Edev_502 response wk1_4

On understanding connectivism.

In the pre-internet age when government clerks needed to have thousands of pieces of information in their minds ready to be recalled at a moment’s notice, it made sense to teach and test discrete facts. Nowadays, the job of information storage can be left to the cloud. We need to teach more about information retrieval, information type and information searching. This makes a lot of sense to me, and it indicates a necessary change in how we view the curriculum.

However, I can’t see this becoming a grand theory of learning: a localised set of techniques for dealing with information, yes. It’s more akin to theories of librarianship than of learning, I think.

But there transhumanists who talk of “a singularity, a ‘biointelligence explosion'” (Eden et al., 2012, p. 2), the complete linking of the human brain with artificial intelligence. The arguments set out in Eden et al.’s book are frighteningly persuasive. In this context, I can see a more fundamental role for connectivism as a theory.

Jim

Eden, A. H., Moor, J. H., Søraker, J. H., & Steinhart, E. (2012). Singularity hypotheses: An overview. In A. H. Eden, J. H. Moor, J. H. Søraker, & E. Steinhart (Eds.), Singularity hypotheses: A scientific and philosophical assessment (pp. 1–15). Heidelberg: Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32560-1

About theCaledonian

Scot living in north Japan teaching at a national university.
This entry was posted in EDEV_502, learning theory and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s