace.nl/nl/Redactieomgeving/ Publicaties/Documents/Connectivism%20a%20new%20theory.pdf
[45]	Kerr, B. (December 2006). A challenge to connectivism. Retrieved November 11, 2008, from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2006/12/challenge-to-connectivism.htm.
[46]	García, I (2008). Connectivity theory as an emerging solution strategies-innovative learning (e-learning) - International Conference on Education for Higher Education Innovation: Convergence to this process, Madrid, 22-24 October.