Connectivism and Learner Engagement in an Online Graduate Level Course

Topic: Connectivism and Learner Engagement in an Online Graduate Level Course   While many educators have long relied on behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism as theories to guide their teaching philosophy, someeducators and education researchers are now embracing a social constructivist approach called connectivism. Connectivism is built aroundtwo pillars – learning autonomy and learning networks. The majority of research regarding connectivism has been conducted in highereducation because those learners often have both autonomy and network. Connectivism learning is facilitated by educators when ideas aremade between learning networks; To visualize this, note that the “learners role is not to memorize, but to nd, process, and apply knowledgewhen and where it is needed” (Smidt, Thornton, & Abhari, 2017, p. 2117) through active participation and knowledge construction individuallyand with small groups or networks of other learners. Background Connectivism is commonly referred to as a form of constructivism that can be viewed as social constructivism. This approach specicallyfocuses on digital technology and social network opportunities to facilitate and guide learning. Siemens (2004) was one of the initialresearchers to bring connectivism to the forefront of teaching and learning at the higher education level. He discusses in his foundationalarticle how learning likely extends beyond behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism because people continue to learn from one another,outside a prescribed set of walls and/or organizations. The connectivist approach requires learners to be open to gaining new knowledge,sharing information with their network, and creating new content. This openness also aligns with “expression of self, control, andindependence” (Smidt, et al., 2017, p. 2118). Likewise, connectivism can allow for learners to seek creative, diverse opinions and solutions byconnecting with far-away learners or scholars.Duke, Harper, and Johnson (2013) provide an overview of Siemens’ collective research spanning from 2004 to 2011 as well as others who haveresearched the beginning of the connectivism paradigm. With the general population gaining access to the internet exponentially since theearly 2000s, educators have had the opportunity to utilize social networks to embrace learning in the classroom. Connectivism is an“enhancement to how student learning occurs with the knowledge and perception gained through the addition of a personal network” (p. 7).Utilizing their work, it is important to note that in the connectivism approach, or model, learning occurs along the Bloom’s Taxonomy aroundthe application through synthesis levels. As educators well know, learning along Bloom’s is a continuum and not a specic step. However, withconnectivism, learners are required to build their knowledge base utilizing critical thinking skills. Further, learners must connect specializedinformation with self-organization and complex landscapes of knowledge (Siemens, 2004). Because of this advanced processing, it falls on ahigher level of Bloom’s Taxonomy and is more frequently found in higher education or workplace training settings.In a study conducted by Smidt, et al. (2017), the connectivism approach was blended with problem-based learning to create a new theoreticalapproach for future implementation. The researchers set out to “operationalize the connectivism principles into an actionable framework withinclusion of problem-based learning and contextual learning” within a middle school setting (p. 2116). In their research, they describe thecomponents of connectivism and how they relate to the STEM coursework, when infused with problem-based learning. Rajabalee, Santally, and Rennie (2020) conducted a primary research study on learner engagement at the higher education level, specicallyfocusing on online courses. They analyzed data from completed learning activities from within the course, the importance of the completedactivities in regard to course outcomes, and activities requiring presences within the learning management system. The learning modulecontained learning activities designed around “an activity-based approach which is more included towards constructivist learning thanbehaviorist model of learning” (p. 16). Findings indicated a small, positive correlation between engagement and performance in the learningactivity. Rajabalee, et al. (2020) conclude with the “weak nature of the association between the two variables highlighted the fact that in onlinelearning, the classical model of knowledge acquisition mainly through online learning behaviors does present some limitations to prediction” (p.16). Application in Online Learning Connectivism as an instructional approach lends itself nicely to the online learning environment. Within online learning courses, learnerautonomy and learning networks, two pillars of connectivism, are required. Mattar (2018) states in his work that since “cognition and learningare distributed not only among people, but also among artifacts, we can ofoad some cognitive work to devices that are more efcient atperforming tasks than humans” (p. 9). This further suggests how “digital technologies contribute to a collaborative epistemology in whichlearning is constructed by a group, not only by an individual anymore, even when interacting with others” (Mattar, 2018, p. 11). In an onlinecourse, often the learner is choosing what time of day they will engage with the course work and in what type of setting. Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development work supports connectivism, whether face to face or digital, however, in an online course orwith proper technologies, it can also subvert the ndings that a Zone of Proximal Development would have, because of the technologiesabilities to support a learner. This issue is addressed by Goldie (2016) to reiterate how technology may help learners to be more diverse inviewpoints, create stronger connection between nodes of learning, and to have their own autonomy. One caveat to the connectivism approachin online learning is to ensure the scholar or educator is still creating a presence in the online course; learning is not being heavily constructedor relied upon by others outside of the institution. Goldie (2016) further explains how more empirical research needs to be done but couldaddress learner usability, interactives, and relevancy. Those items are designed and facilitated by an instructor. Goldie (2016) closes with “while connectivism provides a useful lens through which teaching and learning using digital technologies can be better understood and managed,further development and testing is required” (p. 1068).This in-progress research study would be useful to help educators implement connectivism within their online classrooms. Specically, the research looks at learner engagement compared to a non-social constructivist approach in a graduate level Research Methods course. In thepresentation, the audience will hear the strategies employed to test whether "learners be more likely to engage with the content and drawconnections when the social aspect of learning is required?" Early findings from this mixed methods study indicate the connectivist approach will support our next generation of leaders as many are connected, distributed in nature, and networked. Siemens (2004) noted while we areseeing digital learners shift in their learning process, we will see how leadership development begins to make a shift as well. Further research on connectivist leadership would be useful for those studying the skills and theories behind leading a successful organization.