Feynman in this video provides a unique perspective on social science. It sounds challenging to most social scientists.
I agree on the rigorous checks that are necessary on any “Theory” based on a scientific approach. It would be useful to adopt a scientific approach in exploring the multiple forms of truths. May be it’s important to reflect on the “trial and error” approach towards learning and education that are prevalent at this digital age, especially with PLN/PLE and Web 2.0. How about the pedagogy behind all these PLN/PLE in teaching and learning?
My favourite is to adopt an empirical approach in understanding the science of learning and the associated learning theory – in particular Connectivism. That’s why I like the research that we have just completed.
Learning could be viewed both as art and science. However I think a scientific approach is necessary, but not sufficient in understanding learning. We also need an artistic approach in revealing the myths of learning. But how? May be the performance artists, the curators, the expert educators and our networkers could educate us more on these – with the repurposing, re-creating, re-producing of new forms of artefacts. We may all appreciate the emergent learning experiences that we could “feel” and “sense” and way find with those learning, though such “learning” could be difficult to be proven using scientific methods.
How could we improve our understanding of learning and education from an artistic and scientific point of view?
Neuroscience, Network Theory, Complexity Theory, Actor Network Theory, Activity Theory, Situation Learning Theory, Cognitivism, Constructivism, and Connectivism. These are all useful for understanding learning. However, we may still be far from understanding the holistic “spirit” and “scientific basis” behind “postmodernism” of learning – our ecology of learning or the Complex Adaptive Ecology of Learning
Is a scientific approach towards learning still important to you? How would you apply such an approach?