Rooted in the Past, Prepared for the Future

How do we come to know? What does it mean to know? How do the answers to these questions inform the decisions we make about learning? These are questions that have been asked and answered many times in Western Civilization since, at least, the dawning of the Golden Age of the Greeks.  The questions have changed due to changes in culture, politics, economic concerns, and development of new technologies. Likewise, the answers have been modified and categorized under many names as epistemology has evolved over millennia. Siemens adds to the storyline with his idea of Connectivism as a way of knowing. However, this does not diminish the epistemological models of the past. I would argue that each model is appropriate to come to understanding if, how, when, or where we come to attain knowledge. Each epistemological model is appropriate to various learning environments.

Siemens asks a very interesting question …Are “the connections that enable us to learn more important than our current state of knowing?” He argues that  ”learning (as actionable knowledge) can reside outside ourselves” and that the nodes which connect us to many others applifies our knowledge. Analogously, I wonder, is the microscope more important than the cells on the slide? Are the tools that give access to new information and processes more important than what we already know? If we accept that, as constructivism holds, we create meaning as we interact with our environment then the present knowledge has a considerable influence on how new knowledge formed. Or, if we accept the notion that knowledge resides within then the influence of our present “knowing” on our future “knowing” is even greater. Where knowledge resides continues as an open ended argument.

The emphasis Siemens places on “the connections between sources of information”, which, “ create useful information patterns” provides something new to learn about, perhaps even a new learning environment, but does not qualify as a new epistemological model. I would argue that while the nodes now reside in a digital format they are only representations of internal thought, and while the lightning speed at which interaction occur in the digital age speed communication and increase connections they still have their roots in human thought and derive meaning and order from these inceptions.

I would not quarrel with the principals of Connectivism only with the argument that places connections above our present knowledge base.  I argue that he has oversimplified our current knowledge base and ignored the rich complexity of thought that already exists. Siemens treats our current knowledge as so many trivial objects that are just waiting to be enriched by multiple interactions. I agree that diversity of opinions does seem to lead to learning and knowledge. But not that the interaction is somehow more important than the opinions themselves, which are rooting in a rich complexity of thought. Learning can occur in “non-human appliances” through connecting specialized nodes but not with the claim that our capacity to learn is more important than what we already know. Not to say that capacity to learn is not critical, and perhaps more critical than it has ever been, but it should not usurp the rich knowledge that already exists.

What I do very much agree with is that the we need to engage in the “fuzziness” of learning in chaotic environments that challenge us to make sense of or discover the patterns that exist. The “half-life” of the knowledge that results from learning experiences is much reduced and requires that act more quickly than ever before in sharing or responding to new knowledge. The knowledge is changing so fast that we must be engaged in the learning conversation constantly or we risk being irrelevant. Indeed the connections are critical but equally so should be our roots in traditional values and knowledge. It is more important than ever that we are aware of and act upon our core values and beliefs and not be swept away by the momentum of the group think created by our digital connectedness.