Here is my response to Jaap in my previous post.
A learning theory is a modelling of the learning, and in the case of Connectivism – Networked learning which focuses on learning as making connections. This is based on the epistemology of Connectionism, Complexity Theory, Self-Organising Theory, and the Theory of Emergence. “Connectivism is the integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories” (Siemens, 2004). As George has once mentioned, thinking and looking at the networks as a whole may not be helpful, but thinking of individual connections in order to explain why and how learning has occurred may be easier for us to understand – and that learning starts and develops with connections – where knowledge grows, with different sorts of learning such as connective, emergent learning. To this end, sense-making and way finding would be the valuable tools while constructing and navigating networks. Stephen’s emphasis on pattern recognition, with growth of knowledge based on connections of entities does provide a holistic model that embodies every scenarios in learning, with diversity, autonomy, openness and connectivity being the properties of such networks. Learning to me could both be natural and artificially constructed and conceived, depending on what sort of frame of reference (model) or framework, system you use.
A shift of reference framework could reveal a different model. In the past, we might have fixated on one model, and not aware of the existence of different models which are equally valuable in mapping into the reality. Following a wise man or woman could be wise. Everyone has however our wisdom – that maps our model of the world, based on experience and knowledge. As a Catholic, I still believe the wisdom comes from our God, Jesus Christ our Lord, who is the wisest.