Jeffrey Dunster

I recently learned a new term for a concept I have struggled to explain to people for some time. Connectivism.

"One aspect of connectivism is the use of a network with nodes and connections as a central metaphor for learning. In this metaphor, a node is anything that can be connected to another node: information, data, feelings, images. Learning is the process of creating connections and developing a network. Not all connections are of equal strength in this metaphor; in fact, many connections may be quite weak." — http://www.answers.com/Connectivism

This is the best description of how my mind works. Part of the joy of learning is discovering which connections new knowledge strengthens and which it weakens. False information doesn't have to be patently disproven; it may simply fade from relevance with fewer and fewer connections. I also find many, many unintended connections between nodes of knowledge which often lead to major flashes of insight, or at least a hunch which influences future learning.

I believe that not everyone thinks this way. Some people don't seem to trust "instinctual learning" as I'll call it. They must be shown, conclusively, what is right and wrong before they will accept and use new knowledge. This serves two purposes for them: one, they don't bear personal responsibility for the truth of said knowledge. If it's false, they can blame others for their problems. Two, they don't have to change much in the light of new information because they get to choose what is "conclusively proven" before acting on it; the "Doubting Thomas" syndrome.

I don't know enough about the theory to weigh in on its relevance to other learning theories, but I do see its applicability to me.

There is another, rather unique, aspect of this theory that is enlightening; learning is not necessarily an internal process. The other theories use some form of a "black box" where information is processed and knowledge is made invisibly from others. Connectivism adds an external factor for knowledge.

“Experience has long been considered the best teacher of knowledge. Since we cannot experience everything, other people’s experiences, and hence other people, become the surrogate for knowledge. ‘I store my knowledge in my friends’ is an axiom for collecting knowledge through collecting people.” — Karen Stephenson

Relying openly on others makes knowledge behave more like faith, belief, and intuition. It relies on personal insight to find hidden patterns in others' experiences and maybe even rely on something psychologists do not recognize: the Spirit, the Light of Christ, some pervasive measuring influence which confirms or denies veracity in everything. For those willing to trust "intuition" boundless tracts of knowledge may be realized through who you know and what they are, alongside your own self. This is beginning to sound like the Celestial order spoken of in D&C 76:94. "...and they see as they are seen, and know as they are known...."