I have to be honest. I have spent several days and have read upwards of 5 articles, plus scanning other articles and wiki sites, and I still don’t think I have a handle on what connectivism is supposed to be. In looking at Group B’s wiki on the cons of connectivism, the following quote from their page sums up my feelings about connectivism.
Connectivism is a “sterile” learning theory. It wouldn’t exist without technological advances of today.
When I first read the initial article about connectivism I thought there was a good argument to be made that connectivism was a “real” learning theory. But consider the quote above; if what is quoted is true than how is connectivsm a learning theory? How does taking advantage of a computer and internet connection justify being called a learning theory? In my opinion, connected learning has been around since the beginning of time. Little children learned their roles by watching and working along others or by being apprenticed to master craftsman and learning a trade. There have always been groups of enthusiasts who banded together to learn new information and knowledge.
I think sometimes we forget that technology doesn’t just mean computers and the internet, but any new instrument or device that radically changes the landscape. In the past there were champions of radio education, television education, video education and each champion thought their new “technology” was going to change the world. Does connectivism demonstrate a new way of thinking? I think not. What it does demonstrate is a easier way to collaborate and learn new information; again a process that has been going on since the beginning of time.