نوع مقاله : علمی- پژوهشی

نویسندگان

چکیده

 
 
 
 
 
مقاله پیش‌رو یکی از نظریه‌های یادگیری جدید و روبه رشد، تحت عنوان "ارتباط‌گرایی" را از نقطه نظر مبانی و پیش‌فرض‌های معرفت شناسی مورد نقد و بررسی قرار می‌دهد. ایده‌پردازان این نظریه، آن را نظریه‌یی برای عصر دیجیتال، و پاسخی مناسب به شرایط جدید و متغیر حال حاضر جوامع قلمداد می‌کنند. تاکنون پژوهش‌های متعددی در سراسر دنیا جنبه‌های مختلف این نظریه را – بویژه در رابطه با فضاهای مجازی و یادگیری‌های الکترونیکی- مورد پژوهش قرار داده‌اند، اما کمتر موردی را می‌توان یافت که از لحاظ معرفت شناسی به آن توجه کرده باشد. از آنجا که هر نظریه در انقیاد زمینه‌های فرهنگی و همچنین پارادایم‌های علمی حاکم بر زمانه خود است، به‌طور ویژه جوامعی که از مختصات انسان‌ شناختی، معرفت شناختی و ارزش شناختی متفاوتی برخوردارند لازم است قبل از هر اقدام عملی در زمینه به‌کارگیری نظریه‌های جدید، آن را از جنبه‌های مذکور مورد بررسی و نقادی قرار دهند. بر این اساس پژوهشگران با روشی توصیفی-تحلیلی، به تبیین و نقد مبانی معرفت‌ شناختی نظریه جدید پرداخته‌اند. نتیجه این بررسی نشان می‌دهد که این نظریه با اتکا به دانش ارتباطی (در برابر دانش کمّی و کیفی) و همچنین التزام به نظریه‌ی برآمدنی (در برابر نظریه‌ی علّی)، تلاش می‌کند از دیدگاه‌های تحویل گرایانه نسبت به یادگیری و فضاهای تعلیم و تربیت، به سوی دیدگاه‌های کل گرایانه حرکت کند؛ با این وجود، پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که تسری قوانین و یافته‌های دیگر علوم (فیزیکی) به علوم تربیتی، و همچنین انگاره ارگانیستی به آدمی، و یکسان‌ انگاری قوانین شبکه‌های عصبی، اجتماعی و فناوری، به شکل پیچیده‌تری این نظریه را از جهات دیگری به یک نظریه تحویل‌گرا نزدیک کرده است.
 
 
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Connectivism and explanation and critique of its epistemological basis

نویسندگان [English]

  • H. Eskandari
  • H. Fardanesh
  • S.M. Sajadi
  • A.R. Sadegh Zadeh ghamsari
  • S. Beheshty

چکیده [English]

 
       
 
 
This article examines "connectivism", from presumptions view and epistemological aspects. Connectivism theoreticians, claim this theory is a new learning theory for digital age, and a response to new and unsteady conditions of today societies. Yet, many researches all over the world, have examined this theory from different aspects, especially in relation to virtual spaces and e-learning. But there are a few ones that have studied it from epistemological views. As any theory grounded in cultural context and also current scientific paradigm, societies that have different anthropological, epistemological and axiological coordinates, should examine new theories from this aspect, before they decide to apply it.  In this regard researchers according to a descriptive-analytic method explain and criticize this theory. This review shows this theory by reliance to connective knowledge(versus quantity and quality knowledge) and obligation to emergent theory (versus causal theory), tries to move from reductionist views to holistic views in education environments; nonetheless research shows that application of results and rules of other sciences(physics) in education, and also organic tenet about human, and equalizing rules of neural, social and technological networks, makes this theory reductive, in more complicated way.
 
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Connectivism
  • connective knowledge
  • epistemology
  • reductionism
خسروپناه، عبدالحسین؛ پناهی‌آزاد، حسن (1388). نظام معرفت‌شناسی صدرایی. تهران: سازمان انتشارات پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشه اسلامی.
معلمی، حسن(1377) «معرفت‌شناسی از دیدگاه حکمت متعالیه». فصلنامه قبسات، زمستان 1377 و بهار 1378، شماره 10 و 11، صص 93ـ86.
 
Carmean, Colleen M. (2008). E-learning design 2.0: Emergence, Connected Networks and the Creation of Shared Knowledge, A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree, Doctor of Philosophy, Capella University
Coyle, Jr., & James, E. (2007). Wikis in the College classroom: A Comparative Study of Online and Face-to-Face Group Collaboration at a Private Liberal Arts University. A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College and Graduate School of Education, Health, and Human Services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Downes, S. (2006). Learning Networks and Connective Knowledge, Retrieved February 20, 2009, from http://it. coe. uga. edu/itforum/ paper92/paper92. Html
Downes, S. (2007). An introduction to connective knowledge, Hug, Theo (ed.): Media, Knowledge & Education - Exploring new Spaces, Relations and Dynamics in Digital Media Ecologies. Proceedings of the International Conference held on June 25-26, 2007.
Downes, S. (2008). Types of Knowledge and Connective Knowledge. Retrieved March 11, 2009, from http://halfanhour. blogspot.com/ 2008/09/types-of-knowledge-and-connective.html
Fenoglio, P. J. (2006). ‘Pinball’ engagement and Connectivism: New understandings of learning in the 21st Century.
Jonassen, David (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14.
Kop, Rita; Hill, Adrian (2008).Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), ISSN: 1492-3831
Loftus, M. (2006). Creating feedback for students on online discussion boards using rubrics and a web server: Is technology enough? A National University of Ireland, Galway & Regis University, for the degree of Master of Science.
Lyotard, J-F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Translated by Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. Foreword by Fredric Jameson. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
Miller, R. D. (2009). Developing 21st Century Skills Through the Use of Student Personal Learning Networks Dissertation Submitted to Northcentral University Graduate Faculty of the School of Education In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education.
Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2006). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them. Retrieved December 26, 2007, from Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Web site:http: //cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryCmaps/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.
Reder, L. M., Park, H., & Kieffaber, P. D. (2009). Memory systems do not divide on consciousness: Reinterpreting memory in terms of activation and binding. Psychological Bulletin, 135 (1), 23-49
Rousseau, J. J. (2007). Historical Case Study o the Supernet Consortium: Investigating Change management and the Concept of Connectivism and Distributed Professional Learning communities, Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Texas A & M University-Commerce in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for a digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 1-13, 2005.
Siemens, G. (2006a). Knowing knowledge. Vancouver, BC: Lulu.
Siemens, G. (2006b). Connectivism: Learning Theory or Pastime for the Self-Amused? Retrieved March 1, 2009 from http://www. elearnspace. org /Articles/connectivism_self-amused. htm
Siemens, G., & Tittenberger, P. (2009). Handbook of Emerging Technologies for Learning. University of Manitoba p.12.
Starkey, L. (2010). Digital Saviours: Digitally Able Secondary School Teachers in their First Year of Teaching, A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education, Victoria University of Wellington.
Suroweicki, J. (2005). The Wisdom of Crowds. Anchor.
Webb, R. L. (2009). The Online Game Modding Community: a Connectivist Instructional Design for Online Learning. A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy, Capella University.