Prompt A. Connectivism has a core proposition — knowledge is not acquired. What does that mean? If knowledge is not acquired, then what instead?
Those that believe in Connectivism believe that “learning does not simply happen within an individual, but within and across the networks.” (Wikipedia). My big struggle with this question and prompt is that it sounds like to me that the individual brings nothing to the table on their own and that only through a group are he/she able to learn. I agree with the Connectivism approach that large health issues or educational issues can only be solved by a network of individuals however, each person still brings a set of understandings to the table.
Knowledge is acquired through various means, reading, conversations, following social networks, etc. As I read from these various sources I am acquiring new knowledge that I can bring to different conversations or different problems to tackle. Meaning, as I gain new knowledge, whether I do that on my own or not, and I bring that new knowledge into my network I am contributing as an individual. But at the same time I am gaining from conversations from a larger group and we in turn are solving issues/challenges through Connectivism. But I still brought my own knowledge to the conversation (to the group, to the network).
All that being said, I am a huge fan of connectivism and I believe there is endless potential for those to learn if he/she are willing to connect with larger networks, for example, PLN’s. I too prescribe to the theory that the room is the smartest person in the room theory. I absolutely believe that we are “smarter” and more “affective” in problem solving as a connected group than we are as an individual.
So thankful I was exposed to Connectivism and I really look forward to reading more about it.