Interesting paper, and I agree with most of it, but I'm going to focus on a bit that I disagree with, because it's relevant. Glenyan (sorry, no more precise author name is provided) writes, "The process of valuing information doesn't change when the model moves from ZPD theory to Connectivism theory, only the focus of internalization dries up." Except - it does. What is valued (for lack of a better word) in connectivism isn't information, it is practice and (most of all) experience. To y mind at least. This ties into another Glenyan post, where Glenyan cites, "the body is a frontier between myself and everything else." This to my mind is the wrong understanding of the relation between the body and the world. The body is the perceptual device, and there is no distinction to be drawn between the perception and the 'information'. The brain is a sophisticated perceptual device; what we know is what we perceive; there isn't some sort of 'channel' through which (entirely fictitious) 'information' flows.
Today: 0 Total: 5 [Direct link] [Share]
