1

Annotated Bibliography: An Emerging Learning Theory - Connectivism

Teresa Froehlke

Boise State University

ED-TECH 504

Dr. Dazhi Yang

July 5, 2011

2

An Emerging Learning Theory: Connectivism – An Annotated Bibliography

Connectivism is an emergent theory that attempts to capture and reflect the complexity of

learning in a world of abundant, changing and short-lived information . While I was researching

this theory the majority of the research was on the definition of the theory and discussions on

whether it should be a learning theory in the same class as behaviorism, constructivism, or

cognitivism. What I found through my research is connectivism is a newly emerging learning

theory that has transpired due to the use of new technology. The 21st century learner is

processing and applying information differently and at a faster pace than any other faction of

learners. Siemens defined the components of connectivism as: The chaos theory, importance of

networks and the interaction of complexity and self-organization (Siemens, 2005). The basis of

the chaos theory is that unrelated events when studied together create a relevance beyond the

individual events. The network components are created through learning communities that can

share their ideas with others. The complexity and self-organization element results in formation

of well-organized structures, patterns or behaviors from random initial conditions. The authors

that I found that supported connectivism as a valid learning theory were Siemens (2005), Strong

(2009 ), Behlol & Dad (2010) Sims (2008). Other authors such as Bell (2010), Rita ( 2008 ),

Patrick (2009) viewed it as more of an epistemology that is reflected in pedagogical practices.

The criticisms from these authors are: Connectivism does not contribute to a theory or reform

because the language is too generalized to guide new practice, and because it misrepresents the

current state of established learning theories such as constructivism, behaviorism and

cognitivism. Other authors I researched, focused on actually studying the implications of the

learning theory on ways it can be best used in learning environment. From my research I

discovered that connectivim is truly the “new kid” on the block in learning theory domains. I

agree with the authors who recommend researching the effect on learning outcomes and the

careful implantation of this theory into learning environments.

Bell, F. (2010). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in

technology-enabled learning. The International Review Of Research In Open And

Distance Learning, 12(3), 98-118. Retrieved from

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/902

Francis Bell is a senior lecturer in information systems at University of Salford, United

Kingdom. She contends that connectivism alone is not a sufficient theory to describe learning in

an internetworked world. The author states that there is not an all-encompassing theory for a

technology context of learning. In this article five situations were presented with a choice of

theories to support the use of technology in learning. The theories demonstrated in the scenarios

included theories of change management, complex theory, Vygotsky’s theory of proximal

development, networked student theory, actor-network theory and social-learning. The

importance of this research is to realize that even though connectivism is often associated with

online learning other theories are applicable also. The author concludes that the global society

needs to invest in high quality research to understand the best approaches to enable learning

through technology. This recommendation is supported in the research conducted by

Boitshwarelo.

3

Behlol, M. G., & Dad, H. (2010). Concept of learning. International Journal of Psychological

Studies, 29(232-239).

Dr. Malik Behlol, is a faculty member, International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan and

Dr. Hukam Dad, is a lecturer, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabd, Pakistan. In

their article they support Siemens in realizing that technology has a significant impact on how

we learn. This study investigated the concept of learning through the attitudes of behaviorist,

connectivists and humanists. They determined the key differences in the concept of learning

were: The behaviorists believe that learning is not active but passive; the humanists believe

learning is individual and the connectivists believe that learning is a way of being. They

emphasized in their article that the educational system should be ready to recognize and utilize

the impact of new learning tools and tasks in order for learner to succeed in the digital era of

technology.

Boitshwarelo, B. (2011). Proposing an integrated research framework for connectivism: Utilizing

theoretical synergies. The International Review Of Research In Open and Distance

Learning, 12(3), 161-179. Retrieved from

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/881/1816

Bopelo Boitshwarelo is a faculty member at the University of Botswana, Botswana.

Boitshwarelo in his article acknowledged Siemens, Kop, and Hill in their differences in whether

connectivism is a learning theory. He was not concerned in his article as to whether it is a

learning theory or not, but rather acknowledged that it is a compelling way of perceiving learning

in the digital age. In his article, he recommended that research on connectivism’s applicability

and effectiveness in a variety of educational contexts is necessary. It will be through the

developmental research that models can be developed to assist in understanding the pedagogical

implications of connectivism. He recommends using a design based research (DBR) method, a

methodological pattern of research. The importance of this research and the recommended

methodology is that it will assist educators in using connectivism in a manner that will enhance

learning. The paper integrates the theories of online communities of practice, design-based

research, and activity theory to construct a research framework that is characterized by a

synergistic relationship between each of these methodologies.

Calvani, A. (2009). Connectivism: New paradigm or fascinating pot-pourri? Journal of e-

Learning and Knowledge Society, 4(1), 247-252.

Antonio Calvani is a Full Professor, and has been teaching Educational Methods and

Technologies at the Faculty of Educational Sciences (University of Florence) since 1990. In this

article, Calvani defines connectivism as a theory based on the combination of chaos, network,

complexity, and self-organization theories. Based on this definition of connectivism, he

questions the concepts are original. He cites Piaget, for the concept of decentralization, Wieser,

Norman, Bruner, Wenger and Levy for the remarks on distributed intelligence, and on the

ecology of communities. He is in disagreement with Siemens and other authors that

connectivism is a new paradigm because he does not recognize a consistent theoretical reference.

4

He also listed his concerns for transferring connectivism into a classroom because he sees a loose

interpretation of the theory in the use of technology. He noted that an uncontrolled transfer of

connectivism into school would lead to the thought that putting students on the net is enough to

produce knowledge, and would reinforce the conception that the more technologies we use,

anyway we do it, the better it is for learning.

Jonassen, D., & Land, S. M. (2000). Revisiting activity theory as a framework for designing

student-centered learning environments. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical

Foundations of Learning environments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

David Jonassen is a professor of instructional systems at Penn State University. Susan Land is an

assistant professor at Penn State University. In their book, Johanssen describes activity theory

(AT) as an inter–disciplinary framework for studying diverse forms of human activity. Activity

systems contain interacting components: Subject, tools, object, division of labor, community and

rules and are organized to accomplish the activities of the activity subsystem. The principles of

AT are: Unity of consciousness and activity, intentionality, contradictions, mediated action and

historicity. The importance of including AT in research of a learning theory is that it provides a

lens to view the learning processes and outcomes for the purpose of designing instruction.

Boitshwarelo, in his article, merges AT as the analytical piece of the model, online communities

of practice as the theoretical function, and design based research as the methodology, with all

three connecting to determine the learning processes involved in connectiviness.

Kop, R., & Adrian, H. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the

past? The International Review in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 1-12.

Rita Kop is a lecturer at the Department of Adult Continuing Education at University of Wales,

Swansea, Wales, United Kingdom. Adrian Hill is an educational project manager at the Open

School BC, Canada. In their article they differ from Strong and Hutchins in supporting

connectivism as a separate newly emerging learning theory. These authors contend that a new

epistemology may be developing, but the new model does not justify it being treated as a

separate learning theory. The authors cite the research by Forster in which he maintains that for

connectivism to be a learning theory, the theory’s limitations and the full range of contexts in

which learning can take place must be accounted for. The authors in their research contend that

connectivism does not fulfill the tasks of describing changes of behavior, and the relationships

among types of behavior to warrant being considered a theory. They do agree that connectivism,

does play an important role in the development of new pedagogies, most importantly, the shift of

control from a tutor to an autonomous learner.

Patrick, W., & Kop, R. (2009). Heidegger, digital technology, and postmodern education: From

being in cyberspace to meeting on myspace. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society,

29(4), 278-286. doi: 10.1177/0270467609336305

5

Patrick Walters and Rita Kop are lecturers at Swansea University, Wales, United Kingdom .

These authors differ from Sims, Siemens, Behlol and Dad on the role of technology and higher

education. They believe that central to humanistic learning is the teacher–student relationship.

The teacher and the leaner are required to “invest something of themselves” in learning and

through this investment that actual learning occurs. They disagree with other researchers who

believe education is about assimilating information and ideas or skills of the unknown. They feel

education should aim to integrate teaching and research. They did not find internet discussion

groups sufficient for intellectual inquiry and critique. They feel strongly the role of the university

is to have face-to-face engagement to promote critical thinking and humanistic learning.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of

Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. doi=10.1.1.87.3793

George Siemens is a strategist and researcher at the Technology Enhanced Knowledge Research

Institute at Athabasca University. In his article , he defines connectivism as a model of learning

that recognizes the shifts in society where learning is no longer an internal, individualistic

activity. He contends that connectivism provides insight into learning skills and tasks needed for

learners to flourish in a digital era. Siemens recognizes the limitations of the existing learning

theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism in our digital age. He states that the

older learning theories hold the view that learning occurs inside a person and do not address the

learning that occurs outside a person through technology. His revelations and discussion of a

new and separate learning theory and the defining tenets of the theory are used in other articles

for reference.

Sims, R. (2008). Rethinking (e)learning: A manfesto for connected generations. Distance

Education, 29(2), 153-164.

Dr. Roderick Sims, is a principal consultant with Knowledgecraft, an independent

organization specializing in design and implementations strategies for online teaching and

learning. In his article he questions whether the models we use to create learning environments

are relevant in this generation in which technology is the primary form of communication. He

has 30 years of experience in designing, writing and teaching about e-learning. Sims agrees with

other researchers that the new forms of learning cannot be addressed by current instructional

design methodologies, which are often teacher-centered. He strongly agrees with Siemens in his

observation that learning has changed over the last several decades. Sims notes that learning has

moved into an informal, networked, technology-enabled space, and because of these changes, the

theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism fail as learning theories. He supports

c3-learning – collaborative, contextual, and connected. Collaborative in that learners and

teachers can engage in meaningful interactions that are dynamic. Contextual in that individual

learners are taking responsibility for contributing content relevant to the learning and connected

in that learners and teachers are not limited to one classroom. He stated that there is currently an

opportunity for a paradigm shift in teaching and learning.

6

Strong, K., & Hutchins, H. M. (2009). Connectivism: A theory for learning in a world of

growing complexity. Impact: Journal of Applied Research in Workplace e-Learning,

1(1), 53-67.

Kay Strong professor in the School of Technology at the University of Houston and Holly

Hutchins, an Assistant Professor of Human Resource Development Program at the University of

Houston are the authors of this article. In their research they review the origins and foundations

of connectivism. The authors included a diagram in their article which compared behaviorism,

cognitivism, constructivism and connectivism. The learning theories were compared on five

topics, how learning occurs, the factors that influence learning, the role of memory, how learning

is transferred and the approaches to learning that support the theory. This comparison is useful

in understanding connectivism and the relationship it has with the other three learning theories.

An important contribution of this article for instructional designers is the recommendation of

sharing, reflecting, and questioning in designing for e-learning .